Recent Posts

social policy

2018: Year of the Post-postfeminist DFL

by Invenium Viam on June 29, 2018 · 0 comments

Where the boys are
Someone waits for me,
A smiling face, a warm embrace,
Two arms to hold me tenderly…
Connie Francis, 1960


In early February of 2016, Gloria Steinem and Madeline Albright told young women that it was “their duty to support Hillary Clinton” in her presidential campaign.


“We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it’s done,” Ms. Albright, the first female Secretary of State in US history, said of the broader fight for women’s equality. “It’s not done. There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”


A day earlier, Ms. Steinem had stumbled badly on the HBO series Real Time with Bill Maher when she suggested in an Overtime segment that younger women were backing Mr. Sanders just so they could meet young men. “When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’ ” she said.


Those remarks drew an immediate, widespread and hostile reaction from young women across the country.


“Shame on Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright for implying that we as women should be voting for a candidate based solely on gender,” Zoe Trimboli, a 23-year-old from Vermont who supports Mr. Sanders and describes herself as a feminist, wrote on Facebook. “I can tell you that shaming me and essentially calling me misinformed and stupid is NOT the way to win my vote.”


Word. Keeping it real myself, I have to admit to a brief moment of schadenfreude. Having gotten an earful a time or two for insensitivity to the challenges facing women in a patriarchal society, most recently from my wife and daughter over the recent revisiting of the Bill Clinton / Monica Lewinsky scandal, I was kind of happy to see a feminist leader of the stature of Steinem get flamed. If anyone should get a pass for saying or doing something stupid, she should. They’re probably going to erect statues of Steinem in campus quadrangles around the country. Books and plays will be written about her life and leadership. They’ll name high schools after her. And after she passes, a movie will be made of her life and struggles entitled simply, ‘Gloria.’


The most I’ll ever get is an epitaph on a headstone that reads, ‘He tried hard not to be an sh*thead.’ Unless I outlive my wife and daughter, that is. Not likely.


As a political junkie, I noted this kerfuffle at the time as a potentially significant event demographically. After all, young women among the Mil-Gen′s who were voting for the first time in 2008 supported Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton. Later, in 2016, polls showed they strongly supported Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton, prompting the reaction from Albright and Steinem and the counter-reaction just described. I began to wonder if these facts were a bellwether of an attitudinal change in gender relations; hence, a change in gender politics. I wondered if they weren’t early evidence of a post-postfeminist ethos forming among young Democrats.


Then came the revelations about Trump the pussy-grabber and serial womanizer. Then came the Women’s March. Then came Cosby, Weinstein, Lauer, Roy Moore, Louis CK, and dozens of others. Somewhere in there came the accusations locally against Rep. Tony Cornish, State Senator Dan Schoen, and US Senator Al Franken. All of which fit perfectly with the focus of Fourth-Wave feminism as defined by feminist writer Prudence Chamberlain: economic and social justice for women and opposition to sexual violence and sexual harassment. Nope, I thought, 2008 and 2016 were just the anomaly of two charismatic male candidates opposed by a uninspiring female candidate with a militant sense of entitlement and a caustic demeanor on the stump.


But the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.


Getcha Mojo Below the Fold, Moe



A high-realism love doll

‘Oh, a storm is threat’ning … My very life today … If I don’t get some shelter … Lord, I might – fade away.’
                                               Gimme Shelter ~ The Rolling Stones


Now that some of the apocalyptic nuclear dust has settled from the Supreme Court’s recent decision to uphold the civil rights of same-sex couples in federal law, but while the subject is still fresh in the minds of the media-consuming public, I can’t help but point out that Conservatives — once again — have got it all wrong. At least they’re consistent.


There IS a very real threat to traditional marriage, but it doesn’t come from sundry gay folks conjoining in wanton acts of civil union so they can learn to hate each other after 10 or 12 years of disputatious conversations about patio furniture and wallpaper — just like regular folk do.


No, the real threat to traditional marriage comes from a direction that Radioactive Crack Monkeys like Limbaugh, Hannity, Cruz, Huckabee and Jindal haven’t even thought about.


I am speaking, of course, about highly realistic synthetic human love dolls.


By any measure, traditional marriage is about to take a hard one on the chin — and not because two guys or two gals are seen engaging in shameless PDA’s like hand-holding, or what we straights sometimes call Mormon First Base. It’ll be a hard right hook arcing up hidden in the blind spot that will lift Conservatives off their heels and rock their world in the very near future, and it will be thrown from the shoulder of highly realistic, animated synthetic human love dolls.


To be clear, I’m not talking about those inflatable plastic balloons that cost $14.95, that sometimes double as a pool toy, and were once ubiquitous in the party pits of frat houses across America — required décor along with black-light posters of chesty Mexican bar maids in embroidered peasant blouses, the omni-present Farah Fawcett poster on the door in the head, pull-tab chains from countless coke cans festooning the overhead pipes and rafters, a beer can pyramid in the corner, a lava lamp next to the turntable, a Zippo® lighter the size of a hard-cover book on the spool table, and spent condoms among the dust bunnies behind the couch.


No, I’m talking about those expensive, high tech love dolls — the kind that cost $12,000 and up. That’s what a new car used to cost not so very long ago. The newest embodiments of plastic gratification that do something more than just vibrate are getting so realistic they can almost pass muster as a bed friend you’ll want to tell your buddies about. And they’re just getting more realistic and more sophisticated with every passing year.


Anita, domestic ‘synth’ in the AMC television series ‘HUMANS’

The day is soon coming — the day is well nigh, O Zion — when the new AMC television series ‘HUMANS‘ will be more docu-drama than science fiction and ‘synths’ like Anita and Niska will be commonplace in bachelor pads around the world. Let’s be honest — Anita is a babe, appearance-wise. Niska, too, is a babe. She’s a dangerous murderous babe with the strength of a male chimp and the instincts of a wolverine, to be sure; but fully babe-ified nonetheless. Stupifyingly babe-ilicious.


In real-life, it should be pretty easy to program a realistic response-curve intimacy feedback algorithm (code-named: ++INTIMACY) based on a range of different inputs that generate appropriately-timed declarations, physical contortions, and vocalizations in a high end love doll that are adequately gratifying to the end user. Human sexual response is, after all, not all that much more sophisticated than two Gooney Birds trilling, high-jumping and bobbing their heads up and down in unison, when you really get down to it.


HTLD-3Not to mention that market forces will ensure that synthetic human love doll quality will continue to improve by leaps and bounds, while cost will continue to decrease precipitously, as it does with any high tech product. It’s a sure bet that once the right cost-benefit benchmark is attained, high tech synthetic human love dolls will be found in every every bachelor’s home, as commonplace as cell-phones and cable teevee. The reason is that high-tech synthetic human love dolls offer a number of clear advantages over traditional marriage:

More Below the Fold


Obama-facepalmOne of the things that mainstream media tends to overlook in the current debate over the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act (aka “Obamacare”) is that it employs the very market solutions that business-centric Republicans love to tout as the panacea for all that ails, but either don’t really seem to understand, or only apply topically when needed — like zinc ointment for a skin rash.
One reason the media keep missing it is because the White House Office of Communications (WHOC) repeatedly fails to point it out.
We need to remember that Obamacare is not socialized medicine, or anything remotely like it, no matter what those reality-challenged moonblind sub-normals in sloth cloth say on the buzzbox.
The foundation of Obamacare is state-based insurance exchanges. The idea is not to socialize medicine, but to socialize risk across a broader population base and thereby to reduce costs for everybody. In fact, that’s all insurance companies of any stripe do — socialize risk by spreading loss across a large subscriber base. The ACA state-based insurance exchanges just make it more efficient.
Here’s where market principles apply: as health insurance companies compete for customers within a huge pool of potential customers, over time there will be winners and losers, as there are in any competitive marketplace. Those who survive and prosper will be those who figure out ways to: 1) Provide better services at lower cost; 2) Create more efficiencies in providing those services; 3) Find innovative ways to create those efficiencies; 4) Increase productivity while decreasing overhead.
What’s for a free market capitalist and Austrian School Tool not to like? Maybe the regulations?

{ 1 comment }

Mud Soup 12/05/10

by Dan Burns on December 5, 2010 · 0 comments

–  “Just imagine if we could get something like that going here.”  Indeed.

–  More righteous news from Adventures of Johnny Northside.

With the impending shifts in site format, ‘Mud Soup’ will be ascending to a more inclusive, comprehensive feature.  In the waning days of the current format, I’m going to indulge myself, just a bit:

–  A little light reading for cat lovers, and

–  The late, great John Fahey:


Mud Soup 12/4/10

by Dan Burns on December 4, 2010 · 0 comments

–  Campaign for America’s Future:  ‘Hidden Agendas Killed The Deficit Commission.’

–  Dick Bernard on ‘vicarious violence.’

–  This weekend’s science hit.

NASA-funded astrobiology research has changed the fundamental knowledge about what comprises all known life on Earth.

Researchers conducting tests in the harsh environment of Mono Lake in California have discovered the first known microorganism on Earth able to thrive and reproduce using the toxic chemical arsenic. The microorganism substitutes arsenic for phosphorus in its cell components.


Mud Soup 12/3/10

by Dan Burns on December 3, 2010 · 0 comments

–  Teabaggers and earmarks.  It’s not what they want people to believe.

–  What would you do with the $700B to extend tax cuts for the mega-rich?

–  Centrisity describes the recount chess game.

–  Minnesota Brown on the ‘mining vs. environment debate’ on The Range.

–  A ‘Shelter Report’ from Across The Great Divide.


Mud Soup 12/2/10

by Dan Burns on December 2, 2010 · 0 comments

–  Penigma on World AIDS Day, which was Dec. 1.

–  An open letter about Wikileaks and the peace community.

–  Open Left also has excellent stuff on the matter.

–  Norwegianity takes note of a ‘close call.’

–  The Shannon Files on ‘A not so natural disaster…’


Mud Soup 12/1/10

by Dan Burns on December 1, 2010 · 0 comments

–  Failure to accomplish much on global sustainability

–  Good commentary about the President and our broken system.

–  A roundup of polling, and hypocrisy, about the economy, taxes, and the deficit.


Mud Soup 11/30/10

by Dan Burns on November 30, 2010 · 0 comments

–  For better or worse, traditional religion is declining among young people.  Here are some ideas as to why.

–  ‘Next Chapter in the Republican War Against Women.’

–  The death toll from Wikileaks releases.

–  ‘Wikileaks on Israel, Iraq, and the Iranian Specter.’


Mud Soup 11/29/10

by Dan Burns on November 29, 2010 · 0 comments

–  The next big Wikileaks release could be a doozy.

–  Michigan Liberal on the TSA controversy.

–  I don’t know about this, at all.  But I’m throwing it in here, for whoever might be interested.

–  I’m linking this for all the economic data.