…and believe me, it takes a super-human effort for me to say that right now…
1. Good. Rep. Esty is not running for re-election. We discussed her hypocrisy in a post two days ago. Now she says, “Too many women have been harmed by harassment in the workplace. In the terrible situation in my office, I could have and should have done better.” This would have been a meaningful and productive statement if she hadn’t previously insisted that she handled the matter correctly and refused to be accountable. She did, however, and mouthing platitudes now should not alter the verdict that she was a cynical and grandstanding #MeToo performer who, when time came to act according to the standards she was demanding of others, failed miserably.
2. Anybody know of an ethical computer protection service? I now have two ghost services torturing me with pop-up ads, slowing down my computer, and generally behaving like a virus because I cancelled them. When I cancel a service I allowed onto my computer, I expect them to say good-bye and leave. I do not recall agreeing in my original contracts that “the undersigned hereby agrees that if for any reason he chooses to end his relationship with ____________, the service will continue to hound him with warnings, special offers, unrequested scans and other harassment until he dies or throws his computer out the window.”
The two companies at issue are AVG and McAfee. I will chew off my foot before I engage either of them again.
3. Big Brother’s way of winning a debate: change the meaning of the terms so you can’t lose. After the repeated misuses of the term “assault rifle” as a disinformation and fear-mongering tactic by the anti-gun mob were flagged by Second Amendment supporters to the embarrassment of the zealots, Mirriam-Webster rode to the rescue, changing its online dictionary entry for the term so its ignorant ideological allies could now cite authority:
On March 31, 2018, the following definition was published:
noun: any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire; also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fire
Translation: “This is what the term really means, but it also means what ignorant politicians, journalists and activist refer to erroneously as the same thing even though it’s not, because we support them and this will make it easier for them to mislead other without looking dishonest and foolish.”
[UPDATE: There is some question of whether that definition was added before or after Parkland. Reader Steve Langton reports that he read the current version a couple of days after the shooting.]
4. Fake News Alert! Some conservative websites and blogs (here, for example) are claiming that California will start registering illegal immigrants to vote along with its new law allowing some illegals to get drivers licenses. This is true zombie news, as it has been shot dead many times over the last several months. Two points: 1) When a website prints something this dishonest, Ethics Alarms never darkens its cyber-space again. So good-bye, American Thinker, among others. 2) There is a reason why a lot of people would believe this of California. Do I think the state is so estranged from basic U.S. values and principles in its fetishistic worship of illegal aliens that it would give them the vote if it thought it could get away with it? Absolutely.
5. Observations on the latest NFL scandal. After Bailey Davis, the cheerleader the Saints dismissed in January, filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claiming unfair treatment. Now the degree to which the NFL teams treat its cheerleaders like submissive eye-candy is coming to light, and it isn’t pretty. From the Times:
“Cheerleaders for the Carolina Panthers, known as the TopCats, must arrive at the stadium on game days at least five hours before kickoff. Body piercings and tattoos must be removed or covered. Water breaks can be taken only when the Panthers are on offense. TopCats must leave the stadium to change into their personal attire. Baltimore Ravens cheerleaders were subject to regular weigh-ins and are expected to “maintain ideal body weight,” according to a handbook from 2009. The Cincinnati Ben-Gals were even more precise in recent years: Cheerleaders had to be within three pounds of their “ideal weight.” Some cheerleaders must pay hundreds of dollars for their uniforms, yet are paid little more than minimum wage. Cheerleaders must sell raffle tickets and calendars and appear at charity events and golf tournaments, yet they receive none of the proceeds. Cheerleader handbooks, seven of which have been reviewed by The New York Times, include personal hygiene tips, like shaving techniques and the proper use of tampons. In some cases, wearing sweatpants in public is forbidden….”
Why did, and do, the women who cheer put up with all of this? Simple, really: 1) they are fungible, as many equally lovely young women will happily take their places to show off their booty on the field and TV, and 2) they really, really want to be cheerleaders, which means they want to be pin-ups, they want to be sex-symbols, they want to perform.
- Nobody’s holding a gun to their heads. The teams abuse the cheerleaders, and thus the women should refuse to endure the abuse, and quit. If they accept the abuse, the teams are given no incentive to change. Every past cheerleader who allowed herself to be abused has been a willing accessory to the current cheerleaders plight. Why? Because they lust after the opportunity to be lusted after, and to be seen on TV, videos and photographs looking like this…
- I have thought cheer-leading squads were sexist and demeaning since high school, and no, it had nothing to do with the fact that no cheerleader would even look at me without sneering. I was quite proud of my college to find that it’s cheerleading squad consisted of a geek in a Pilgrim costume who shouted into a megaphone. He also sneered at me, come to think of it.
- Although watching the NFL’s cheer-tarts debase themselves is far from the worst thing NFL fans do, it is bad enough.
- The situation is akin to one I fought over with a particularly well-funded and arrogant community theater in Alexandria, Virginia. Although this theater runs productions for three weeks or more, the equivalent of many area professional theaters, and has a huge subscription base that makes the company a money machine, especially since it is staffed by volunteers, it not only didn’t pay actors, it nickeled and dimed them mercilessly. They had to join the organization, and buy a ticket to attend their own cast party. Actors were not permitted to enter the theater through the main entrance for rehearsals, and had to use a back door. I told the organization’s board that the treatment was unconscionable, and its answer was, “Well, they all still keep coming to audition!” “In other words,” I said, “because you know you can exploit them, because actors want to act, you do exploit them. You are disgusting.”
- So are the teams that exploit cheerleaders. Just because people are willing to be mistreated doesn’t justify mistreating them.
Source: The Federalist (#3)