Culture Warriors category archive
How Stuff Works, Dominance and Desire Dept. 0
I must say that, in none of the places I’ve worked–and by that I mean my own little corner of the company, not the company as a whole–have I heard of, let along witnessed, predatory sexual behavior such as that recently in the news.
Nonetheless, the recent news stories in no way surprise me.
I know that such conduct went on in parts of at least one company I worked for. It was early in my career, which started just as the Mad Men days were coming to a close. As one of my co-workers told me at the time, “No woman wants to be in the elevator with [Vice President X]. He thinks every woman in [Department Y] is a member of his harem.” I also recall that, when an accomplished and diligent woman in my department received a promotion, it was accompanied by a whispering campaign that she had “slept her way” into it (she didn’t).
Historiann argues that there much more going on workplaces which tolerate such behavior than sexual hanky-panky. Here’s a bit of her piece; follow the link for the rest.
Suffer the Children 0
Mike wonders why Republicans and their vocally self-proclained “Christian” supporters are willing to condemn children to sickness and death through their failure to renew CHIP. (Warning: Language.)
Suffer the Children 0
It’s not scripture. It’s policy.
Real Big Men 0
Alfred Doblin muses on the state of “manhood” (whatever that is) and concludes that it has been Trumpled.
A snippet:
class=”aligncenter” width=”500px” height=”373px”“Think of the Bakeries” 0
Redacted Tonight discusses how the religious right is attempting to leverage the recent hurricanes so it can suckle at the public teat.
Warning: Language.
Whinestein 0
Also at the Inky, Will Bunch excoriates Harvey Weinstein’s farcical attempt to attribute his predations on the 1960s. A snippet:
The biggest difference in sexual abuse — by family members, “trusted” adults, bosses, or the otherwise powerful — before the arrival of the 1960s and ’70s was that victims were more likely to suffer in silence, increasing their trauma. As for those changing “rules” that Weinstein clings to as his excuse, the only real rule changes that mattered that came from the early 1970s were the ideas that women had a right to more freedom, more respect and greater opportunity in the workplace and in every other social arena that mattered.
Blaming the Victim 0
John Kim, writing at Psychology Today Blogs, demonstrates that women are not to blame for male predation. Furthermore, he suggests Harvey Weinstein and his ilk are far from being monstrous exceptions to the rule, but, rather, are far too typical.
Here’s a snippet:
Aside:
It’s not the best-written piece, but I think he makes points worth considering. And, in a related piece, Laura Gianino tells a tale of trolls.
Trumpling Weinstein 0
At the Boston Review, Bonnie Honig sees both similarities and differences between Donald Trump and Harvey Weinstein. The similarities she perceives are not surprising, but the differences are chilling.
Here’s a bit:
(snip)
. . . Trump has changed the rules of the game. Trump would never offer to get treatment to save his job. He would never ask for a second chance. If you are emailing your friends asking for support, if you say you will seek treatment, if you are hoping for another chance, you are already—in Trump’s grade school terms—a loser: reality’s victim, not its maker. The game is over.
Follow the link for the rest; it is quite worth your consideration.
One Thing Is Not Like the Other Thing 0
Randye Hoder points out similarities between the conduct towards women of Donald Trump and Harvey Weinstein because of Weinstein’s contributions to Democratic candidates and causes.
She then notes a crucial difference:
. . . there’s only one difference that matters: We didn’t make Harvey Weinstein president.
Click the link to follow her path the this conclusion.
Return of a Classic 0
In The Roanoke Times, Steve Frey despairs at the revival of a TV classic. A snippet:
In this modern scenario, Chief of Staff Kelly acts as Ward Cleaver, giving Donald fatherly advice, which the president seemingly ignores. Can’t you just see General Kelly standing by the fireplace advising, “Now Donald, you know that tweet was mean-spirited and will just get you into more trouble.” Wally and Beaver would listen and learn; Eddie Haskell Trump just keeps doing it. He can’t help himself. He seems to need A LOT of attention.
Aside:
For all who yearn for that portrayal of 1950s America, remember, Barbara Billingsley was a working mother.
School for Scamdal 0
Pap and Frank Schaeffer discuss the home school scam and its origins as a proxy for re-segregating schools.
A Picture Is Worth 0
Piggishness knows no party.
Dis Coarse Discourse 0
Jay Bookman discusses Donald Trump’s debasement of political debate. A nugget:
Nobody could have done what I’ve done for #PuertoRico with so little appreciation. So much work! pic.twitter.com/k2jAkIpfjI
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 8, 2017
In ordinary times, such a childish whine for attention would be considered extraordinary evidence of a leader’s incapacity and weakness, and cause for global concern. It is literally inconceivable coming from any other major political figure, perhaps in history, and in fact is inconceivable from anyone else beyond the age of 10.
In the era of Trump, it’s just a Sunday.
“Republican Family Values” . . . . 0
. . . is a con for the rubes.