Tagged: men
The Idea: Keep My Kids Out of War
How best to accomplish this?
My method is simple. I will teach them of the utter madness of most wars. If I am successful, then my kids will be so distrustful of the concept of destruction-based-improvement, that they’ll only engage in it when it is absolutely the best decision.
Why this post? Because I am not certain my simple method will work.
What say you?
Our Betters
You know those semi-recent additions to highway signage? The huge black digital signs?
Well, last night, my windshield wipers were going so fast and making such a racket that I almost couldn’t read the message some of our betters felt necessary to share with me: “Rain and Wet Roads. Caution.”
This is as bad, probably worse than, as texture-less braille on the sign at the local park.
Filling Space
George Carlin joked about how people acquire space—then we fill it up. Something like, “Look! There’s some space! Let me put something there!” (It’s Saturday. I know. I’ll help if you’re not yet bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Think of our closets, rooms, trunks of cars, open land etc.)
Isn’t the same thing true for mental space? I’m thinking specifically about “misinformation” “delusions” “lies” and the like. What is our problem? We just can’t keep mental space empty? We can’t admit “I don’t know” and wait to fill it until we do? Does there have to be a filler for every single topic that enters our mind?
Is that healthy? Does it even accomplish anything? We all just walk around spouting lies as if no one can tell, even though we also, on some level, know we “don’t know” everything?
Is it really so hard to keep a clean mental house? Is it really so hard and inhumane to tell your conversant, “Now, you know that’s not true”?
What is it? Is it that we need people in proximity to us so desperately that we’d rather put up with their incessant, void-preventing bullshyat than call them to try harder to keep their integrity?
I don’t get it.
Parental Bliss
Your 4 year old is eating a watermelon wedge.
She loves it.
And you love watching her bite diligently closer and closer to the rind.
You turn away to talk to your spouse.
You turn back and there is no more watermelon. No red part. No rind.
Behind the empty plate on the table is nothing but your little girl wearing the satisfied expression that only comes from a job well done.
That is bliss.
On The Highly Placed Women Of Mission Impossible: The Final Reckoning
The only criticism I dared mention to my group after the movie (it was midnight and we were tired) was, “I think they went a bit overboard on the ‘women as leaders’ part. I mean the President, the aircraft carrier boss, the president’s close friend/cabinet member, both Osprey pilots, and even a Navy SEAL with the biceps of a 15 year old boy. It was a bit much.”
For this blog, forget the twin aspects of whether women should be in those roles and whether women ever would be in all those roles together. Instead, consider the following.
Before AI, Hollywood didn’t make movies with that many women in leadership roles.
In other words, the rise of Hollywood’s portrayal and seeming belief that it is important and necessary to portray women in leadership roles if we want women to actually be accepted as leaders across the board, but especially in areas that are traditionally male dominated, has come about at precisely the same time that AI is “taking over”.
Coincidence?
Irrelevant?
Boring to consider?
Or maybe there is fruit in the consideration of just how this pairing happened and its meaning—especially if men invented AI.
Just thoughts.
No More LifeGuard Babes
I don’t know if you saw, but the other day a nerd-bomber with a drone just spontaneously and brilliantly saved a person from drowning by flying out a rescue device. (Took two tries actually.)
For those of you who can read facts but struggle to draw conclusions correctly, allow me to help. This simple, lifesaving effort just removed all hope of me ever receiving CPR from a Baywatch-style lifeguard, a la Sandlot scheming.
Until this event, I have to say that I didn’t believe any single person’s actions could be more disastrous to life on earth than the first man to work through the siesta.
The future is bleak. And apparently limitlessly so.
Reading Log 5.18.25
****
Ben Franklin is a remarkable man. Plenty of little nuggets throughout, but the overall sense is probably no one was adapted to his time better than BF.
****
Too much of my life has included the cultural icons, “The X-Men”. So it only made sense to get their original comics. They do not disappoint. The main, concrete benefit is the movies are more enjoyable. Coming in close second—the first comics can be rough around the edges and highly “experimental” or very “willing to take chances and then adjust”. So besides the inherent story that resonates so well with coming-of-age, we find an example of how to pursue your passion.
****
Locke and Hume are worth reading, but I can confess that their ideas are so foundational for our society that they only pack a punch if you have the uncommon ability to imagine what life was like before them.
****
Jordan Peterson loves Brothers Karamazov. Ooh. So sexy sounding, no? It’s one of those “tells you more about him than the book” claims. I mention it because I read this book years ago precisely because it was one of the greats. So don’t take this as a bash of JP. Instead, take it as a DUH! THE BOOK IS GREAT! YOU NEED TO READ IT! shameless promotion.
Just Have To Smile
When you work at an airport and shortly after arriving see and hear a brightly colored colored biplane suddenly appear from behind your hangar on what, by altitude and position, must be its base turn, looking like it is the one that needs saving from the opening scene of Disney’s The Rocketeer, you just have to smile.
I Can’t Shake My Joe Rogan Fantasy
Douglas Murray lost the “debate”. Or he came away looking weaker than Rogan and Smith. It all boiled down to Murray’s ill-advised, “Have you bean there?”
As a reminder, faithful readers, classical rhetoric delineates three areas of persuasion, Logos (logic), Ethos (expertise), and Pathos (emotion). The generally accepted breakdown of how to employ these during debate is 60-80% Logos, and the remaining 20-40% evenly divided between Ethos and Pathos. Murray obviously employed Ethos in more than its rule-of-thumb 20% maximum when he uttered his “bean” line.
But even without that type of thinking, I *feel* like we all knew (consequently Murray should’ve known too) both that Kamala was destroyed by her “been there” interview moment and that, with Harris’ failure in mind, JD triumphed with Zelensky, in his own “been there” moment in the Oval Office. The Vance answer was all the more compelling because he brought Logos right into the moment by clearly pausing—which seemed to betray that he was aware of the rhetorical trap—before answering the question.
Oh well. Nobody is perfect.
ICYMI Murray was recently chatting with Gad Saad and in the discussion plainly decried the problem that I’ve instinctively had with the JRE podcast along—despite my inability to put a name on it. Murray pointed out that the JRE podcast is irresponsible.
Douglas Murray, who I find myself nearly entirely aligned without actually giving me unrealistic hope that anyone else is listening, is part of ARC (Alliance for Responsible Citizenship). So it is only logical that his criticism of the men who beat him is that they are irresponsible. But the fact is Murray is correct. That studio in Austin with its 30 million Trump interview views and 0 (zero) Harris interview views is irresponsible.
My fantasy, then, is for Joe Rogan to prove Murray wrong.
Then again, I am not sure that would accomplish much. Imagine it. Rogan converts to responsibility; severe and instant backlash occur. Then Rogan joins the myriads of smaller podcasts. Fizzle. Whoopdeedoo.
I certainly don’t wish Joe Rogan any ill will. So maybe my fantasy is some horrible and embarrassing revelation of my envy of Rogan (which always manifests in sabotage) since it would surely result in negatives for him on every front.
But I can’t shake the fantasy.
Larry David Eats His Own. It’s All That Can Be Done to Bill Maher.
I’m not going to make it childishly easy, but I have a fantastic anecdote for why the Left’s constant use of Hitler will never work.
When my Ethiopian step-son first had an opportunity to get me a birthday gift after coming to America and joining his mom and I’s family, he got me a T-Shirt. The shirt was black and on the front had a bald eagle, mid-flight, and a rider. The rider was a superimposed George Washington, taken from presumably some famous painting.
I loved the shirt. I loved the gift. Most of all, I felt heard.
“Not bad,” I thought.
The first big opportunity to put the shirt on full display was the county fair. We’re talking small town Minnesota. This was during or around COVID and so everyone was already bursting to get outdoors cause a ruckus. Or I was. Like all small towns in Minnesota, there was a wildly disproportionate amount of Somalis and they were sure to be at the fair, for the proper American reason: boredom.
Imagine the scene for a second. I proudly walk out among this multicultural crowd, wearing GW riding a bald eagle. I am checking out the other whites’ shirts, and, as expected, they were mostly about how they would kill anyone who tried to take their guns.
The Somalis, like all immigrants, wore Puma brand gear. (I remember having like one Puma brand item as a kid and being terribly embarrassed by the non-Nike, Reebok, Adidas gear.) No matter, these kids are Generation Puma, through and through.
Now, reader, let this scene play out for a bit. I keep walking and scanning shirts. I also scan eyes to see if any ignite with patriotic sparkle and joy when they see my shirt.
None do.
You can imagine my disappointment.
Finally, while ordering dessert before leaving, a youngish white girl that was serving—likely a veteran’s daughter—said, “I like your shirt.”
I am not going to tell you the answer to the riddle, because I don’t believe you’re stupid. The point of my anecdote is to give a BIG clue as to why Larry David can only further evidence why the Left and Democrats are limited to reinforcement of their incompetence when they bring up Hitler. It can never take their intended effect.
Do you see?
Captain’s Log 