Author Archives: Dana Pico

Posted on by

What is ‘gatekeeping’?

From The Gods Must Be Crazy, one of my all-time favorite movies. Click to enlarge.

We have previously mentioned the ‘gatekeeping’ function that the credentialed media used to enjoy. Now it seems as though “gatekeeper” and “gatekeeping” are internet insults. From Business Insider:

The internet really hates ‘gatekeeping,’ social media’s new go-to insult. The truth is you’re probably a gatekeeper, too.

by Sirena Bergman | Sunday, July 3, 2022 | 7:00 AM EDT

Being a gatekeeper is just about the worst thing you can be accused of online.

Every few years, the internet cycles through a new buzzy clap-back phrase that’s instantly recognizable by its lifecycle, speeding from valid criticism to Twitter cliché until it hits the mainstream, finding its way into op-ed headlines and political discourse before being relegated exclusively to ironic use due to its cringe-inducing outdatedness.

You may remember the “check your privilege” phrase, circa 2012, which was counterbalanced by calling those using it “snowflakes” and “social justice warriors.” Then came the age of calling out “virtue signalers,” who were swiftly put in their place with a well-timed “this you.”

Now, the 2020s have ushered in their own social-media-specific takedown. So abhorred is the concept of “gatekeeping” that it’s been lumped in with “girlbossing” and “gaslighting” to spawn a meme.

I will admit it: I am so uncool that I had to look up “girlbossing” and “this you.”

In its simplest form, “gatekeeping” is having access, opportunity, or knowledge — and then keeping it all to yourself. Gatekeepers, at least according to the internet, pull the ladder up behind them and exclude those with fewer opportunities from their space.

A great deal follows, including defining gatekeeping as simple privacy, such as ‘celebrities’ not sharing every little thing about themselves, though as Johnny Depp and Amber Heard, the former Mrs Depp, learned the hard way, sharing everything might not be a particularly good idea.

But it can also be less specific, referring to people who maybe aren’t hiding something tangible but are telling others they’re not entitled to an opinion or behavior (whether warranted or not).

The most obvious example of that, today, are the pro-prenatal infanticide forces telling men that they cannot have an opinion on the subject — unless it is pro-abortion, of course! — because males cannot get pregnant. But it has been used in countless other ways, such as blacks saying that non-black Americans cannot have an opinion on anything happening in primarily black neighborhoods.

Calling out gatekeepers is a core tenet of extremely-online Gen-Z culture which, spurred by the pandemic and the evolution of social media, has come to uphold the democratization of, well, everything, as the ideal.

This part is just silly, because it’s “Generation Z” who have been behind much of the censorship of social media: clamping down on ‘unapproved’ information about COVID-19, and Twitter’s banning of ‘deadnaming‘ and ‘misgendering‘. I have had to be careful in my article titles about Will Thomas, the male University of Pennsylvania swimmer who claims to be a woman named “Lia,” to keep from being banned; my good friend William Teach has been suspended from Twitter a couple of times, and had one account completely killed, because Twitter doesn’t like people doing something really radical like tell the truth.

Of course, the notion of “generation Z” and all of the other named generations is entirely a #woke[1]From Wikipedia: Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from … Continue reading Western notion, and I hesitate to use it at all, but, alas!, it has become part of culture, and when the article I reference uses that kind of shorthand, it’s difficult to ignore it.

On social media, people have been accused of gatekeeping marginalized identities, science, mental health, zines, “the truth,” Kate Bush, and on, and on.

Accusing someone of gatekeeping online is so common that it’s now a trope in and of itself, one that is often mocked and subverted in irony.

So, what gatekeeping do I do? This site uses a spam blocker, which is almost always successful; I have attempted to close the gate against unrestricted advertising. We have a Comments and Conduct Policy, plainly accessible from both the website main page and subsequent article pages, although I’ve almost never had to actually enforce it. Maybe if more people actually read The First Street Journal, . . . .

As minor as this site is, we are, in effect, a publisher, and publishers can choose what to publish. We almost never actually censor anything, as I believe that what people say says more about the individual saying things than the writer may realize.

Is that ‘gatekeeping’? Yes, it pretty much is. But unlike the credentialed media of old, my refusal to publish something here does not prevent someone from saying what he pleases, because not only are there millions of websites out there, but starting your own site is simple, easy, and inexpensive. Some sites, like blogger.com, are so inexpensive that they are free.

I will accept the internet dismissal of OK Boomer for what it is, a reference to the fact that we boomers built the greatest economy and freest nation in the world, which the Special Snowflakes™ are trying to destroy! 🙂

References

References
↑1 From Wikipedia:

Woke (/ˈwoʊk/) as a political term of African-American origin refers to a perceived awareness of issues concerning social justice and racial justice. It is derived from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke“, whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.
By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term broadly associated with left-wing politics and cultural issues (with the terms woke culture and woke politics also being used). It has been the subject of memes and ironic usage. Its widespread use since 2014 is a result of the Black Lives Matter movement.

I shall confess to sometimes “ironic usage” of the term. To put it bluntly, I think that the ‘woke’ are just boneheadedly stupid.
Posted on by

Killadelphia The June shooting statistics are in!

The statistics are out for the Philadelphia Shooting Victims database, and they’re just about as ugly as you’d imagine.

There were 249 people shot in the City of Brotherly Love last month, at least as far as those wounded seriously enough to have sought medical attention. Who knows if there were more victims just grazed, or more shooting incidents in which no one was struck?

In a city in which the population are 18.7% black males, black males suffered 71.89% of the gunshot wounds, and 73.33% of the fatal shootings. While the city government and The Philadelphia Inquirer want to blame gun control laws not being strict enough, I have to ask the obvious question: since those gun control laws apply equally to everyone, black or white, male or female, Hispanic or otherwise, why wouldn’t the number of wounded and killed closely match the percentage of the population by each demographic group?

The Philadelphia Police Department reported a total of 48 homicides for the month, so there were three homicides which did not involve firearms. Through the end of June, 257 homicides, or 1.4199 per day. That puts the city on pace for 518 murders this year. Working the math differently, basing it on the pace of homicides last year, I come up with a projected 533 homicides for the year. Either figure puts the city solidly in second place all time.

Philly’s leaders, Mayor Jim Kenney, District Attorney Larry Krasner, and Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw, should be so very proud of the jobs that they have done!

Note: even though Hispanics can be of any race, all of the victims listed as “Latino” in the database are also listed as white. June is not the only month in which this has occurred, and I suspect that this is a result of very poor gathering of data.

Posted on by

For print newspapers, tempus is fugiting The solution to being 18th century technology is not becoming 19th century one-party newspapers!

Mickey East, a political science professor at the University of Kentucky during the 1970s, when I was a student there, used a bastardized phrase to encourage his students to get their work done, “Tempus is fugiting.”

According to Wikipedia, the expression “Tempus fugit” comes from line 284 of book 3 of Virgil‘s Georgics, where it appears as fugit inreparabile tempus: “it escapes, irretrievable time”.

Well, time flies for newspapers, which I have previously called 18th century technology, because people are abandoning printed materials.

U.S. newspapers continuing to die at rate of 2 each week

Despite a growing recognition of the problem, the United States continues to see newspapers die at the rate of two per week, according to a report issued Wednesday on the state of local news.

by David Bauder, Associated Press | Friday, July 1, 2022 | 10:26 AM EDT

NEW YORK — Despite a growing recognition of the problem, the United States continues to see newspapers die at the rate of two per week, according to a report issued Wednesday on the state of local news.

“A growing recognition of the problem,” huh? The problem is that time has flown by, and technology has overtaken the print medium. Yes, I subscribe to newspapers, The Wall Street Journal, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Lexington Herald-Leader, for my use as source material for my poor site. As I have previously mentioned, my hearing is seriously compromised, and I can read the news far more easily than I can watch and hear the news on television. More, when reading the news, if there’s something which was poorly worded or unclear, or that I somehow missed, I can go back to reread that portion, to lock it down correctly. To me, especially as a (poor) writer, trying to ascertain that I am getting things correctly, that’s important.

But, let’s face it: my subscriptions to those newspapers, and all the рублей I am spending — The Wall Street Journal in particular is not cheap, and though this site has changed, I had originally planned to concentrate more on economics — are all digital; I not only don’t get the print editions, but out in the rural area in which I live, I cannot get home delivery of the dead trees edition. Heck, I can’t even get the United States Post Office to deliver the mail to me, so I have to rent a post office box!

However, it’s more than that. Before I retired, I used to pick up a copy of the Inquirer from the Turkey Hill in Jim Thorpe, to take to the plant. The guys combitched[1]The word “combitch” is a Picoism, for which I would bet you can figure out the etymology. Feel free to use it yourselves, with an appropriate credit appreciated. that I should have picked up the Allentown Morning Call instead, because that was closer to local news, but it was, and is, a junk paper. Now that it’s been bought out by the hedge fund, Alden Global Capital, I’m pleased that I didn’t spend much money at all on the Morning Call.

Amusingly enough, for an owner of dead trees newspapers, Alden’s website opens up to an image of trees!

One of the issues with buying the Inquirer for the plant was that there were frequently sports stories which noted that ‘this game ended too late for inclusion in this edition.’ In the 21st century, we can always get our news up-to-date, by checking that internet thingy that Al Gore invented. And that illustrates the major problem for print newspapers: they are always several hours behind, in a world in which the news is reported minute-by-minute. I have no idea whether the Associated Press story referenced above will appear in the print edition of the Inquirer, from which I sourced it, but time stamped at 10:26 AM as it was, it cannot appear earlier than Saturday’s dead trees edition!

Areas of the country that find themselves without a reliable source of local news tend to be poorer, older and less educated than those covered well, Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, Media and Integrated Marketing Communications said.

The country had 6,377 newspapers at the end of May, down from 8,891 in 2005, the report said. While the pandemic didn’t quite cause the reckoning that some in the industry feared, 360 newspapers have shut down since the end of 2019, all but 24 of them weeklies serving small communities.

Actually, even out in the sticks, we have not one but two local weekly newspapers, the Citizen’s Voice & Times and the Estill County Tribune, but who can know how long they’ll both survive?

An estimated 75,000 journalists worked in newspapers in 2006, and now that’s down to 31,000, Northwestern said. Annual newspaper revenue slipped from $50 billion to $21 billion in the same period.

Even though philanthropists and politicians have been paying more attention to the issue, the factors that drove the collapse of the industry’s advertising model haven’t changed. Encouraging growth in the digital-only news sector in recent years hasn’t been enough to compensate for the overall trends, said Penelope Muse Abernathy, visiting professor at Medill and the report’s principal author.

As I have previously reported, The Philadelphia Inquirer, our nation’s third oldest continuously published daily newspaper, and 17th largest newspaper as measured by circulation, still thinks that the taxpayers should be taxed to support journalists, to the tune of a refundable payroll tax credit of up to $25,000 per journalist to help local news organizations hire and retain reporters and editors.

In other words, the publishers of the Inquirer believe that the taxpayers ought to pay up to $25,000 of the salary of reporters and editors! Does ABC News or CNN have to beg for the taxpayers to subsidize their journolists'[2]This was not a typographical error. The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure … Continue reading salaries?

True “daily” newspapers that are printed and distributed seven days a week are also dwindling; The report said 40 of the largest 100 newspapers in the country publish only-digital versions at least once a week. Inflation is likely to hasten a switch away from printed editions, said Tim Franklin, director of the Medill Local News Initiative.

One of the newspapers to which I subscribe, the Lexington Herald-Leader, does not publish a Saturday edition, and what I see online on Saturdays makes it look like the reporters and editors are pretty much off on Saturdays.

But there’s more to it. When I look at the digital editions of the Herald-Leader and the Inquirer, since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization it has become obvious: if those were your only sources of news, you’d not be blamed for thinking that six Supreme Court Justices are the only people in America who don’t support an unlimited abortion license. These newspapers have been wholly one-sided in their reporting on the subject.

What my, sadly late, best friend used to call the Lexington Herald-Liberal just published a fairly long story on the disappearance of Democratic voters in eastern Kentucky. You’d have to be a Kentuckian to really understand it, but it points out the problem for the newspaper: a paper which used to circulate widely throughout the counties east of Lexington — and I delivered the morning Lexington Herald and afternoon Lexington Leader in Mt Sterling, two counties away from Lexington, when I was in junior high and high schools — has few subscribers now, because there is little or no local delivery, but also because the newspaper has become so thoroughly urbanized to the city that it really has nothing for the more conservative counties to the east. As we have previously reported, the newspaper has consistently endorsed the candidates, all Democrats, strongly rejected by the voters in every county of their (former?) service area other than Fayette. If you don’t give something for the readers in the outlying counties, can you really expect to have many subscribers there?

In Pennsylvania, the Inquirer is steadfastly liberal and Democratic in orientation, publishing all sorts of OpEds and barely-disguised opinion pieces camouflages as regular news articles slamming Republicans and conservatives, yet, while Joe Biden carried the Keystone State by 80,555 votes in 2020, that was only due to his 471,050 vote margin in Philadelphia; absent Philadelphia County, President Trump had a margin of 389,495 votes. Much of Pennsylvania was strongly “red” and even Philly’s collar counties were only slightly “blue.” But the Inky gives those more conservative voters no reason to be actual readers of the newspaper.

Newspapers have more than a single problem. Yes, print newspapers, despite fancy colored printing and photographs, are simply updated 18th century technology, and the reduction in print subscribers has meant a dramatic downturn in advertising revenue. But they also have a 19th century problem: in becoming so highly slanted, they have reverted to the one-party newspaper style of William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer. In the 19th century, there were competing newspapers in every city of any size, and if readers of one particular political stripe did not like the slant of one newspaper, they could turn to another.

Today, few cities have more than one newspaper, but newspapers do have competition, from television news. If MSNBC and CNN are slanted to the left, Fox News and the One America News Network are slanted to the right, and consumers can do something really radical like choose the sources they prefer. That newspapers face serious competition from television news and the internet is obvious; when they respond by pissing off half of their potential readership, they compound their problems.

References

References
↑1 The word “combitch” is a Picoism, for which I would bet you can figure out the etymology. Feel free to use it yourselves, with an appropriate credit appreciated.
↑2 This was not a typographical error. The spelling ‘journolist’ or ‘journolism’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
Posted on by

It seems that some “men” are really immature little boys

I’m not certain that there has ever been a Supreme Court decision which has ever provoked the mass hysteria and insanity that has attended Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the decision which overturned Roe v Wade. We’ve seen all sorts of whacky comments that the decision means the end of the right to use contraception, marry someone of a different race, and same-sex ‘marriage.’

But this story, from the supposedly very serious Washington Post, pretty much takes the cake!

Men rush to get vasectomies after Roe ruling

By Meena Venkataramanan | June 29, 2022 | 3:12 PM EDT

Thomas Figueroa always knew he didn’t want children. Growing up in Central Florida, he remembers his classmates getting pregnant as early as middle school, and had considered getting a vasectomy for the past few years.

But after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade on Friday, he rushed to schedule one. He registered Monday for a vasectomy with Doug Stein, a Florida urologist known as the “Vasectomy King” for his advocacy of the procedure. Continue reading →

Posted on by

Killadelphia Idiocy, fueled by alcohol, leaves a young woman dead, and a man who'll, hopefully, spend the rest of his miserable life in prison

We have often said that The Philadelphia Inquirer does not care about murder victims unless they are an innocent, a ‘somebody,’ or a cute white girl. One second she was happy and alive, and the next she had a bullet in her brain.

Bystander killed in shooting at Northeast Philadelphia bar

The woman was later identified by a relative as Jailene Holton

by Rodrigo Torrejón | Wednesda, June 29, 2022 | 10:12 AM EDT

Jailene Holton, via Steve Keeley, Fox29 News. Click to enlarge.

A bystander was killed after a disgruntled customer sprayed bullets into a Northeast Philadelphia bar late Tuesday night, police said.

Around 11:30 p.m. Tuesday, three men were kicked out of the Philly Bar and Restaurant, on Welsh Road, after causing a disturbance at the bar. While two of the men left without issues, one had to be forced out.

That man, after being thrown out, walked to a pickup truck about 200 feet away and then shot at least 15 times into the front of the bar. Five of the bullets went through the window and one struck a 21-year-old woman in the head. Continue reading →

Posted on by

Some people just can’t tell the difference between comic books and reality

I devoured the Conan the Barbarian books when I was a teenager, starting out with the Lancer Books twelve volume edition. Robert E Howard wrote his original books between 1930 and 1936, and L Sprague deCamp, Lin Carter and Bjorn Nyberg added to it. Published in the 1960s and 70s, the men were strong and brave, while the hero bedded an assortment of nubile, slim but nevertheless voluptuous — how does that work — ladies after slaying countless forms.

Conan was a character which simply could not be left alone, and many authors used Conan as a character, through several publishers, during the 1980s and 90s. The difference? While there were plenty of helpless ladies to be bedded, there were also warrior women, women who could kick ass just as well as any man.

I also read plenty of comic books. In the 1960s, the female superheroines tended to have what I’d call ‘distance powers,’ able to beat the bad guys, but from a distance, not from fisticuffs. Supergirl and Wonder Woman were obvious examples of the latter, while the Invisible Woman might have been able to trip someone unseen — especially before Stan Lee had her discover that she could also create invisible force fields — and the Wasp and Scarlett Witch and Jean Grey worked their wonders from range.

Gradually, the superheroines gained the ability to match, and beat, male villains hand-to-hand. And in the CW Supergirl series, Supergirl beat her cousin Superman in a fair fight.

Well, I have come to the conclusion that today’s American left grew up reading the same things I did, but they did more than read them; they swallowed them whole, and came out believing that women were the physical equal or men in strength, speed, quickness, size, and endurance. Every girl is Supergirl; ever woman is Wonder Woman! So, heck, it’s perfectly normal and reasonable to have males and females competing against each other, and it’s always fair, right? Continue reading →

Posted on by

The West are about out of non-military actions to take against Russia Economic sanctions are hurting democracies as much as Russia

The recent Supreme Court decisions in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen and Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization have pushed almost all discussion of other issues off the front pages, but there is still that nasty little war going on in Ukraine. I have made my position clear: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was very wrong, and almost everyone wants to see Ukraine win against the Russians. But I, at least, do not think it is worth risking what Major Kong called “nuclear combat, toe to toe with the Russkies.”

President Joe Biden and the leaders of the NATO nations have all said that Russia’s invasion is wrong, wrong, wrong, and that something ought to be done, but reality has a way of biting people in the gluteus maximus, and as the G-7 leaders meet in Berlin to decide just what to do, that reality is staring them dead in the eye. From The Wall Street Journal:

G-7 Summit Exposes West’s Challenges in Tackling Russia

Economic fallout is hampering further sanctions against Moscow as Ukraine demands more weapons to halt the Russian advance

By Bojan Pancevski | Tuesday, June 28, 2022 | 9:31 AM EDT

The original picture caption is: “G-7 leaders displayed some unity during their summit as they pledged their unwavering support to Ukraine.
Photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters.” Click to enlarge.

BERLIN—The Group of Seven rich democracies ended their summit with an agreement to discuss a batch of new sanctions against Russia, but the gathering underlined the limits of using economic tools to punish Russia four months after its invasion of Ukraine.

While weapons deliveries have made an immediate difference on the battlefield and Ukraine has been clamoring for more equipment to repel Moscow’s forces, sanctions have proven slow to take effect, some of them have backfired against the West, and new ones have so far been too complex to deploy quickly.

G-7 leaders displayed some unity during their three-day summit in the German Alps as they pledged their unwavering support to Ukraine, with no sign of dissent on public display. Yet Kyiv and some Western experts said the Russian advance could only be halted in the short term with more heavy weapons.

The unprecedented sanctions against Russia implemented by the G-7 and other nations—targeting Moscow’s economy, energy exports and central-bank reserves—have caused global market volatility and raised energy costs.

Now high inflation, slowing growth, and the specter of energy shortages in Europe this winter are damping the West’s appetite for tougher sanctions against Moscow.

The photo caption originally said that the G-7 leaders “pledged their unwavering support to Ukraine,” but, of course, that support is wavering, because the sanctions imposed so far are hurting their own people. The only thing I see in the photo is further evidence that British Prime Minister Boris Johnson still doesn’t know how to brush his hair. Continue reading →

Posted on by

Los Angeles Times “diversity” columnist thinks white people won’t accept blacks legally carrying firearms

Erika D Smith, an opinion writer for what Patterico calls the Los Angeles Dog Trainer, writes as though there aren’t a lot of black people in city already carrying guns.

Is California ready for more Black people to legally carry guns in public?

by Erika D Smith | Monday, June 27, 2022 | 5:00 AM PDT

Nathan W. Jones leads the Bay Area chapter of the Black Gun Owners Assn. But until a few years ago, he wasn’t even into guns.

Then the COVID-19 pandemic hit. And George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police, sending racial justice protesters into the streets. And white supremacists trashed the U.S. Capitol in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Suddenly, it seemed as if America was on the brink. And with the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe vs. Wade on Friday, emboldening a militant array of white Christian nationalists, we clearly still are.

So, on Thursday, while many were apoplectic over the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the rights of gun owners to carry a loaded weapon in public — throwing gun control laws in California and New York into limbo at a time when shootings are increasing — Jones was thoughtful.

Here’s where the OpEd column veers off into the weeds. The author noted that shootings have been increasing, but that was before the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v Bruen, so the previous law wasn’t stopping shootings.

The ruling was a fairly simple one: it did not overturn New York’s law requiring people who owned firearms to have a permit to do so, but overturned the Empire State’s very restrictive requirements that the people needed a specific, approved reason to own a firearm, a reason that the state approved, and that a desire to own a weapon for self-protection was insufficient. The state can still require a permit, and laws which ban previously convicted felons from having firearms still apply, but the state cannot ban law-abiding people with ordinary reasons from obtaining such permits.

As we have previously noted, in Pennsylvania, where concealed carry permits are required, law-abiding people have been applying for permits at record-breaking rates because so many gang bangers have been carrying firearms, and have been killing people in record-breaking numbers.

On the one hand, he wants it to be easy for law-abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves “if and when the time arises.” But on the other hand, he’s a 50-year-old realist who knows that fear and hatred of Black people run deep in the United States, especially when we’re armed.

“There’s no overt racism when we go to the gun range, but we know how people are looking at us,” Jones said of the dozens of Black members who meet up to go shooting. “We know the things that people think.”

Setting aside Mr Jones exercise into mind-reading, the obvious point becomes: shouldn’t he want for the public to see law-abiding black citizens, to get people used to picturing black Americans as decent citizens? I am reminded of the Sacramento Bee putting into plain language its reasons for ceasing the publication of police mug shots, because they “perpetuat(e) stereotypes about who commits crime in our community,” by which they meant that black people are seen as criminals.[1]Erika Smith worked for the Sacramento Bee, but left before the Bee began that policy. Shouldn’t black Americans want to break that stereotype by showing themselves as responsible citizens?

Following a couple of paragraphs in which the author notes that Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and the state legislature will have to come up with some form of permit process which meets the Supreme Court’s requirements, he continues:

But the governor and lawmakers could fail, and the Supreme Court’s ruling could stand. And then, California could be forced to confront a reality that has long made many self-proclaimed liberals uncomfortable: Black people — potentially a lot of us — legally carrying guns in public.

But that’s just it: a lot of black Americans, and white Americans, are already carrying guns in public, just not all of them legally. The various permit requirements didn’t deter the criminals; they only got in the way of law-abiding people, people who didn’t have the time to apply, or didn’t want to pay a fee, or, in some cases, such as in New York, knew that their reason for wanting a firearm just wasn’t special enough to get past the bureaucrats.

It’s simple: the black — and white — Americans who we don’t want carrying firearms in public are the one already carrying them, illegally, without bothering with any stinkin’ permits, because they are criminals, or punks looking to make a street name for themselves and become criminals. But if you’re a good guy, I don’t care if you carry a firearm; that’s your business.

And once more the author veers into the weeds:

Most who join say they bought a gun for self-defense, Choice and Jones agree. Many reach out after getting — forgive the phrase — triggered by high-profile racist incidents, including last month’s massacre of Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo, N.Y.

Really? Maybe in the Pyrite State, I suppose, but the article I cited above, noting the great increase in permit applications in Philly was written on March 16, 2022, two months before the Buffalo killings. They were ‘triggered’ by 499 murders in the city in 2020, then 562 in 2021, and another 251 so far this year, more than half of 500 with less than half of the year elapsed. They were triggered by an even higher number of shootings in the city than on the same day last year, even though the homicide totals have decreased slightly, apparently because the gang-bangers are squeezing off more rounds, but seem to be worse shots. While it may be true that having a firearm makes it more probable that you will injure yourself, or a family member, than defend yourself from a bad guy, such statistics are of little comfort to people stuck in Strawberry Mansion or Kensington or West Philadelphia.

Much of the rest of the argument is that, even in “liberal California” white people are going to be suspicious of black Americans carrying firearms; it is an argument, at bottom, which says that white people will simply never trust blacks.

Well, I don’t buy it. There will always be some white people who will never trust blacks, but that can be minimized by black Americans not only being trustworthy but showing that they are trustworthy, and that includes exercising their Second Amendment rights responsibly. If black Americans are seen as fighting for safety in black neighborhoods, as not tolerating the gang-bangers who ruin things and shoot up mostly black neighborhoods, more white Americans will come to understand that black Americans are just like any other group, with some good people and some bad people.

Some of this comes from my personal experience. I spent much of my career — I’m retired now — working in an integrated working-class industry, ready-mixed concrete production and delivery. I worked with black drivers and white drivers, I worked with black plant managers and white plant managers, I worked with black quality control technicians and white quality control technicians, and they pretty much all alike: some good at their jobs and some bad, some who showed up and worked hard every day, and some who tried to make it through with as little work as possible. And I knew a couple who were packing heat every day.

And it just happened again in the City of Brotherly Love:

We don’t know that the residents of this house are black, but at least one of the home invaders was, and the address, 1606 South 10th Street is in a reasonably nice neighborhood, not far from Sts John Neuman, and Maria Goretti Catholic High School; the adjacent rowhouse, at 1604 South 10th Street is listed for sale at $750,000. This is not a particularly crime-ridden neighborhood.

While the Fox 29 tweet says that the invaders “forced (the) front door open,” The Philadelphia Inquirer’s story did not confirm that, saying only that:

Detectives on the scene declined to answer reporters’ questions about why the men were entering the home, who shot them, how many shooters opened fire, or what led to the bloodshed.

Both Fox 29 and WPVI 6 ABC News reported that the dead men were attempting to break into the house, but the Inky said that, as of 10:00 PM police were still saying that it was not clear exactly what happened.

From the 6ABC News story:

“This is surprising. This neighborhood is usually very safe. It’s a shock to see something like this happen. I live a block away,” said John Carrozza. “It’s sad. It’s a sign of the times, unfortunately.”

“I’ve been here for six years. I feel really safe. I just had my catalytic converter stolen, and I’m thinking maybe it’s time to move out – for something like this to happen in the middle of the afternoon…” said Mary Grace McHale.

As in maybe move out of Philadelphia entirely? South Philadelphia is supposed to be one of the safer areas in the City of Brotherly Love, and while a single break-in isn’t really indicative, the fact that Mrs McHale had her vehicle’s catalytic converter stolen shows that planned, not spontaneous, crime is moving into that area. Is it any wonder that people are seeking firearms to defend themselves. Whatever the story at the shooting, apparently the men inside the home had to take action before the police arrived.

Erika Smith’s column had the theme that even in her very liberal city, white Angelenos would fret that more black residents might be carrying firearms. That’s being forced on them, by their own neighbors. This white evil reich wing conservative has absolutely no qualms about law-abiding black Americans carrying firearms.

References

References
↑1 Erika Smith worked for the Sacramento Bee, but left before the Bee began that policy.
Posted on by

Follow the science! If someone was out to destroy transgender acceptance, what would he be doing differently?

I have previously asked if someone was out to destroy transgender acceptance, what would he be doing differently from what Will Thomas, the male swimmer for the University of Pennsylvania who claims to be a woman named ‘Lia’ has done?

Now we have this, from the New York Post:

Trans competitor beats 13-year-old girl in NYC women’s skateboarding contest

By Snejana Farberov | Monday, June 27, 2022 | 8:51 AM EDT | Updated: 9:32 AM EDT

A 29-year-old male beat 13-year-old Shiloh Catori in a skateboarding contest, and the left think that’s perfectly OK.

A 29-year-old transgender woman beat a 13-year-old girl to take home the top prize in a skateboarding contest in New York City, reigniting the debate over whether new inclusivity pushes create an unfair advantage in women’s sports.

As per our Stylebook, we do not change the direct quotes of others, but there is no such thing as a “transgender woman”; there is only a mutilated male.

Ricci Tres, from Los Angeles, who was born a man but now identifies as a woman, won the women’s division of the Boardr Open street skateboarding competition and a $500 prize, with 13-year-old Shiloh Catori, from Florida, coming in second and taking a $250 prize.

The First Street Journal endeavors to use the correct names for those who claim to be ‘transgender,’ but an internet search for “Ricci Tres'” real name failed to find it. He shall be referred to as “Mr Tres” in the parts of this article which are not direct quotes from others. [Updated: June 29, 2022: His name is actually Richard Batres.]

Four of the six finalists were under the age of 17, with the youngest being 10-year-old Juri Iikura, who came in fifth. At 29, Tres was the oldest contestant.

Tres is 838 in the Boardr Global Rankings, compared to Catori’s 133 ranking.

The transgender athlete’s victory sparked an outrage on social media among critics, who blasted Boardr Open for allowing a much older competitor assigned male at birth to face off against biological females — many of them more than half her age.

Sadly, the Post’s stylebook apparently uses the silliness of the ‘transgender’ agenda. People are not “assigned” a sex at birth; they are recognized as being what their sex actually is.

It was discovered a hundred years ago that the sex of humans and other mammals was determined by the XX (female) or XY (male) chromosomal pair, and that the sex of an offspring was determined by whether the sperm cell which fertilized the egg carried an X or a Y chromosome. Thus, sex was determined at conception, and at no other time. We used to chuckle at stories that King Henry VIII was angered by his first two wives because they gave birth to female rather than male babies, at least as far as the ones who survived infancy. With modern knowledge, we knew it was actually Henry, and not Catherine of Aragon or Anne Boleyn, who determined the sex of his children. Now, in the 21st century, political correctness demands we abandon scientific knowledge. The formulation “sex assigned at birth” is simply political propaganda to support transgenderism.

Skateboarder Taylor Silverman led the chorus of discontent, writing in an Instagram post: “Male wins women’s finals and money at Boardr Open NYC presented by DC today. My story is not unique in skateboarding.”

Silverman, who has been skateboarding for 11 years, previously complained on social media that she had lost to transgender rivals twice, including at the Redbull Cornerstone competition in May, when she missed out on $5,000 in prize money by coming in second.

“I deserved to place first, be acknowledged for my win, and get paid,” she wrote. “I reached out to Redbull and was ignored. I am sick of being bullied into silence.”

Silverman’s post from May 17 drew a mixed response, with some users fully supporting her stance, while others accusing her of being a sore loser, with one commenter writing: “lol or you could just … be better at skating & actually win the already fair contest?”

Mr Tres’ win is hardly something as big as Will Thomas’ victory in the NCAA nationals, but it’s simply one more piece of evidence that males are not the same as females, and in athletic contests in which size, speed, strength, quickness and endurance are factors, biological males will always have an advantage over females. Simple common sense — something apparently not quite as common as we like to think — has told us this all along, and the 50 year anniversary of Title IX, celebrated just four days ago, is being bitch-slapped by males claiming to be women competing against real women in sports. There’s some real irony that the American left are using ‘transgenderism’ to undermine the opportunities for real women.

I’ll ask it again: why would biological males who are convinced that they are really female, and who want other people to recognize them as women, undertake actions which prove just how different ‘transgender women’ are from real women?