It’s a good day, a new week, and anything is possible…
Perry may be a good example of that. Supposedly he was told early on in life that he had a two-digit, sub-normal IQ and should seek a trade rather than anything too intellectually demanding. Como dutifully went to barber school, and was cutting hair when his singing talent made him a star. This story should make us doubt IQ tests more than we doubt the intelligence of “Mr. C”….
1 And today’s ridiculous virtue-signaling and pandering to political correctness goes to…Brawny paper towels!
Keep repeating falsities frequently enough, and people will begin to think they make sense. I guess that’s the theory, right? The truth is that one gender is stronger than the other in about 99.9% of the population, or to put it another way, the average male is much larger and stronger than the average female. This is why women who make themselves look like this…
…are regarded as unusual–because they are. But Brawny’s lie is used to, for example, pretend that there is nothing unfair about allowing biological men transitioning to womanhood to compete in sporting events as women.
From now on, it’s Bounty for me!
2. Scarlett Johansson demonstrates why most performers should shut up about politics and social issues. You may recall the post about Johansson being forced to withdraw from playing the role of a real life transgender male. Speaking about the controversy, the actress opined,
“You know, as an actor I should be allowed to play any person, or any tree, or any animal because that is my job and the requirements of my job… I feel art should be free of restrictions. I think society would be more connected if we just allowed others to have their own feelings and not expect everyone to feel the way we do.”
Then she began getting criticism from the social media mob (and maybe her agent), and in a subsequent interview said,
“I recognize that in reality, there is a wide spread discrepancy amongst my industry that favors Caucasian, cis gendered actors and that not every actor has been given the same opportunities that I have been privileged to. I continue to support, and always have, diversity in every industry and will continue to fight for projects where everyone is included.”
Translation: “Tell me what I have to believe to maintain my income and popularity, and I’ll say I believe it.” Ah, integrity! It’s a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, it requires courage and the ability to think.
Shut up, Scarlett. When you end up only being able to play blonde bimbos, it will be nobody’s fault but your own. [Pointer: Amy Alkon]
3. Speaking of Big Lies…Jeffrey Omari, a Gonzaga University Law School professor, wrote an article published in the ABA Journal about his reactions when a student wore a MAGA hat to class. He writes,
From my (progressive) perspective as a black man living in the increasingly polarized political climate that is America, MAGA is an undeniable symbol of white supremacy and hatred toward certain nonwhite groups. For its supporters, MAGA indexes an effort to return to a time in American history when this country was “great” for some—particularly, propertied white men—but brutally exclusionary for others, most notably women and people of color. Recent statements by MAGA-supporting politicians such as Roy Moore have given this perspective added credence.
It’s an embarrassingly biased and reason-free article. Imagine citing Roy Moore as a authority for anything! Not to spoil my upcoming Big Lie review on this topic, but “Make America Great Again” is no more a racist dogwhistle than Obama’s “Hope and Change.” The difference is that Obama’s mainstream political opponents didn’t spend years spreading the lie that what “change” really meant was to subjugate white Americans to a system where they were treated as second class by law, and that America’s system of personal liberty would be “changed ” into a socialist nanny state, with the necessary restrictions on the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments, of course.
The statement that the intended racism of the MAGA caps is “undeniable” is a disgraceful argument for a law professor to make. Of course it is deniable. I deny it; so do plenty of other serious analysts. Using “it’s undeniable” as a substitute for an actual argument is the sign of an emotional position rather than a considered one.
(Now someone will find a post or six where I used the adjective “undeniable.” )
Pepperdine Law School dean Paul Caron collected opinions from other law professors on the article. Some of the reactions:
Howard Wasserman (Florida International): “[I]f, under the rules of the school and the professor, student can wear a baseball hat with any political message in this classroom, in what way did this student fail to meet his “professional expectations”? Other than by wearing a hat with a message the prof does not like. … Arguably, in fact, Omari, not the student, disrupted the class when he took the time from the substantive discussion to comment on the student’s sartorial choices. …I think the dean, who presumably knows something about law, has a bigger problem: One of his faculty members took to a national publication and called a student–unnamed but readily identifiable within a small institution (Gonzaga has about 350 students)–unprofessional, insensitive, disrespectful, and racist. For engaging in constitutionally protected speech supporting the sitting President. …
Jonathan Turley (George Washington University): “[Professor Omari’s op-ed] demonstrates the increasingly shrill environment faced by conservative students. Omari took to the pages of the Journal to recount his almost breathless encounter with a student wearing a “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) hat. … For Omari, the incident was chilling since he declares the MAGA hats worn by many conservatives to be per se racist symbols. Omari insisted that anyone wearing the hats are advancing “racial antagonism” since they are an “undeniable symbol of white supremacy.” …The mere fact that some kid wears a MAGA hat does not mean that he is a racist or that he is trying to racially intimidate an African-American professor. Omari simply concludes that the hat was by definition improper and inciting . … Omari assumed that the interpretation of the hat (which is not shared by many) was manifestly true. This is part of the trend that we have discussed on campuses where speech is being curtailed as racist or microaggressive based on how it is perceived by others as opposed to how it is intended….”
Scott Fruehwald (Legal Skills Prof Blog): [T]he ABA article was not appropriate. Students and probably professors at Gonzaga can certainly identify the student. A professor has publicly shamed a student when his actions were probably innocent. A professional teacher does not do this.”
Dean Caron adds, “But wasn’t that most likely the professor’s goal? I mean, if we’re going to apply his metric of accepting the most cynical view possible, doesn’t it make sense to assume that the professor’s goal was effectively to dox the student? What possible ramification is the professor going to face other than a little light chiding on an internet board?”