The Whack-Her Curve

Some of us already knew Johnny Depp was an ass, and his stature just got lower. Or did it? It was revealed Friday that wife Amber Heard was granted a restraining order against Depp, for allegedly smashing her face with an iPhone.

There were plenty of photographers and filmographers to capture her appearance as she left the courthouse. These are among the most seductive and alluring images of a woman in years.

Her gaze is downcast and demure. Her black dress, a sackcloth contrast to her alabaster skin.

There is a bruise around her right eye. It makes her look vulnerable, and accessible in a way.

Is it too soon to call shenanigans? Let's step back and consider a few things.

Amber Heard is an actress, and has contacts in the industry who could easily use a little makeup to give her a realistic-looking bruise.

I was thinking today that after this "violent" episode, a good role for Amber Heard would be a femme fatale, like the Sharon Stone character in Basic Instinct, or the Linda Fiorentino character in The Last Seduction. And what do you know?! Amber Heard has a movie in the can, coming soon to a theatre near you, called London Fields. She is playing a character named Nicola Six, a "clairvoyant femme fatale."

The question everybody is asking, is, will this accusation harm Johnny Depp's career? Well, long ago Sean Penn was charged with felony domestic assault in connection with allegations involving Madonna. And Sean Penn has never wanted for top shelf pussy or star vehicles.

Amber and Johnny haven't involved the police. She was granted her restraining order, but there have been no criminal charges filed against him. Maybe this "violent" incident will earn her a nice payday, but Depp has fuck-you money, certainly enough to commit to a project like Heard. By Hollywood standards, this is just another way to earn a producer credit.

Even by the standards of civil society, Johnny Depp will not be materially damaged by these allegations. This is because women desire a little domestic abuse. It is affirmation that their man is emotionally invested in the relationship.

Think of it like the way economists think of optimum levels of taxation. Ever heard of the Laffer Curve? This states that there is a level of taxation between 0% and 100% that will maximize revenue. Certainly there is also a level of abuse that women will submit to that will maximize loyalty. Call it the Whack-Her Curve.

Stop Bogarting That Thalidomide

I went to the local big-box pet store yesterday afternoon. There was a black guy standing near the sliding doors, puffing on a joint. He even asked my wife if she wanted a hit!

This seems to be happening more frequently, in my experience. People smoking grass on the street corner, out here in suburbia. If they were vaping, then nobody would even know.

America's love affair with marijuana seems to be nourished by the natural fallacy. Since marijuana is natural, it must be good. And they keep coming up with studies conducted on animals to fortify their arguments.

Marijuana Kills Cancer Cells https://t.co/MOvZzdhU6A pic.twitter.com/OYKd4mPiFG

— MME (@THEMMEXCHANGE) May 29, 2016

Wow if true. But it's not. The study by the National Cancer Institute found that, in the lab, and using animals, cannabidiol (CBD) "may lessen the growth, number, and spread of tumors."

Cannabidiol is just one of hundreds of compounds in marijuana. Studying it as an isolated extract on mice isn't perfectly analogous to its effect on humans. And high CBD content isn't why people use cannabis recreationally. Only a small amount of medical marijuana users use marijuana for legitimate medical reasons. The rest of them go to a doctor willing to write them a prescription to use pot for anxiety or depression or back pain.

Yet state governments are practically rushing to legalize weed, and tax the revenues. Their logic seems to be that it isn't as bad as opioids or alcohol. That is damning with faint praise!

Especially in light of new research that shows marijuana damages your DNA. The summary of the paper, "Chromothripsis and epigenomics complete causality criteria for cannabis- and addiction-connected carcinogenicity, congenital toxicity and heritable genotoxicity," indicates that marijuana, as an addictive substance, can shatter chromosomes. That is chromothripsis. That is when a "chromosome becomes dislodged from the mitotic spindle, isolated in micronuclei and chaotically re-connected."

Chromosomes being "chaotically re-connected" doesn't sound desirable. And "carcinogenicity" is a fancy way of saying it causes cancer.

"Cannabis has been linked epidemiologically with major foetal malformations and cancer induction in children." Smoking dope will give your children birth defects and raise their cancer risk, perhaps years or decades before they are conceived.

"Epigenetic damage from cannabis forms major pathways to oncogenesis, fetotoxicity and ageing in humans and their offspring." We tell pregnant women not to drink. Why don't we tell all people who plan to have children to never smoke pot? Because what this study says is that the toxicity of marijuana is passed on to your children.

The most chilling sentence in the abstract? "THC shows a non-linear sigmoidal dose-response relationship in multiple pertinent in vitro and preclinical genotoxicity assays, and in this respect is similar to the serious major human mutagen thalidomide."

Governments think they've found this spigot of tax money that will magically balance the budget. They never ask themselves whether that tax dollar today is going to be enough to cover the generational effects of addiction, tomorrow.

Perhaps you can't put a number on a docile populace. Maybe it's worth it to have that guy toking out on the corner instead of busting my wife over the head and taking her purse.

Cervical Hostility

From Natural Fertility Info, the average ejaculation contains 200 million sperm, but within hours, those numbers have dwindled to just 1/10 of that amount. So what accounts for the reduction?

Cervical mucus is intended to help sperm move toward the egg, but in some cases the mucus will go on the attack instead. It is this phenomenon that came to mind yesterday watching the Twitter feed of ABC Digital News correspondent Liz Kreutz. She is virtually embedded in the Hillary Clinton campaign. And her job seems to be to suppress or ignore any news that doesn't make her candidate look good. If a story is too big to ignore, she will just go to the campaign for their officialese statement.

Yesterday we had the release of a State Department Inspector General audit of Clinton's use of a personal email. They concluded that Clinton "did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act."

Yet what did Liz Kreutz dig into yesterday, of all days? A sexist was spotted in the wild!

Man holds "Women are NOT fit to be President" sign outside Clinton's rally pic.twitter.com/S2Ya6MUAyU

— Liz Kreutz (@ABCLiz) May 25, 2016

A few tweets later, Liz wrote, "The man would not give his name but some people here identified him as a local high school AP calculus teacher." Kreutz is implying that this man should be identified and lose his job for wrongthink. Has Justine Landed Yet?

A little later on, Kreutz tweeted, "Just reached this man by phone. He confirms he's a high school calc teacher - and now tells me the sign was meant to be a joke." Kreutz spent hours digging into this man's story instead of researching actual news. This is displaying her hostility to anything substantive that will damage Clinton, and a instinct to protect her.

Perhaps that is the sentiment this man is expressing. There are no innate, biological reasons why a woman shouldn't be president. But men are treated differently by society. They are told that they are interchangeable, and disposable. Not women. Women are told that they are special snowflakes, and that they should be protected.

If that was his belief, that women are not fit to be president because people will instinctively shield them from criticism, then I would have to agree. Are you going to come after me now, Liz?

Butch Ghostbusters

The second trailer for butch Ghostbusters has dropped, and it doesn't make the movie look very funny. Not a good sign. The best gags are usually cherry-picked for the trailer, to whet your appetite.

It looks like a bunch of sight gags that break up the forced, CGI supernatural malevolence.

Unfunny sight gag # 1. Kristen Wiig gets slimed. Hackneyed. They couldn't think of another way to coat someone with ectoplasm? A rich lady walking her foofy poodle getting slimed would at least merit a chuckle (HAHA that old lady and her stupid dog finally got their comeuppance)!

Unfunny sight gag # 2. Leslie Jones falls down and asks whether it was her blackness or her femaleness that kept people from catching her. Soon, she will be wondering whether her blackness or her femaleness is what's keeping people from laughing.

Unfunny sight gag # 3. Kristen Wiig being dragged kicking and screaming. It doesn't have the same impact as, "dogs and cats, living together, mass hysteria."




All that being said, there is a potentially decent movie in there, somewhere. Whether director Paul Feig recognized that potential is another question. One of the things that made the original Ghostbusters charming was the way it played with stereotypes.

The nerdy, socially awkward scientist Egon Spengler (Harold Ramis) caught the eye of Janine Melnitz (Annie Potts), who chatted him up. He replied that his hobby was collecting, "spores, molds, and fungus." If Feig were writing to the stereotype, he would make the female scientist character somewhat frigid and sexually repressed.

Wiig's occupation (physicist) and frumpy tweed suit puts her in the right category. Her and Kate McKinnon are the only females in the cast who aren't hideous, but McKinnon is almost always pictured wearing thick green goggles. If there is a character that experiences a sexual awakening, it will be Wiig.

The 2016 version of Ghostbusters also has a damsel-in-distress theme, but they flipped the script. Beautiful blonde Chris Hemsworth plays the damsel, and this sets up some interesting possibilities. Hemsworth experiences a demon possession and starts doing daring stunts on a motorcycle.

He becomes the ultimate bad boy. This is the kind of character that women have been swooning over for eternity, with the current archetype being Edward from Twilight. He seduces Bella, even though Bella understands that to consummate her desire would be to surrender her soul.

In Ghostbusters, there could be a moral choice between a woman's desire and her duty to rid the world of a dangerous phantasm. In the original, the spirit was freed from the damsel. But we'll see. It is 2016 after all.

Prediction: The best ideas will remain in the Ecto-Containment System. The movie is going to be about female empowerment and, since Melissa McCarthy is in it, fat acceptance. Every female character is a Mary Sue who don't need no man. There isn't a single actor in this movie capable of stealing a scene, and the ensemble female cast just means they tried to write an equal number of lines for each one.

Ace Ventura Banned In Canada?

Canada is preparing to prohibit discrimination based on "gender identity." They are also going to amend the Canadian Criminal Code to prohibit "public speech or communication that 'promotes hatred' on the basis of 'gender identity' or 'gender expression.'"

All it will take is one word that doesn't condone full transgender endorsement to cause offense. The "victim" need only say that they feel "unsafe." It may be something as small as mispronouncing their preferred gender pronoun.

Canadian lawmakers have no idea how much power this will give the radical left, who are not exactly known for magnanimity anyway. From here, it would be merely incremental to criminalize speech deemed sexist or that denies AGW.

What happens when a licensed medical doctor refuses to issue a prescription for puberty-delaying hormones? We'll be in the position where we can't punish a doctor who performs an abortion at thirty weeks but we can jail one for refusing to mutilate healthy genital tissue.

What happens when Netflix receives the list of transphobic movies from GLAD? In the movie Ace Ventura, Jim Carrey pukes in a toilet and scrubs his mouth with a toothbrush when he realizes he kissed a trap female.

Perhaps that segment can be edited out of the new, bowdlerized Canadian version of Ace Ventura. But some classic movies have "transphobic" themes that are crucial to the plot. In the movie Silence Of The Lambs, the psychopathic murderer is revealed to be a transsexual.

"What is the first and principal thing he does?"

"Anger, um, social acceptance, and, huh, sexual frustrations, sir..."

"No! He covets. That is his nature."

Banning Silence Of The Lambs and editing Ace Ventura are the tip of the iceberg. Just googling "transphobic movies" yields 232,000 results.

When the radical left has control over what you cannot see, they also get control over what you will see. And you will see mainstreaming of the transgender agenda (transgenda?) in every aspect of the culture. Television, movies and higher education are already there.

Check out this video of college students so afraid of potentially offending someone, they can't even say whether men and women are different.



Expect public secondary schools to begin teaching this garbage, and popular media to continue to promote gender fluidity and bisexuality. It's designed to remove all traces of gender in order to destroy the nuclear family unit.

Because the family is the only truly free institution, and because, as Karl Marx said, the family is a vehicle of class oppression.

Buy The News

Ploughshares Fund, it was revealed yesterday, has given money to media groups to help it sell the JPCOA, the Iran Deal, to the public. How much money? For starters, they gave NPR $100,000 last year.

They also gave $225,000 to the left -leaning Brookings Institution and $576,500 to the left -leaning lobbying group J Street. All this to create an echo chamber to help sell the JPCOA.

Anyone who opposed the JPCOA on principle was accused of being in favor of war with Iran. This created a war-or-diplomacy binary that was constantly employed in support of the JPCOA.

The Obama Administration doesn't believe in gender binaries, but they do believe in foreign policy binaries.

Ploughshares can grant money to whomever they please. They are a 501(c)(3) foundation that is focused on nuclear non-proliferation.

The idea of nuclear non-proliferation is a noble concept. The idea of nuclear disarmament is a childish one. There is no reason that they deserve tax exemptions on their "charitable" donations.

Ploughshares also disclosed that it contributes to "reputable and strategic media outlets" like The Guardian, Salon, and the Huffington Post. That may be the first time the words "reputable" and "strategic" have ever been used to describe those media outlets. Usually places like Salon and HuffPo are described with words like "progressive," and "lefty."

Strange that the JPCOA is so bad that even lefty shills had to be paid to promote it.

Ploughshares spokeswoman Jennifer Abrahamson said, "It is common practice for foundations to fund media coverage of underreported stories.

The Iran Deal was an underreported story?

The business model for journalism used to be selling advertising space to stereo retailers. Then the newspaper could practice editorial independence. Points of view could be disseminated with letters to the editor, and in the op-ed pages.

When "foundations" are funneling money to media outlets, it creates the appearance of bias. Remember that, next time you listen to NPR, and the little voice-over comes in and tells you, "Funding for this program provided by...."

Three Predictions For 2016

A woman will lead one of the service branches.

 Fanning was named to be the Secretary of the Army!? Fanning has never served in uniform. He's been a "civil servant" his whole career. He's worse than a rear echelon mother fucker. He's a zero.

Judging by his profile picture, he's a thirsty fucker, too.

Well, maybe two predictions for 2016, then.

The DEA will cease classifying marijuana as a Schedule 1 Drug.

This will be done to blunt any attempt by Donald Trump to appeal to Bernie Sanders voters. Trump has proved himself adept at getting to the left of the Republican establishment. He also has a knack for getting to the left of settled Democratic policy.

He's the only Republican who can safely claim to be on the left of Hillary on the subject of OIF. She voted for the authorization of military force. He is on the record as saying it would be a bad idea.

Also, the FDA will no longer require a prescription for most birth control pills. The Supreme Court yesterday told the lower courts to figure out an accommodation to the birth control mandate. Republican libertarians have been discussing for years the desirability of making birth control pills available without a prescription.

The political expediency of forcing Republicans to "deny healthcare access to women" is long past its sell-by date.

This prediction will only come to pass if and when the federal apparatus tires of flaying politically unwanted constituents like the Little Sisters Of The Poor.

Trump Crossing The Line

The New York Times takes the award for most risible headline. The recent hit job on the GOP nominee is titled, Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump Behaved With Women in Private.

The encounter everybody is talking about involved Rowanne Brewer Lane. "Donald J. Trump had barely met Rowanne Brewer Lane when he asked her to change out of her clothes."

Lane is quoted in the story, "Donald was having a pool party at Mar-a-Lago."

"He suddenly took me by the hand, and he started to show me around the mansion. He asked me if I had a swimsuit with me. I said no. I hadn’t intended to swim. He took me into a room and opened drawers and asked me to put on a swimsuit."

At the time, Lane was a 26-year-old model. At a pool party. At Donald Trump's mansion. When she put on a swimsuit, and Trump saw her, she said, "he said, 'wow.'"

A twenty-six year old model was objectified. The horror, the horror! Note that Lane has responded to the article by commenting that The Times "did take quotes from what I said and they put a negative connotation on it."

In other words, the woman who was interviewed is calling bullshit on the Daily Show-style selective editing and bad faith. Not that the world much cares about what a man says to a woman in private anymore. The tacit acceptance of Bill Clinton's behavior pretty much ended that.

Don't think I can muster any vicarious rage because some woman was objectified, either. Here's a news flash: women objectify men! They don't usually see men as sexual objects, the way men see them.

But women view men as a resource to be exploited for a their comfort and security. That is commodification no less pronounced than seeing a woman as a sexual receptacle. The disposable man is the basic premise and selling point of feminism. There has never been an effort to understand or care why men die earlier than women. It is taken as a social good.

So spare me the crocodile tears over Trump's male gaze.

When a thought-leader among women condemns one of her sisters for silently calculating the net present value on each and every male she meets, then we'll talk.

Brexit or Texit

The Obama Administration has dropped another Dear Colleague letter on American schools. Any school that accepts federal funding must submit to federal rules on transgender students.

The Department of Justice, together with the Department of Education, published the guidelines on Friday, which are based on Title IX. Title IX says that you can't discriminate on the basis of sex. On Friday, the DOJ stated that this "prohibition encompasses discrimination based on a student’s gender identity."

This is pure circular reasoning.

A person's gender identity may not match their sex. A person's sex is perfectly binary, either male or female. A person's gender identity is an infinite continuum. Facebook lists fifty-eight different gender identities. The very premise of the new guidance is flawed. So flawed that it will likely be tried in the courts.

Hopefully we will witness the spectacle of a governor calling in the National Guard to blockade a women's restroom. Then the President could call in the 101st Airborne to escort a trans-fag she-male cross-dresser in to let xir take a dump.

Otherwise this is all just a very annoying sideshow. The only reason I'm taking any side at all is the utter contempt I have for the people pushing this on us.

Just ask yourself whether you want this person telling you how to run your local school district. Nothing personal against her, but she sits in an office in Washington, D.C., and thinks she knows what's best for your kid. The best thing in the world would be to disband the Department of Education, and scrape off all the barnacles that cling to the ship of state. Then bulldoze the building and salt the earth, so no federal bureaucracy ever grows there again.

Why does anybody think some civil servant like her acts in the best interest of anything but her cadre?

There is a similar argument being played out right now in England. Next month they are going to vote whether to stay in the European Union. The question is whether British citizens will consent to being governed by un-elected EU functionaries instead of their own sovereign government.

Those wishing to remain in the EU are resorting to scare tactics. Labor MP Harriet Harman said that "Brexit could derail the fight for women’s rights."

World Ends, Women, Minorities Hardest Hit.

Another twat, Christine Lagarde, the IMF managing director, has said that leaving the EU would be "pretty bad to very, very bad." When it comes to Brexit, people like Nigel Farage have it right. And when it comes to the federal government trying to impose its will on local school districts, Oklahoma Attorney General E. Scott Pruitt has it right. He responded to the Dear Colleague letter by writing,

"Please be advised that if you attempt to enforce this "significant guidance letter" on schools in
the State of Oklahoma, we will vigorously defend the State's interests."

Tell Me About Your Campus Rape Culture

Is it time for an addendum to the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights 2011 Dear Colleague letter? According to Beth Mitchneck and The Chronicle Of Higher Education, college tour guides don't know enough about how their institutions handle "an issue that keeps rearing its ugly head on campuses nationwide — sexual assault."

"My daughter and I recently returned from a whirlwind tour of six colleges in the Northeast." Mitchneck's sample size is six.

"We are not just any mother-daughter team." Do tell, do tell. "I’m a professor who has been involved in gender equity for 15 years. My daughter is in the midst of creating a high-school curriculum on consensual sex for a class project and is interested in discussions of social justice." Don't hold your breath waiting on her to produce grandchildren any time soon.

"So she decided that she would ask every student tour guide how their institution handles sexual assault. It seemed especially relevant since a new study indicates that between 2001 and 2013, reports of sex crimes on college campuses have more than doubled."

Has Mitchneck avoided the "One In Five Female Students Will Experience Sexual Assault While In College" fake statistic? Maybe her critical reasoning isn't fatally compromised by fear.

Linking to her statistic goes to a PDF compiled by the National Center For Education Statistics entitled Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2015. One of the key findings of this report, "the number of reported forcible sex crimes on campus increased from 2,200 in 2001 to 5,000 in 2013."

Five thousand reported forcible sex crimes, out of a population of nearly twelve million female college students. The reason the issue seems to "keep rearing its ugly head" is the state of utter moral panic among people like Mitchneck.

And keep in mind that a "forcible sex crime" means "any sexual act directed against another person forcibly and/or against that person's will." In other words, touching a woman's breast against her will is in the same category as forcible rape.

Anyway, back to the college tour. On their first stop, their tour guide had to overcome the "constant querying of a young man about the location of the rec center." Boys, amirite? Excuse me, do you know where the weight room is? I'll check it out.



Mitchneck says that she "wanted to know that skilled and knowledgeable people were available to students and others to assist during and after crises, and should lawyers come in, they are there to protect the victims’ rights." The lawyers better not be there to protect the rights of the accused! Due Process? Rape due process! Due process was asking for it!

Later in her article, Mitchneck cited the "2015 survey by the Association of American Universities found that 23 percent of undergraduate women respondents experienced some form of sexual assault." And there it is. The survey that takes selection bias to new heights. Mitchneck just disqualified herself from being taken seriously.

Good thing Mitchneck wasn't cursed with a son, as far as we know. Sometimes it's nice to see the occasional resource for mothers whose sons have experienced the abdication of due process protections for alleged sexual assault.

Another Little Boy Dropped On Hiroshima

President Obama is going to visit the city of Hiroshima later this month. We have been assured by the White House that the President doesn't intend to offer a formal apology for America's decision to bomb the city.

Obama doesn't need to make an apology. His presence will send an unmistakable message. We're Sorry! Every time Obama leaves the United States to make a speech, he apologizes. It's his shtick. Like when Rodney Dangerfield adjusts his tie, we know he's going to say, "I don't get no respect."

Let's allow Ben Rhodes to tell us exactly why Obama will visit Hiroshima. As usual, Ben discourses the fuck out of it, in a post on Medium.

"The President will visit the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park," where he will "share his reflections on the significance of the site and the events that occurred there." Notice the passive voice. Events occurred. Obama is going to make a teleprompter speech in front of the Peace Memorial. The symbolism will be self-evident. The first post-colonial, post-imperial American President will be super serious and thoughtful.

"He will offer a forward-looking vision focused on our shared future." Banal, meaningless pabulum. Ben, you didn't exactly discourse the fuck out of that one.

"The President’s time in Hiroshima also will reaffirm America’s longstanding commitment — and the President’s personal commitment — to pursue the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons." The world will never be without nuclear weapons. This is a childish fantasy.

"That commitment has guided our efforts to promote non-proliferation." Obama has done more to promote nuclear proliferation than any previous President. Sure, he will talk about how fantastic the JCPOA is, and how it will prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.

Unless they decide to enrich and test at Parchin. Iran's military sites are excluded from inspection. Obama hasn't prevented Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. He just ensured that no nation will attack Iran until Iran has a nuclear deterrent.

Our good friends in Saudi Arabia will not stand for an Iranian bomb. Neither will Israel. The culmination of the JCPOA is that tactical military options are unfeasible, and the only alternative is strategic arms. Eventually, one side is going to wipe the other side out, with tens of millions of casualties.

But Obama will have his moment of quiet contemplation, as he dreams of a world without nuclear weapons.

He will be photographed with the most gruesome survivor possible. This human being, Obama will explain, was portrayed in American media as the Other. The decision to use the bomb will be grounded in racism. Obama will float a lantern down the Motoyasu River. He will seek out a moment of solitude, where cameras will capture his solemn tribute.

And Ben Rhodes will be there, discoursing the fuck out of things.

London Has Fallen

It's disconcerting to think that two of the world's financial capitals, London and New York City, have mayors so misaligned with their cities' heritage. New York mayor Bill de Blasio makes no secret about his love for fellating communists, whether Soviet or Central American. His latest tribute to identity politics involved condemning one of the city's newest job creators, Chick-Fil-A.

"I’m certainly not going to patronize them and I wouldn’t urge any other New Yorker to patronize them," he said. Well, certainly. Whether or not de Blasio earns re-election depends on New Yorkers' tolerance for public urination and rising crime.

Comrade de Blasio's counterpart across the Pond is a London-born Pakistani muslim named Sadiq Khan. His victory by 13 percentage points was decisive. And Londoners deserves the opportunity to choose for themselves their form of governance.

It's unsettling that the place that sent kings and knights to defend the seat of Christendom is now ruled by Islam. London has become dar al Islam.

The citizens of London had plenty of data points to judge the character of Khan, before the election. He criticized the Transport authority as having too many white males.

"Did you know there are 16 people on the board of TfL," he asked. "Thirteen of them are white men. Thirteen. Think about it."

Thus Khan has served notice that the sun will set upon those with Anglo heritage. It's not the fault of the white people, really. They have been leaving the city to the foreign-born. London has earned this changing of the guard.

Queen Elizabeth II was coronated on June 2, 1953. She was born in London, and reigned long enough to see a foreign political movement take power in her capital. Khan isn't the problem with London, he's merely the symptom.

I get that Pakistani muslims have fought on the side of the British Empire. But it's different now. I tried to imagine a Christian being elected mayor of Riyadh or Karachi. Impossible. Or a gaijin becoming mayor of Tokyo. Or an Anglo in power in Beijing. Impossible to even imagine.

This is intensely personal for me. I've been to London, in mid June of 1984. It was cloudy all the time. I was a recent college graduate, and had no concept of the historical significance of the city. I did all the touristy stuff, like seeing the Crown Jewels, and Westminster Abbey.

I do remember feeling that the women of London were the most beautiful in the world. They were all slightly underweight and extremely pale. These people were all my kin, on my mother's side at least.

Now, a generation later, the message for Anglos is unmistakable. If there is someone brown who wants the same job as you, don't even bother applying.

Divest This

When you think of San Diego, you probably imagine Sea World, the Zoo, the beaches, and those kinds of touristy things. But do you think of muslim terrorism? Perhaps you should.

Two of the 9/11 hijackers stayed in San Diego, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar. They helped fly a plane into the Pentagon. They lived in Clairemont and went to the islamic center there. They were financed by a Saudi named Omar al-Bayoumi.

There might be a connection between al-Bayoumi, a Saudi government contractor, and the Saudi royal family. President Obama is slow-walking his decision whether or not to release 28 redacted pages of 9/11 documents that allegedly connect the House of Saud to the 9/11 hijackers.

Prediction: Obama will declare that the classified documents did not pass a security review because they are too sensitive. Also, the Saudis have threatened to dump $750 billion in U.S. assets if the information is released. That's one of the sucky things about being a debtor nation. You lose a lot of leverage.

Islamic murderers don't like it when you expose their connections. A micro version of that played out this week at San Diego State University. David Horowitz of the Freedom Center scheduled a talk on campus focusing on the BDS movement and campus leftism.

Horowitz, a red diaper baby, knows plenty about campus leftism. That's basically what the BDS movement is, and affiliated organizations like SJP are. Freedom Center supporters posted flyers around campus making connections between the BDS movement and Palestinian terrorism. BDS is funded by Hamas, and they hold campus rallies chanting, "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free." That necessarily means wiping Israel off the map.

When SDSU President Elliot Hirshman issued a response to the flyers that wasn't itself BDS boilerplate, the muslim students and their allies trapped him inside a police cruiser for two hours. Hirshman hasn't condemned the intimidation tactics of the students, but he did condemn the "hate speech" of the flyers.

When looking at the image of the police car surrounded by protesters, the image that leaps to mind is the University of Missouri protests from last year. Protesters surrounded UM President Timothy Wolfe's car during a homecoming parade, and linked arms together.

Wolfe eventually stepped down, conditioning college protesters everywhere to expect victories of their own. Nobody remembers that the University of Missouri protests began because of a poop swastika.

But everybody is aware of what a shambles UM has become. They are expecting a freshman class of fewer than 5,000, a drop of nearly 1,500 students from last year.

Every Silver Lining Has a Dark Cloud

The CDC reported last week that the teen pregnancy rate has been falling. This news has been repeated triumphantly across the political spectrum.

Planned Parenthood took this as confirmation of their carefully cultivated public image as our stewards of family planning.

The unplanned teen pregnancy rate reached an all-time low, despite anti-women's health care lawmakers's setbacks. https://t.co/evwtBdpgog

— Planned Parenthood (@PPact) May 1, 2016

"Conservative" radio host Michael Medved also noted this development. He said that this disproves the conservative fear that progressive sex education in grade school will lead to more grade schoolers having sex. Medved misses the point.

Medved points out that the high teen pregnancy rates of the 1960s meant that women got married sooner. And that reactionaries who think we were better off then, are idiots. What pathologies of the 1960s would we wish for today, he mockingly wondered. Perhaps lower rates of single motherhood?

Medved's thinking is parallel to that of the CDC. The CDC immediately states, in their very first paragraph, that, "teen childbearing can have negative health, economic, and social consequences for mothers and their children and costs the United States approximately $9.4 billion annually."

This is pure circular reasoning.

The idea that a child brought forth is somehow a drain on the treasury is a Malthusian, eugenic notion. Not too many people can justify fourteen -and fifteen -year old girls having children. But seventeen, eighteen, and nineteen-year old females are still technically teenagers. Why shouldn't they have children? Because they're not ready?

That's the cultural driver behind dropping fertility. Women are told to delay pregnancy until they have established themselves in the workplace. So women are waiting until their thirties to even look around for potential mates.

The reason teen pregnancy rates are falling is because Western fertility is falling. In 2013, the U.S. fertility rate fell to 1.86 live births per woman. Replacement rate is 2.1.

The cultural changes being pushed on women are contributing to declining fertility. The same can perhaps be said about the cultural signals that men are getting. The economy is shifting to more of a service economy, and men no longer expect to be the breadwinner and protector of their family. Men are expected to stay at home and raise children while their women go out into the world and make a living. That's why men are checking out, and that's a factor in declining fertility as well.

So excuse me for not celebrating the drop in teen pregnancy.

Male Privilege (Insert Current Year)

Female suffrage inexorably leads to bigger and more coercive government. For confirmation, look no further than the whimsically named Operation Mother's Day in Jefferson County, Arkansas. Fifteen people with outstanding warrants for failure to pay child support were arrested.

Twelve of those arrested were black. You might say that the arrests had a disparate impact on black men, since they comprise 80% of those arrested. I guess #BlackLivesMatter is still too busy anguishing about Mike Brown to care about this over-incarceration.

Media sources helpfully published the names and pictures of those arrested, and the amount each one owes. One person was arrested for falling behind $2,726. Twenty-seven hundred dollars. That is fucking absurd.

That one kind of looks like a woman. So 14 out of the 15 arrested are men. That's some male privilege!

Family court should not have the authority to hold men in contempt of their court orders, and thus to issue warrants for their arrests. If they can't get the money voluntarily, garnish their wages. If they don't have any wages to garnish, leave them alone. There is a generous social safety net for single mothers.

Arresting them is an abuse of power. Why do we arrest people? One reason is to punish them. Another reason is to deter other people from breaking the law. Still another reason is to keep dangerous people separated from the rest of us.

There can be other punishments for failing to pay child support, like loss of visitation. The evidence that these arrests cause people to catch up is slim and anecdotal.

If someone loses their job because they are locked up, doesn't that defeat the purpose?

Everybody should pay their child support, but I can think of one reason why someone wouldn't want to, even if they could. If your ex-wife brings another man into the house with your children, but doesn't marry him, you still have to pay her. I'd tell the bitch to go pound sand.

We have lots of ways to shame people who don't pay their child support. We publish their names, we post their mug-shots, we video tape their perp walks, we call them "deadbeat dads." We chastise them for "not keeping it in their pants," but we never shame women who can't keep their panties on.

Maybe we should. The phrase "entitlement cunt" has a certain truthy ring to it.

Male privilege, 1944