The Kiss

This topic was unwittingly recommended by my younger sister, a reliably liberal Democrat who, to my knowledge, has never read Ethics Alarms once in its 23 years of existence. (Don’t you think that’s strange? I think that’s strange, but I refuse to let it bother me. Much….). She had to tell me about the eruption of an international women’s rights, #MeToo, “sexual assault” cancel culture controversy in the wake of Spain’s first Women’s World Cup championship because I pay as little attention to soccer, international or otherwise, as humanly possible.

Shortly after the championship game’s final whistle, Luis Rubiales, the head of Spain’s Soccer Federation, joined the jubilant on-field celebration, and at the award ceremony, Rubiales took midfielder Jennifer Hermoso’s head in both his hands and…kissed her on the lips!!!!

Searching for relevance and headlines now that her own soccer career is mercifully over, woke activist Megan Rapinoe told The Athletic that the kiss reflected “the deep level of misogyny and sexism in the federation. It made me think of how much we are required to endure.” (I don’t know about the “we” part in Rapinoe’s case: I think an over-excited soccer official would be more likely to spontaneously kiss a scorpion.) Everybody piled on. Spanish soccer coach Jorge Vilda ripped Rubiales, saying in part “I regret deeply that the victory of Spanish women’s football has been harmed by the inappropriate behavior that our, until now, top leader, Luis Rubiales, has carried out.” Eleven members of the Spanish women’s team coaching staff tendered their resignations over the weekend, expressing “their firm and categorical condemnation of Luis Rubiales’ behavior towards Jenni Hermoso.” 81 Spanish players, including all 23 World champions, vowed to go on strike and refuse to play until Rubiales is removed from his position. FIFA, the international soccer organization, suspended Rubiales from all football-related activity for 90 days pending an investigation—yeah, maybe he secretly planned the kiss weeks in advance, for example). The Spanish government publicly supported the decision.

Continue reading

The New York Times Publishes A Feature About Ethics And Doesn’t Mention Ethics Once, Part 2

[Once again, I apologize for the dumb error in Part I, where the Unethical Conduct Score and Jerk Score for #8, “Playing gory video games,“ were both supposed to be zero and I inexplicably had them both as “4.“]

To recap, I am examining the ethical logic—if any— being displayed in each of the 16 sections of the Times piece titled “The Virtues of Being Bad,” rating the combination of unethical conduct described and rationalizing it in a public form from 0 (not unethical at all) to 5 (very unethical) as well as assigning a “jerk score” to each of the authors, writers all, again ranging from zero (not a jerk) to 5 (Jerk-o-rama). Part I covered the first eight; now here is 9-16. Warning: it gets pretty weird from here on…

9. “ I, a responsible parent, feed my kids McDonald’s and other junk food. Not all the time. But I do. And they love it.” Oh, so what? This is the most “unethical” conduct this writer engages in? I don’t believe it. It’s more unethical to accept free publicity in a New York Times feature and do so little to earn it.

Unethical Conduct Score: 0. Jerk Score: 2.

Continue reading

The New York Times Publishes A Feature About Ethics And Doesn’t Mention Ethics Once, Part I [#8 Corrected!]

This should be expected, since the Times no longer practices ethics, shows much interests in it, or demonstrates that it understands what ethics is.

In a bizarre feature called “The Virtues of Being Bad,” 16 writers (I never heard of any of them, and I follow such things) wrote confessionals about their “guilty pleasures” of doing bad things, supposedly the only “bad” things they do. (In most cases, I doubt it.) Here is the annoying introduction…

“Mocktails and sunscreen, masking and mindfulness — for those of us who strive to be upright, responsible citizens, the constant reminders of various ways we ought to be good are all around us. They’re almost enough to make you forget the pleasures of being a little bit bad. We asked 16 writers — most of them respectable adults — about the irresponsible, immoral, indulgent things they do. Transgression has the power to teach us something about how we ought to live. But it’s also just … fun?”

I’ll briefly comment on the ethical logic—if any— being displayed in each of the 16 sections, rating the combination of unethical conduct described and rationalizing it in a public form from 0 (not unethical at all) to 5 (very unethical). I won’t mention the authors, because, frankly, I don’t care who they are. Any feature that confounds non-ethical considerations like “fun” with ethical conduct is too subversive and badly reasoned to generate anything but contempt. Along with the ethics score, I’ll also assign a jerk score to each of the authors, again from zero (not a jerk) to 5. Here we go with the first eight; 9-16 will be discussed in Part 2.

Continue reading

Ethics Dunce: Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson

This news item has the added advantage for me of adding to my file, now voluminous, of ridiculous legal theories that nonetheless cannot be sanctioned violations of Rule 3.1: Meritorious Claims & Contentions, aka. “Frivolous claims” when they are used as the justification for lawsuits. (The profession’s aversion to punishing lawyers for Hail Mary lawsuits apparently applies to all lawyers accept those representing Donald Trump.) Mostly, however, it demonstrates how completely incompetent another progressive big city mayor is when it comes to dealing with crime.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) announced yesterday that his crime-ridden hell-hole of city, rife with property crimes and murder, will be suing automakers Kia and Hyundai for “their failure to include industry-standard engine immobilizers in multiple models of their vehicles.” This, the theory goes, is why there are so many car thefts in the Windy City.

Yes, it’s the cars’ fault that they get stolen! It certainly isn’t the fault of the car thieves, whom the new mayor wants to see treated with compassion, care and as little punishment as possible. Even though the crime explosion in Chicago was the main reason he defeated the previous mayor, Lori Lightfoot (that, and the fact that she was dishonest and incompetent), Johnson’s plan to stop crime is pure John Lennon wishery: defund as much of the police as possible, seek “restorative justice” and “treatment over punishment,” and have judges who will avoid handing down jail sentences.

Continue reading

How Can We “Trust The Science” When It’s Distorted By Activist Scientists? Audubon’s Bird Scam

How? We can’t. Next?

The National Audubon Society, the famous non-profit dedicated to the conservation of birds and their habitats, wants to make the U.S. “bird safe” by shaming homeowners into “turn[ing] off unnecessary lights at night” and “clos[ing] blinds, [and] curtains,” along with other precautionary measures. Businesses should install bird-safe glass, for example, which has patterns that make it more visible to birds. This, the Audubon’s ornithologists claim, will save the lives of “up to a billion birds a year.” The group told WBAL-TV viewers in Baltimore that “lighting and reflectivity, specifically during migration for birds, is a really dangerous problem and kills up to one billion birds in North America per year.”

Sure. Advocacy groups love fake statistics, and this one screeches “Made-up!” like a bald eagle in heat. That “up to one billion” number is partially based on a 2014 abstract estimating that between “365 and 988 million birds” are killed annually by “building collisions” in the United States. Of course, since the objective isn’t to fairly communicate facts but to support the extreme positions of single-issue activists, the Society chose the highest estimate, already probably polluted by confirmation bias, and rounded up. The society used estimated bird collisions with walls to assess the deadliness of windows alone. In addition, the fake number mixed in ball park estimates that North America has lost 3 billion birds since 1970, and oh, let’s say a third of those died in “building collisions.” Yes, let’s.

Continue reading

It’s An Asshole-O-Rama, Starring Donald And Tucker!

“Yecch” doesn’t begin to express my disgust and revulsion regarding this development, but right now I can’t think of anything stronger, and I don’t know how to spell the sound of projectile vomiting, so…Yecch!

After informing the Republican Party that he will not pledge to support its candidate if the GOP’s choice isn’t him, Donald Trump not only plans to skip the first GOP candidate’s debate in Milwaukee this Wednesday, he is going to actively compete with it, teaming up with fellow toxic narcissist Tucker Carlson for an online interview on the same night.

It’s perfect, if you think like Donald Trump, which is to say, obnoxiously, unethically, and undemocratically. No degree of perfection in my sock drawer would prompt me to forsake it to watch the Tucker and Donald Show. “Mr. Trump’s apparent decision to skip the first debate of the presidential nominating contest is a major affront to both the R.N.C. and Fox News, which is hosting the event,” writes the New York Times, for once not being unfair to Trump. Sure, why not stick his thumb in the eyes of two organizations substantially responsible for Trump’s rise in the first place? This full-time troll who claims to value loyalty and gratitude has none himself. Naturally Tucker Carlson wants in: after all, he wants his revenge on Fox too. Nowhere in the consideration of either man, assholes that they are, are the best interests of the nation and the democratic process.

Continue reading

Ethics Dunces: “Snow White” Star Rachel Zegler, And Disney (Of Course)

I thought actress Sarah Porkalub, who trashed the (ridiculous) Broadway production of “1776” that had given her the chance to play South Carolina’s Continental Congress delegate Edward Rutledge as an Asian woman (Don’t get me started!), was the most irresponsible and arrogant performer I had heard about in decades, and, in fact, she might still hold the title. But it’s now a close competition, as Rachel Zegler, Disney’s star of the almost as ridiculous live-action re-imagining of its animated 1937 classic, “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” as “Snow Latina and the Seven Whatever-the-Hell-They Are” has been allowed to insult her film’s progenitor, which, among other things, is substantially responsible for her employer’s very existence.

“It’s really not about the love story at all, which is really, really wonderful,” Zegler has blathered. “I mean, you know, the original cartoon came out in 1937 and very evidently so. Um… there’s a big focus on her love story with a guy who literally stalks her! Weird, weird, so we didn’t do that this time…People are making these jokes about ours being the PC Snow White, where it’s like, yeah, it is — because it needed that… our version is a refreshing story about a young woman who has a function beyond “Someday My Prince Will Come.'”

Continue reading

The International Chess Federation Doesn’t Understand Its Own Game, Biology, And Who Knows What Else…

Funny, I thought chess players were supposed to be intelligent—observant, capable of long-term planning, adept at strategy, those kinds of things.

That’s one more stereotype to discard. The people who run international chess competitions have just outed themselves as morons. The International Chess Federation, or FIDE just banned transgender women from competing in men’s chess tournaments and stripped trans men of women’s chess titles they won. The body revealed its guidelines for transgender competitors this week, thus highlighting its long-running idiocy.

Okay, fine: defining the gender of chess players by their chromosomes would be a solution to a problem if there were a problem, but there isn’t. There is no reason to segregate female and male chess players except ancient prejudice and ignorance—well that, and if it is decided that the fewer little chess players conceived, the better.

Continue reading

Insufficient Mockery Alert #1: The “Jewface” Controversy

Jonathan Turley likes to begin his posts on oft-visited topics (like speech suppression on progressive college campuses) by reviewing all of his past posts on the matter. If I started this post like that and listed all of the ridiculous, hypocritical, wokey, DEI-inspired casting ethics controversies EA has highlighted, there would be no room for the post itself. But I will supply a sampling…

Let’s see: a black actress can play Anne Boleyn, and James Earl Jones can play the Celtic King Lear, but a white actor is engaged in racism by playing Othello. Hmmm. Gay Hollywood actors (most of them are, after all) can play straight characters, but Tom Hanks apologized for playing a gay character (and winning an Oscar for it) in “Philadelphia.” Lou Diamond Phillips simultaneously asserted that as a Filipino actor he is entitled to play anyone—after all, he has made his living playing Hispanics, South Americans and Native Americans— then in the same interview said “I happen to agree that casting Caucasian people in what are supposed to be ethnic roles is not kosher.”

Yes, it’s Calvinball! The minority communities, supported by progressive DEI fanatics, make up the rules as they go along—whatever keeps whites, heterosexuals and non-disabled actors out of roles. Back in 2019, I designated this “the dumbest casting controversy yet”: that was when Bryan Cranston was criticized for playing a quadriplegic without being actually paralyzed from the neck down. Well, the DEI maniacs have gone way, way beyond that, and conveniently, the most recent ridiculous Calvinball installment is relevant to today’s nonsense.

Continue reading

Oh Good JOB, Fulton County! This Is Just What The Public Needs To See To Convince It That The Use Of The Criminal Justice System Against Donald Trump Is Fair, Non-Partisan, And To Be Respected…[UPDATED!]

There goes my head.

This is unbelievable: I saw the story yesterday and ignored it assuming it was a hoax or something. But no.

Hours before a Georgia grand jury handed down a pack of indictments yesterday charging Donald Trump and 18 lawyers, allies and associates with crimes in their efforts to challenge the 2020 election, a document was posted on the court’s website stating that the former President had already been charged. The grand jury hadn’t even voted yet. Oopsie!

The Associated Press, now a consistently biased news source that gives every Trump story as hard a pro-Democratic Party, Trump Derangement spin as possible, notes that this bizarre episode “gave the former president an opening in court and on the campaign trial to try to paint Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ case as tainted and the criminal justice system as rigged against him.” Gee, ya think, AP? Just because the court announced the jury’s decisions before they made it? Boy, those Republicans will pounce on anything!

You know, I try to eschew sarcasm, but only disgust and mockery will do in this case. “There is no evidence that the grand jury process was somehow compromised, or that the document was intentionally leaked by prosecutors or court officials,” says the AP, in a spectacular example of Rationalization #64, “It isn’t what it is.” There’s no evidence—except for the fact that the grand jury’s conclusion was publicized before it was reached! I’d call that rather substantial evidence that the process was compromised and the document was leaked, wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t anybody? Wouldn’t particularly those Americans who are convinced that the Democrats have weaponized the legal system to hold power and to imprison the opponent and critic whom they most fear come to that conclusion? Shouldn’t they?

Continue reading