Share
A Prayer for America on Election Day
1 week ago
Tuesday, July 3, 2018
Knife Attacks Around The World
All humor aside, some folks in the US who want to do away with the Second Amendment are probably saying smugly, “Well, knife attacks are bad, but only people with GUNS can kill dozens of victims quickly.” Those folks would be wrong. For example…Share
This tells me that it isn’t really a problem with guns. It’s a problem with people. (Read more.)
- In 2014, 33 people were killed and 130 more were injured when a group of men coordinated a terror attack using knives at a train station in southwest China’s Yunnan Province.
- In 2015, fifty workers at a Chinese coal mine were killed in a coordinated knife attack. Fifty more workers were injured.
- In 2016, a facility for the disabled was attacked by a man with a knife. He killed 15 people and injured 45, then later surrendered himself to police.
- In 2017, 18 people walking down a city street were injured when a man attacked them with a knife
- 13 people were seriously injured by a knife-wielding assailant at a shopping mall in Beijing earlier this year. One woman died from her injuries.
Cheap Sex and the Decline of Marriage
Marriage in the U.S. is in open retreat. As recently as 2000, married 25- to 34-year-olds outnumbered their never-married peers by a margin of 55% to 34%, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. By 2015, the most recent year for which data are available, those estimates had almost reversed, with never-marrieds outnumbering marrieds by 53% to 40%. Young Americans have quickly become wary of marriage.Share
Many economists and sociologists argue that this flight from marriage is about men’s low wages. If they were higher, the argument goes, young men would have the confidence to marry. But recent research doesn’t support this view. A May 2017 study from the National Bureau of Economic Research, focusing on regions enriched by the fracking boom, found that increased wages in those places did nothing to boost marriage rates.
Another hypothesis blames the decline of marriage on men’s fear of commitment. Maybe they just perceive marriage as a bad deal. But most men, including cads such as Kevin, still expect to marry. They eventually want to fall in love and have children, when their independence becomes less valuable to them. They are waiting longer, however, which is why the median age at marriage for American men has risen steadily and is now approaching 30.
My own research points to a more straightforward and primal explanation for the slowed pace toward marriage: For American men, sex has become rather cheap. As compared to the past, many women today expect little in return for sex, in terms of time, attention, commitment or fidelity. Men, in turn, do not feel compelled to supply these goods as they once did. It is the new sexual norm for Americans, men and women alike, of every age.
This transformation was driven in part by birth control. Its widespread adoption by women in recent decades not only boosted their educational and economic fortunes but also reduced their dependence on men. As the risk of pregnancy radically declined, sex shed many of the social and personal costs that once encouraged women to wait.
These forces have been at work for more than a half-century, since the birth-control pill was invented in 1960, but it seems that our norms and narratives about sexual relationships have finally caught up with the technology. Data collected in 2014 for the “Relationships in America” project—a national survey of over 15,000 adults, ages 18 to 60, that I oversaw for the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture—asked respondents when they first had sex in their current or most recent relationship. After six months of dating? After two? The most common experience—reported by 32% of men under 40—was having sex with their current partner before the relationship had begun. This is sooner than most women we interviewed would prefer.
The birth-control pill is not the only sexual technology that has altered expectations. Online porn has made sexual experience more widely and easily available too. A laptop never says no, and for many men, virtual women are now genuine competition for real partners. In the same survey, 46% of men (and 16% of women) under 40 reported watching pornography at some point in the past week—and 27% in the past day. Many young men and women still aspire to marriage as it has long been conventionally understood—faithful, enduring, focused on raising children. But they no longer seem to think that this aspiration requires their discernment, prudence or self-control. (Read more.)
Monday, July 2, 2018
The Murder of Southern Hospitality
You arrive in a quaint town tucked in the Shenandoah Mountains. A haven. You sit down at your table. You breathe. Perhaps for the first time in a month, you breathe. The owner comes over. Not to say hi. Not even to discuss the night’s specials. She’s there to throw you out. Throw your whole party out. (literally and figuratively). Why? Because she hates your boss, and by extension hates you.
What happened to Sarah Sanders Friday night at the Red Hen in Lexington, Virginia is an abomination. It is a violation of all standards of decency and hospitality. Worse, it is the latest vile display of the unrepentant and unhinged spirit that says “Those I disagree with politically I must destroy.” (Actually, not the latest. Florida’s Attorney General got verbally assaulted inside a screening of the new Mr. Rogers documentary Saturday. It’s an ugly day in the neighborhood.)
What’s going on is nothing short of demonic. But first, let’s deal with the self-righteous, self-deluded owner of the Red Hen.
The Proud Owner
Co-owner Stephanie Wilkinson gave her reasons for her rudeness to the friendly reporters at the Washington Post. And they are completely political. Was Sanders making a scene? Was she shouting, “Boy, we’re showing them little brownies, huh?” Was anything but her tummy growling? No. Her existence was the offense. To Wilkinson, Sanders was not a guest. Not a woman. Not a mother. Not a living, breathing person. She was a symbol that had to be obliterated.
Oh, Wilkinson’s proud of what she did. She’d do it again in a heartbeat. “This feels like the moment in our democracy when people have to make uncomfortable actions and decisions to uphold their morals.” She’s acting like she’s Rosa Parks sitting on a Birmingham bus. No. She’s Robert DeNiro onstage at the Tony’s, shouting “F*** Trump.” Morality had nothing to do with this transplanted liberal New Yorker’s decision to reject Sanders and her party. To reject, in essence, anyone who dares hold different views. Courage would have been in showing kindness. Instead, Wilkinson will be celebrated in her circles. Kathy Griffin and Peter Fonda will be making reservations, if they haven’t already.
When her staff called to say Sanders was there, “What do we do?” any answer other than, “You treat her and her friends with the highest level of service and courtesy you can muster” is unacceptable. I grieve for her intolerance. I grieve her rejection of everything the hospitality business is supposed to represent. I don’t grieve her restaurant’s fate. Lexington is dominated by the Virginia Military Institute. Trump got over 70% of the vote in that area. Telling 70% of the locals they can kiss off is bad enough, but you’re talking about the heart of Virginia. You’re shredding the grand tradition of Southern hospitality. How distasteful is rudeness?
Wilkinson also did something else pretty stupid. She just signaled to her staff that they can pick and chose which guests to treat right. All told, her business is likely doomed. The Red Hen will be plucked. And it gets worse. Wilkinson is also the Director of Main Street Lexington. That’s a tourism agency for the town. (Read more.)
Share
Trump is Winning
To understand the madness gripping American leftists, try to see the world through their eyes. Presto, you’re now part of the raging resistance. Like the Palestinians who mark Israel’s birth as their nakba, or tragedy, you regard Donald Trump’s 2016 victory as a catastrophe. It’s the last thing you think of most nights, and the first thing most mornings. You can’t shake it or escape it. Whatever you watch, listen to or read, there are reminders — Donald Trump really is president.Share
You actually believe The New York Times is too nice to him, so you understand why a Manhattan woman urged a reporter there to stop covering Trump to protest his presidency. And where the hell is Robert Mueller? He was supposed to save us from this nightmare — that’s what Chuck Schumer banked on. Well?
You spend your tax cut even as you rail against the man who made it happen. And you are pleased that cousin Jimmy finally got a job, though you repeat the daily devotional that Barack Obama deserves credit for the roaring economy. And now this — Justice Anthony Kennedy is retiring, and Trump gets another Supreme Court pick. The court might tilt right for the rest of your life. He’s winning. NOOOOOOOOO!!!
In a nutshell, our visit to the tortured mind of a Trump hater explains everything from Saturday’s mass marches to why a Virginia restaurant owner declared No Soup for Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Their loathing for Trump is bone-deep and all consuming. This is war and they take no prisoners. For most marchers, border policies offer a chance to vent. They didn’t make a peep when Obama did the same thing.
If children are their main concern, they could help the 23,000 New York City kids living in shelters. Or they could have attended the funeral of Lesandro Guzman-Feliz, the innocent Bronx teen hacked to death by a Dominican gang. Instead, they give in to Trump Derangement Syndrome, which causes them to immediately and absolutely adopt the opposite position of the president’s — facts and common sense be damned. Alas, they may look back on the last few months as the good old days. For Trump, despite his stumbles and the Mueller shadow, is finding a political sweet spot. (Read more.)
Lessons You Must Teach Your Children and Grandchildren
In the first quarter of 2018, household debt reached a record $13.21 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Household debt is now 18 percent higher than it was in the second quarter of 2013. Imagine how all that debt might impact the life of the average debtor. What will happen if there is a job loss or an illness that health insurance does not cover? How much stress would you feel in that situation? Debt, especially unsecured consumer debt, is a form of slavery. The debtor is beholden to the creditor because each day that the debt remains unpaid, interest charges pile up. Over time, it’s easy to see how the unchecked use of credit can erode wealth and foreclose opportunities. (Read more.)Share
Sunday, July 1, 2018
Paris At The Beginning of 1792
 |
| Burning the Throne |
In 1789, it was still an exceptional thing for the nobility to emigrate. In 1792, it is the rule. Nearly every salon was open in 1789. In 1792, they are nearly all closed; those of the magistrates and the great capitalists as well as those of the aristocracy. Etiquette is still observed at the Tuileries, but there is no question of fetes; no balls, no concerts, none of that elegance and animation which once made the court a rendezvous of pleasures. In 1789, illusions, dreams, a naive expectation of the age of gold, were to be found everywhere. In 1792, eclogues and pastoral poetry are beginning to go out of fashion. The diapason of hatred is pitched higher. Already there is powder and a smell of blood in the air. (Read more.)How Leftist ideology is (again) spiraling into violence before our eyes. From PJ Media:
Karl Marx once acidly quipped that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. But that’s not even right. When violent ideologies shred the fabric of common life, as is happening right now, there’s nothing funny about it. Not for those of us who have to live through such “interesting times.” No doubt you’ve read the headlines. A Latin American-style socialist, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has just effectively won a seat in the U.S. Congress, defeating a long-time Democratic Party boss. One of her close campaign associates is a Jew-baiting demagogue, who whipped up votes by denouncing “greedy Jewish landlords.” (Read more.)Share
A Ban on Teaching Basic Morality
Numerous commentators have raised concerns about a proposed bill currently in the California Senate, Assembly Bill 2943. The bill would amend the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act to prohibit “sexual orientation change efforts.” Most discussion of the bill has focused on its potential ban on Bible sales. It seems much more likely that the bill will make religious education programs the target of “death by litigation.”Share
The proposed bill states: “The following unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices undertaken by any person in a transaction intended to result or that results in the sale or lease of goods or services to any consumer are unlawful:…Advertising, offering for sale, or selling services constituting sexual orientation change efforts to an individual.”
AB 2943 is based in part on California Business and Professions Code. Section 865 defines “sexual orientation change efforts” as “any practices by mental health providers that seek to change an individual’s sexual orientation. This includes efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.” Section 865.1 provides, “Under no circumstances shall a mental health provider engage in sexual orientation change efforts with a patient under 18 years of age.” (Read more.)
Marriage in Regency England–Special License
English marriage, and the methods in which one could place one’s neck in the “parson’s noose,” underwent a number of changes just prior to the Regency, and they changed again during the Victorian Era. Though a Special License appears frequently in romance novels, during the Regency Era, it was issued rarely, and only under extenuating circumstances.Share
During the Regency, the most common way to get married (especially among the humbler classes) was to have the banns posted also called “putting up the banns.” This required posting on the wall of the church and read by the clergy from the pulpit of both the bride and the groom’s parish for three consecutive Sundays in order to give the public a chance to object to the marriage. After that, couple could get married within 90 days, and the wedding must take place between 8 in the morning and noon in the husband or wife’s parish of Church of England, even if the couple were Catholic. Quakers and Jews were exempt, apparently.
A couple wishing to marry could also do so by ordinary license. This did not require putting up the banns, but it cost money–not much, but it wasn’t free, and it had many of the same restrictions of marriage by banns.
Marriage by special license was different. The advantages of having a special license were that a couple could marry any time and place that they wished. When applying for a special license, certain criteria must be met. First of all, few outside of titled lords and their spouses and children were eligible, and one seeking such privilege must go appeal to His Grace, the Archbishop of Canterbury. (Read more.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
