Gee Officer Krupke . . .

Fenster writes:

While trying to remember the last words to that song I had this unrelated memory.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Elsewheres

Fenster writes:

Montaigne is appreciated around in these parts– the patron saint of Uncouth Reflections.  See here, here and here.

Fenster especially appreciates Montaigne’s discursive style, which seems to come natch’l to him but which he nonetheless is not loath to imitate.  Montaigne was no stranger to digressions.

There was the time–did I mention this before?–that Montaigne’s best friend Étienne de La Boétie died, an event that would put Montaigne into what amounted to perpetual mourning.  La Boétie’s death took days to perfect, and Montaigne was there the whole time, supporting, nursing and listening a lot as La Boétie composed his departure.

La Boétie was, like Montaigne, a writer, and shared Montaigne’s way with words, and words, and words.  In Montaigne’s circle even death was made to be a discursive affair and La Boétie was no slouch.   Montaigne remarked after the fact that near the end:

(t)he whole room was full of wails and tears, which nevertheless did not interrupt the train of his speeches, which were a little long.

That’s saying something coming from our patron saint.

In any event the above was just a digression.  I think you are allowed to open a piece with a digression, aren’t you?

This post is mostly to pass along several links to a site where Fenster’s pal–his La Boétie in a way I suppose–deposits commentary that is a bit too long for his Facebook page.  Yes, Fenster’s pal is also discursive.

So here are four such commentaries, written in the form of notes to friends.  If you are of a mind feel free to check them out.

Here, J— discusses the public values that we venerate where matters of the state are concerned, and how they are being challenged for primacy in the public square by competing value sets.  How might this turn out?  Well, I would not wish to spoil the play.

Here, J— comments on the concept of neurodiversity, and whether the current mania for speech codes and other enforced orthodoxies discriminates against, and silences, the nerds that we need for progress.

Here, J— discusses whether a law prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of gender identity should be repealed.

And here, J— comments on certain aspects of the Kavanaugh hearing.

[end]

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Weekend Linkage

Paleo Retiree writes:

Posted in Linkathons | 1 Comment

You Read it Here First!

Fenster writes:

Steve Sailer has reviewed Heather MacDonald’s new book The Diversity Delusion, which deals with the kudzu-like growth of college administrative staff devoted to promoting the creed of diversity and enforcing its many unforgiving norms.

MacDonald is an exemplary public intellectual—insightful, incisive, evidence-based and direct.  And Sailer is . . . well, Sailer.  So it is a worthwhile read, with the caveat that it is getting harder to mine original material about the odd goings-on on American campuses.

Continue reading

Posted in Politics and Economics, Shopping, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Naked Lady of the Week: Linda Gordon

Fabrizio del Wrongo writes:

lg-cover

I ran across Linda Gordon while browsing the excellent Vintage Erotica Forums. She seems to have posed a lot for magazines with titles like Swank and Beaver.

Here’s what Boobpedia has to say about her:

Linda Gordon (born 1953 in California) is an American former adult model. She was one of the most frequently photographed and published nudes during the late 1970s and early 1980s. During one year alone (1977), she featured in such magazines as Candid (January), Male (January), Cavalcade (February), Rascal (March), For Men Only (June), Guys and Gals (June), Cavalier (July), Best For Men (summer), Mr. (November), Man’s Delight (December), and others. Gordon also often appeared in Gem, Gent and other big-tit magazines. And along the way she made a number of nudie-cutie clips, in color and black-and-white.

Is this the same person? Boobpedia seems to think so, but I’m not so sure…

Here’s an energetic summary of her career. Its writer clearly wants you to understand that Ms. Gordon had a big unshaven bush. It’s a nice one for sure.

Nudity below. Have a great weekend.

Continue reading

Posted in Photography, Sex, The Good Life | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Poor Little Rich Kids?

Fenster writes:

In the current American Conservative online Charles F. McElwee III describes the plight of the upper-middle class in America, this group defined as having family incomes between $75,000  and $200,000 a year.  I know this group from experience.  While I spent considerable time as an adult several notches below and was briefly and barely in the 1%, that’s where I am now.  These are my people so I believe I can relate McElwee’s story, including the data and narrative evidence he presents, to my own experience in the class.

The story he recounts is not a pretty one.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Who are Those . . . Guys?

Fenster writes:

When CBS gives $20M to #metoo who do they give it to? I don’t think the original organization founded by Tarana Burke is a 501(c)(3). It was founded in 2006 and ought to have an IRS form 990 on the charity database Guidestar if it were but I can’t see one. And its website does not provide any information at all on what it is–board of directors, “about”, etc. There is a button to donate but it directs you to Girls for Gender Equity, a 501(c)(3) aiming to “create safer and stronger communities for girls, women, and gender nonconforming folks in New York City and beyond.”

Most likely this is another manifestation of the diffuse quality of movements like BLM and Antifa. We speak of them as having a center but they are squishy. Not that there’s anything inherently wrong with that–it is OK for movements to be squishy. But when movements pick up attributes of the real world there will be some tension.

Another case in point from the sometimes squishy Wikipedia. In describing #metoo you find this sentence:

For all public cases of the Me Too movement, the presumption of innocence applies until a final conviction.[12]

Where does footnote 12 take you? To an article that says the exact opposite: that “with #MeToo, we have lost the presumption of innocence.”

Who is the author of the Wikipedia article and on what authority does she speak? And what is the organization, or movement, or whatever, that she is speaking of in making this claim?

Meanwhile back to the title question: who are those guys, the guys that will get $20 million from CBS?  Why do I wonder whether the squishy nature of #metoo is allowing executives there to ponder the different ways that the donation might be leveraged for corporate advantage?  And that no one will bother much to see where the money goes, who may know whom in the matrix, and the good that it does in the end?

The ever provocative “Entertainment Lawyer” at Crazy Days and Nights has raised this point in a so-called “blind item”.

Someone really needs to audit the books of this organization which has seen a ton of Hollywood money thrown into its coffers. There are several people supposedly in charge of it who have a lot of brand new purchases including two with new homes in the $1.5M range or so who make $70K a year or thereabouts. I think people assume it is used for the intended purpose, but it just seems like one big raid on the ultimate cookie jar of guilt money.

Blind items at that site are typically racy nuggets that the blogger has an answer to, with the answer eventually disclosed, albeit in a kind of tabloid style.  Could be the charity here relates to #metoo (“guilt money”) but perhaps not.  One way or another stay tuned.

Posted in Politics and Economics, Sex, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment