Author Archives: Dana Pico

Posted on by

Never interfere with an enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself You've got to love it when the left are eating their own

The old saying, “Never interfere with an enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself,” has a somewhat obscure past. It has been attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte, but direct quotes from 1805, alas! have rarely 🙂 been caught on tape.

Pamela Paul, photo from her website. Click to enlarge.

And so we come to Pamela Paul Stern, OpEd columnist for The New York Times, previously editor of The New York Times Book Review, overseeing all New York Times book coverage including the staff critics and publishing news. Graduated from Ivy League’s Brown University, she has carved out a prestigious career for herself. Married and soon divorced herself, she wrote The Starter Marriage and the Future of Matrimony, about couples who marry relatively young and divorce within five years, without having children:

The Starter Marriage and the Future of Matrimony is a pioneering study of first marriages lasting five years or less and ending without children, and of the changing face of matrimony in America.

According to the brilliant trend analyst and journalist Pamela Paul, “It’s easy to conclude that the starter marriage trend bodes ill for the state of marriage. After all, we’re getting married, screwing it up, and divorcing—a practice that certainly isn’t strengthening our sense of trust, family, or commitment. But though starter marriages seem like a grim prospect, there is also an upside. For one thing, if people are going to divorce, better to do so after a brief marriage in which no children suffer the consequences.” But are there other consequences of starter marriages? And what causes these marriages to fail in the first place?

In today’s matrimania culture, weddings, marriage, and family are clearly goals to which most young Americans aspire. Why are today’s twenty- and thirtysomethings—the first children-of-divorce generation—so eager to get married, and so prone to failure? Are Americans today destined to jump in and out of marriage? At a time when marriage at age twenty-five can mean a sixty-year active commitment, could “serial marriages” be the wave of the future?

Drawing on more than sixty interviews with starter marriage veterans and on exhaustive re-search, Pamela Paul explores these questions, putting the issues into social and cultural perspective. She looks at the hopes and motivations of couples marrying today, and examines the conflict between our cultural conception of marriage and the society surrounding it. Most important, this lively and engaging narrative examines what the starter marriage trend means for the future of matrimony in this country—how and why we’ll continue to marry in the twenty-first century.

On August 15, 2004, she married again, this time with Michael Stern, a New York financial analyst. Then, in 2007, she published Pornified: How Pornography Is Transforming Our Lives, Our Relationships, and Our Families:

“Strips porn of its culture-war claptrap . . . Pornified may stand as a Kinsey Report for our time.”—San Francisco Chronicle

Porn in America is everywhere—not just in cybersex and Playboy but in popular video games, advice columns, and reality television shows, and on the bestseller lists. Even more striking, as porn has become affordable, accessible, and anonymous, it has become increasingly acceptable—and a big part of the personal lives of many men and women.

In this controversial and critically acclaimed book, Pamela Paul argues that as porn becomes more pervasive, it is destroying our marriages and families as well as distorting our children’s ideas of sex and sexuality. Based on more than one hundred interviews and a nationally representative poll, Pornified exposes how porn has infiltrated our lives, from the wife agonizing over the late-night hours her husband spends on porn Web sites to the parents stunned to learn their twelve-year-old son has seen a hardcore porn film.

Pornified is an insightful, shocking, and important investigation into the costs and consequences of pornography for our families and our culture.

It is, perhaps, unsurprising that Mrs Stern, even living in liberal New York City, would have at least something of a more traditionalist idea of sex, but the left are aghast! From The Los Angeles Times[1]If you cannot access the original due to a paywall, you can read it for free here.:

Pamela Paul criticized for anti-trans opinion about the word ‘woman’

by Dorothy Pineda | Thursday, July 7, 2022 | 12:21 PDT

The online literary community is slamming Pamela Paul, publishing kingmaker turned opinion columnist, after she wrote a piece in the New York Times criticizing language that is inclusive of transgender and nonbinary communities. And at least one critic is alleging that she used her longtime perch as the head of the paper’s books section to tone down transgender advocacy.

In an article published Sunday, headlined “The Far Right and Far Left Agree on One Thing: Women Don’t Count,” Paul, who stepped down as books editor in March, posits that women in America are being stripped of their human rights not only by Republicans outlawing abortion but also by academics, progressives and transgender activists who reduce women to “a mix of body parts and gender stereotypes.”

Earlier this week, author and journalist Patrick Ness called the article “a nasty bit of business” for “equating anti-abortion activists with trans rights believers” on his Instagram. He also alleged that Paul had asked him to change the opening in his review last year of Kyle Lukoff’s “Too Bright to See,” a story about a transgender boy.

“Ms Paul asked me to change my original opening — stating how transgender children are under attack — into something less political and ‘more focused on the book,’” he claimed before posting his original first paragraph, which began: “The culture wars have come for your transgender children.”

Perhaps it would be better to take less of what Mrs Stern’s views are from an obviously angered Los Angeles Times book columnist[2]Dorothy Pineda’s Los Angeles Times biography states that she “writes about books, publishing and the local literary scene for the Los Angeles Times. She served a brief stint in City News … Continue reading and quote her New York Times column directly. For ease of the reader knowing what quotations are from whom, Mrs Stern’s column is presented here in Times New Roman font, while Miss Pineda’s piece is shown in Ariel font.

The Far Right and Far Left Agree on One Thing: Women Don’t Count

by Pamela Paul | July 3, 2022

Perhaps it makes sense that women — those supposedly compliant and agreeable, self-sacrificing and everything-nice creatures — were the ones to finally bring our polarized country together.

Because the far right and the far left have found the one thing they can agree on: Women don’t count.

The right’s position here is the better known, the movement having aggressively dedicated itself to stripping women of fundamental rights for decades. Thanks in part to two Supreme Court justices who have been credibly accused of abusive behavior toward women, Roe v. Wade, nearly 50 years a target, has been ruthlessly overturned.

Can we state here that Mrs Stern, by virtue of her last quoted sentences, isn’t exactly an evil reich-wing conservative?

Far more bewildering has been the fringe left jumping in with its own perhaps unintentionally but effectively misogynist agenda. There was a time when campus groups and activist organizations advocated strenuously on behalf of women. Women’s rights were human rights and something to fight for. Though the Equal Rights Amendment was never ratified, legal scholars and advocacy groups spent years working to otherwise establish women as a protected class.

But today, a number of academics, uber-progressives, transgender activists, civil liberties organizations and medical organizations are working toward an opposite end: to deny women their humanity, reducing them to a mix of body parts and gender stereotypes.

As we have reported here, “body parts” have several times offended real women! At least one member of the University of Pennsylvania’s women’s swim team has complained that Will Thomas, who claims to be a woman and calling himself “Lia,” is still a physically intact male and thinks little of parading around the locker room with his male genitalia exposed.

Kristina Wong of Breitbart has reported that:

An Army training slide obtained by Breitbart News instructs soldiers to shower with transgender members of the opposite sex even if they have not undergone a surgical transition.

Also see: William Teach: Army To Require Troops To Shower With Gender Confused

The training slide offers a “vignette” instructing soldiers on what to do if they encounter a female soldier who identifies as male according to the Department of Defense’s personnel tracking system known as Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS), but has not surgically transitioned and still has “female genitalia.”

The slide, titled “Soldier/Unit Training Barracks, Bathrooms, and Showers,” reads:

Vignette: Following his transition from female to male (which did not include sex reassignment surgery) and gender marker change in DEERS, a transgender Soldier begins using male barracks, bathroom, and shower facilities. Because he did not undergo a surgical change, the Soldier still has female genitalia.

The slide instructs soldiers: “Soldiers must accept living and working conditions that are often austere, primitive, and characterized by little or no privacy. … Understand anyone may encounter individuals in barracks, bathrooms, or shower facilities with physical characteristics of the opposite sex despite having the same gender marker in DEERS.”

It also tells soldiers that they should be “respectful of the privacy and modesty concerns of others,” but that “transgender Soldiers are not required or expected to modify or adjust their behavior based on the fact that they do not ‘match’ other Soldiers.”

Most soldiers are male, so perhaps putting it that way would be more practical, but by doing so, it ignores that which would most commonly be more objectionable: a “transgender female” who “did not undergo a surgical change” and still has male genitalia. As the father of a female staff sergeant and squad leader currently deployed to a desert area of the Middle East, I am aware that she shares quarters with another female soldier, but it doesn’t take much thought to realize that, with President Biden’s reversal of President Trump’s policy of banning the transgendered from military service, my daughter could be assigned a ‘transgender’ female who is still an intact male as a roommate.

As reported by my colleague Michael Powell, even the word “women” has become verboten. Previously a commonly understood term for half the world’s population, the word had a specific meaning tied to genetics, biology, history, politics and culture. No longer. In its place are unwieldy terms like “pregnant people,” “menstruators” and “bodies with vaginas.”

Planned Parenthood, once a stalwart defender of women’s rights, omits the word “women” from its home page. NARAL Pro-Choice America has used “birthing people” in lieu of “women.” The American Civil Liberties Union, a longtime defender of women’s rights, last month tweeted its outrage over the possible overturning of Roe v. Wade as a threat to several groups: “Black, Indigenous and other people of color, the L.G.B.T.Q. community, immigrants, young people.”

It left out those threatened most of all: women. Talk about a bitter way to mark the 50th anniversary of Title IX.

In a way, it’s odd. Most of the objections of us evil reich-wing conservatives have been along the lines of males claiming to be women, and taking athletic opportunities away from real women.[3]By “real women” I mean those who were born biologically female. Some people call them “cisgender women”, but in the typical phraseology of referring to “transgender … Continue reading But we appreciate Mrs Stern’s objection to the marginalization or real women from the other direction.

The noble intent behind omitting the word “women” is to make room for the relatively tiny number of transgender men and people identifying as nonbinary who retain aspects of female biological function and can conceive, give birth or breastfeed. But despite a spirit of inclusion, the result has been to shove women to the side.

Women, of course, have been accommodating. They’ve welcomed transgender women into their organizations. They’ve learned that to propose any space just for biological women in situations where the presence of males can be threatening or unfair — rape crisis centers, domestic abuse shelters, competitive sports — is currently viewed by some as exclusionary. If there are other marginalized people to fight for, it’s assumed women will be the ones to serve other people’s agendas rather than promote their own.

But, but, but. Can you blame the sisterhood for feeling a little nervous? For wincing at the presumption of acquiescence? For worrying about the broader implications? For wondering what kind of message we are sending to young girls about feeling good in their bodies, pride in their sex and the prospects of womanhood? For essentially ceding to another backlash?

Women didn’t fight this long and this hard only to be told we couldn’t call ourselves women anymore. This isn’t just a semantic issue; it’s also a question of moral harm, an affront to our very sense of ourselves.

For a conservative like me, this is just glorious. Mrs Stern is clearly supportive of ‘transgendered’ people, but she has also, albeit grudgingly, conceded that the transgendered are simply different from the real members of the sex that they claim to be.

But here we go again, parsing women into organs. Last year the British medical journal The Lancet patted itself on the back for a cover article on menstruation. Yet instead of mentioning the human beings who get to enjoy this monthly biological activity, the cover referred to “bodies with vaginas.” It’s almost as if the other bits and bobs — uteruses, ovaries or even something relatively gender-neutral like brains — were inconsequential. That such things tend to be wrapped together in a human package with two X sex chromosomes is apparently unmentionable.

Well, of course it is unmentionable, because conservatives note what we have known scientifically for over a century, that, in humans, as in all mammals, XX chromosomes result in the females of the species, while XY chromosomes result in males. If the far left were to go along with the scientific fact that females have XX chromosomes, they have completely undermined the notion that girls can be boys and boys can be girls.

Those women who do publicly express mixed emotions or opposing views are often brutally denounced for asserting themselves. (Google the word “transgender” combined with the name Martina Navratilova, J.K. Rowling or Kathleen Stock to get a withering sense.) They risk their jobs and their personal safety. They are maligned as somehow transphobic or labeled TERFs, a pejorative that may be unfamiliar to those who don’t step onto this particular Twitter battlefield. Ostensibly shorthand for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist,” which originally referred to a subgroup of the British feminist movement, “TERF” has come to denote any woman, feminist or not, who persists in believing that while transgender women should be free to live their lives with dignity and respect, they are not identical to those who were born female and who have lived their entire lives as such, with all the biological trappings, societal and cultural expectations, economic realities and safety issues that involves. .  .  .  .

The women’s movement and the gay rights movement, after all, tried to free the sexes from the construct of gender, with its antiquated notions of masculinity and femininity, to accept all women for who they are, whether tomboy, girly girl or butch dyke. To undo all this is to lose hard-won ground for women — and for men, too.

Those on the right who are threatened by women’s equality have always fought fiercely to put women back in their place. What has been disheartening is that some on the fringe left have been equally dismissive, resorting to bullying, threats of violence, public shaming and other scare tactics when women try to reassert that right. The effect is to curtail discussion of women’s issues in the public sphere.

At this point, Mrs Stern just doesn’t get it. By the left’s declaration that #TransWomenAreWomen, they have declared that ‘transgender women’ are identical to real women, that they just cannot be differentiated. To claim that there are things very specific to real women is to differentiate not just ‘trans males’ from real males, but ‘trans women from real women, and that wholly upsets the transgender ideology.

But women are not the enemy here. Consider that in the real world, most violence against trans men and women is committed by men but, in the online world and in the academy, most of the ire at those who balk at this new gender ideology seems to be directed at women.

Can we tell the truth here? When it is asserted that “in the real world, most violence against trans men and women is committed by men,” it has to be noted — though most liberals will not do so — that such violence is almost entirely committed when men are taking up with a woman for sex, usually via prostitution, and then discover that the person they thought was a real woman was actually male.

If a person you believe to be female fellates you, and you then find out that he is actually male, you have been raped! Is it really that much of a surprise that a person who has been raped would respond violently?

It’s heartbreaking. And it’s counterproductive.

Tolerance for one group need not mean intolerance for another. We can respect transgender women without castigating females who point out that biological women still constitute a category of their own — with their own specific needs and prerogatives.

If only women’s voices were routinely welcomed and respected on these issues. But whether Trumpist or traditionalist, fringe left activist or academic ideologue, misogynists from both extremes of the political spectrum relish equally the power to shut women up.

Well, of course: some people have called it ‘shutupery’, the argument that what you say cannot be said, so just sit down and shut the f(ornicate) up!

Me? I don’t want the transgender activists to shut up; I want them to shout their idiocy from the rooftops, because the greatest weapon against stupidity is to have its stupidity demonstrated for all to see and hear.

Back to Miss Pineda:

Paul, whose former position made her arguably the most influential person in print media books coverage, writes that the word “woman” once “had a specific meaning tied to genetics, biology, history, politics and culture. No longer. In its place are unwieldy terms like ‘pregnant people,’ ‘menstruators’ and bodies with vaginas.’”

While she recognizes “the noble intent” of omitting the word “woman” when talking about reproductive health, Paul argues that “despite the spirit of inclusion, the result has been to shove women to the side.”

Others writers, critics and books journalists, who had generally been circumspect about Paul during her books tenure, now decried Paul for what they considered to be her anti-trans and trans-exclusionary views.

Maris Kreizman, host of LitHub’s literary podcast “The Maris Review,” wrote on Twitter Sunday: “Looking at the Opinion section and once again marveling over the fact that this terrible, hackneyed, boring writer was once the most important person in all of book publishing.”

I’ve got to admit it: seeing one liberal calling, via quotation, another liberal a “terrible, hackneyed, boring writer” as a way of dismissing her opinion can only warm the depths of my cold, right-wing heart. Mrs Stern and Miss Pineda ought to be allies on the liberal side, but Miss Pineda clearly hates Mrs Stern’s having taken a position different from her.

I’ve said it before: for the left, when it comes to sex, they feel almost required to take the most extremely left position, because to fail to do so is to legitimize us evil reich-wingers.

In her conclusion, Miss Pineda stated that Bette Midler, who was also concerned about the marginalization of the word “women”, cited Mrs Stern’s article to support her position. Mrs Stern’s writing will be cited by other people, hostile to the furthest left position, and that has the Los Angeles Times columnist very, very worried.

And so the extreme left are trying to destroy one of their allies on the not-quite-so-extreme left. With that, I am certainly pleased.

References

References
↑1 If you cannot access the original due to a paywall, you can read it for free here.
↑2 Dorothy Pineda’s Los Angeles Times biography states that she “writes about books, publishing and the local literary scene for the Los Angeles Times. She served a brief stint in City News Service’s police beat and was a general assignment reporter for the Los Angeles Wave newspaper. Pineda earned her bachelor’s in literature from UC Santa Cruz in 2012 and a journalism certificate from East Los Angeles College in 2017.”
↑3 By “real women” I mean those who were born biologically female. Some people call them “cisgender women”, but in the typical phraseology of referring to “transgender women” and “cisgender women” in the same article, such phraseology implies a form of equality between the two; I deny that, and will not use that wordage.
Posted on by

Killadelphia Black Lives Don't Matter to The Philadelphia Inquirer

When I saw that the Philadelphia Police Department’s Current Crime Statistics page had shot up to 274 homicides, as of 11:59 PM EDT on Wednesday, July 6th, from 268 the previous day, I had to check the Philadelphia Shootings Victims Database, to see if perhaps some of the six new fatalities were simply data catch-ups. As you can see from the chart on the left, there were six fatal shootings, out of thirteen total, yesterday. The chart is a direct copy from the shootings database, though I hid some of the data cells and made some of the data clearer — such as replacing ones and zeros with “no” and “yes” — and easier for the reader. Feel free to follow the link and confirm my data with the original. You can click on the chart itself to enlarge it for easier reading.

I have said, many times, that black lives don’t matter to The Philadelphia Inquirer, and, as of 12:13 PM EDT on July 7th, there was not a single story about any of the murders, either on the newspaper’s website main page or it’s crime page. There was, however, a photo, of Jailene Holton, the cute white girl murdered on June 28th, and a story about her (alleged) killer being arrested. Of course, we have also often said that The Philadelphia Inquirer does not care about murder victims unless they are an innocent, a ‘somebody,’ or a cute white girl, and this is just more evidence of that.

Who were the six people murdered in Philly yesterday? All six were black males, and, with one exception, all were in their twenties. The “anti-racist” Inquirer doesn’t want to tell us diddly, even though long-time Inky columnist Helen Ubiñas once lamented that so many victims received barely a few paragraphs.

Now, they’re not getting even that much! It’s just too politically incorrect for the newspaper to do something really radical like actually report the news. As we noted just yesterday, the advent of digital publication, even though the dead trees edition has gotten physically smaller, newspapers in digital format are no longer constrained by word counts or assigned column inches. Newspapers have always had the ability to go more in depth than television news and their quick-fire show-and-tell stories, and now, with space constraints gone, really get into the heart of stories. Four of the six homicides occurred before 3:00 PM, meaning that the newspaper has had plenty of time, plenty of time, to write something, anything, on the killings, two of which occurred in a double homicide in the 5000 block of Germantown Avenue. But the journolists[1]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 … Continue reading at the Inquirer have, instead, stopped covering the news that simply does not fit its editorial slant, or publisher Elizabeth Hughes’ dictates.

Black lives simply don’t matter to The Philadelphia Inquirer.

References

References
↑1 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

Gun Control Laws and Our First and Second Amendment Rights Beware: if you are a faithful Roman Catholic, some states would deny your right to keep and bear arms

Robert Crimo III, via Twitter.


In the wake of the Uvalde school shooting, several Republicans in the Senate got all wobbly-kneed and agreed to a Democratic ‘gun control’ bill. Among other things, it provides financial incentives for states without a so-called ‘red flag’ law to pass one.

Well, the solidly Democratic state of Illinois had a red flag law, and guess what? It didn’t stop alleged Highland Park shooter Robert Crimo III[1]Some people hold that publishing photos and the names of accused serial killers somehow encourages other potential serial killers. Personally, I cannot see how such an obviously incel-looking man … Continue reading from obtaining a firearm:

Highland Park suspect’s father sponsored gun permit application, police say

By Reis Thebault and Timothy Bella | Wednesday, July 6, 2022 | 10:18 AM EDT

The Illinois State Police confirmed on Tuesday that the father of the Highland Park parade shooting suspect sponsored his son’s application for a gun permit months after relatives reported that Robert E. Crimo III had threatened to “kill everyone,” and that authorities had “insufficient basis” to deny the application.

The revelation that Crimo, 21, had at least two previous encounters with law enforcement has raised new questions about how he was able to legally purchase his guns and whether more could have been done to prevent the massacre that killed seven people and injured more than 30.

In September 2019, a family member told Highland Park police that Crimo had threatened to “kill everyone,” said Christopher Covelli, a spokesman for the Lake County Major Crime Task Force. Officers visited Crimo’s home and confiscated 16 knives, a dagger and a sword, but made no arrest, Covelli said on Tuesday, because they lacked probable cause. However, they notified Illinois State Police, he said.

Months later, in December, Crimo applied for a firearm owner’s identification card, the document required to possess a gun in Illinois. Because Crimo was under 21 at the time, state law required him to have the consent of a parent or guardian before he could own a firearm or ammunition. According to state police, which issues the cards, Crimo’s father sponsored the permit application.

Also see: William Teach: Having Relatives Report Highland Park Shooter Threatened To Kill Everyone Is Apparently Not A Reason To Deny A Gun Permit

There’s more at the original, but it sounds like Robert Crimo, Jr, is being set up to be responsible, in some way, for his son’s (alleged) killings.

The Washington Post article continues to tell us that the state police had received a “clear and present danger” report on the younger Mr Crimo, but because there was no current request for a Firearms Owner’s Identification Card, there was no action the agency could take. Then, when he did apply for a FOID, the agency could not disapprove it because he had a sponsor.

“The subject was under 21 and the application was sponsored by the subject’s father,” Illinois State Police said in a statement. “Therefore, at the time of FOID application review in January of 2020, there was insufficient basis to establish a clear and present danger and deny the FOID application.”

So, what does this mean? It means that instates which are incentivized to establish ‘red flag’ laws, the pressure will be to make them more stringent, to suspend people’s Second Amendment rights for longer, possibly much longer.

I think back to the case of Nikolas Cruz, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooter. Young Mr Cruz had many interactions with the Broward County Sheriff’s Department, all for mostly petty crimes, but the deputies kept giving him free passes, kept letting him off with admonishments to be a good boy. After Mr Cruz committed an in-school assault, the Broward County schools, which had greatly reduced references to law enforcement, because they wanted to stop the “school to prison pipeline,” following a January, 2017, in-school assault. Had Mr Cruz been charged with that assault, he could not have legally purchased the weapons he used in the attack.

A FOID card is required under Illinois law to possess guns. The cards issued by the Illinois State Police require “any qualified applicant” to meet at least 15 requirements listed on the agency’s website.

At a news conference announcing the initial criminal charges against Crimo, Lake County State’s Attorney Eric Rinehart said Illinois’s red-flag law, which allows loved ones to ask a court to temporarily remove guns from those deemed violent or threatening, is “very powerful.” Yet the law is rarely used.

“We must vastly increase awareness and education about this red-flag law,” Rinehart said.

In the days following the shooting, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) has vowed to strengthen state laws in an effort to prevent another tragedy like the one in Highland Park.

Translation: Illinois ‘red flag’ law did not work, so that Democrat-ruled state is going to make it stronger, restricting the rights of law-abiding Americans even further, because the state failed to act under the laws it had in place.

Governor Kathy Hochul (D-NY) said, “(I)n the state of New York, we’re now requiring social media networks to monitor and report hateful conduct on their platforms.” As Hannah Bleau noted on Breitbart:

It is a rather controversial move, given the varying interpretations of what constitutes “hate speech” in a world where far-left radicals consider “misgendering” someone an intrinsically “hateful” act.

In other words, because my site, The First Street Journal, states in the Stylebook,

Those who claim to be transgender will be referred to with the honorific and pronouns appropriate to the sex of their birth; the site owner does not agree with the cockamamie notion that anyone can simply ‘identify’ with a sex which is not his own, nor that any medical ‘treatment’ or surgery can change a person’s natural sex; all that it can do is physically mutilate a person.

I would be denied a firearms permit in the state of New York because my sincerely-held belief that girls can’t be boys and boys can’t be girls. I have no criminal record, and have never even been accused of assaulting anyone. But because my beliefs closely adhere to Roman Catholic teachings on ‘transgenderism,’ the state of New York — where I do not live, but many Catholics do — would deny my Second Amendment rights over First Amendment right of free exercise of religion. Had I kept my beliefs entirely to myself, not exercised another of my First Amendment rights, freedom of speech and of the press, I guess I could get that permit.

There has been plenty of evidence that if law enforcement had acted on the laws already passed, some of these mass shootings could have been prevented, or at least made more difficult for the perpetrators; we could have prevented some of these cretins from obtaining firearms legally, but it seems that nothing can prevent a determined person from obtaining a firearm illegally. Instead, when existing laws have failed, due to bureaucratic mistakes and individual bungling, the response of the states is to further restrict the rights of people who have done nothing wrong. And now New York is attempting to remove people’s rights to keep and bear arms due to people’s religious and political beliefs.

References

References
↑1 Some people hold that publishing photos and the names of accused serial killers somehow encourages other potential serial killers. Personally, I cannot see how such an obviously incel-looking man male — surely no sighted heterosexual woman would ever consider actually copulating with him! — like Robert Crimo could ever inspire anyone to act like he did.
Posted on by

Another begging letter from The Philadelphia Inquirer Remember when it used to be "An Independent Newspaper for All the People"?

This is not the first begging letter I have received from the Leftist Lenfest Institute for Journalism, the non-profit owner of The Philadelphia Inquirer, but it is as amusing as all of the others.

I have frequently referred to our nation’s third oldest continuously published daily newspaper, in our nation’s sixth largest city and seventh largest metropolitan area as The Philadelphia Enquirer ever since RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake. I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I have found it very apt. The Inky, despite Philly’s size, is only our nation’s 17th largest newspaper, by circulation. Why? I have suggested that part of it is because the Inquirer censors the news!

In attempting to meet publisher Elizabeth Hughes stated goal of making the Inquirer an “anti-racist news organization,” the newspaper published its “Black City. White Paper” series, which, in effect, told white readers and potential readers that the Inky was really not for them.

Nor is it even true. Philadelphia isn’t a “black city.” The 2020 census found that just 38.3% of the city’s population were non-Hispanic black, and Hispanics, who can be either black or white, made up 14.9%. Between non-Hispanic whites, 34.3%, Asians, 8.3%, and “other groups,” 4.3%, the city is 46.9% non-black, and it doesn’t take a terribly large percentage of the Hispanic population being white to get the city to majority non-black. The non-Hispanic white population of the city have certainly declined, but they are hardly gone.

More, the Philadelphia metropolitan area is very much majority white. Perhaps, just perhaps, the Inquirer practically marketing itself as a newspaper for a “Black City” isn’t really something that’s going to help it to sell well in West Chester or Bucks County.

The Inquirer used to proclaim itself, on the newspaper’s masthead, that it was a “Public Ledger” and “An Independent Newspaper for All the People”. That “Independent Newspaper” blurb was even proudly emblazoned on its old building, but the newspaper under Miss Hughes has been telling us that no, it is no longer a “Public Ledger,” and that it is no longer a “Newspaper for All the People.”

Why did Rebecca Forman, the Director of Advancement for the leftist Lenfest Institute, call me “a supporter of The Philadelphia Inquirer“? It’s simple: it’s because I am a subscriber for the digital newspaper.[1]As much as I really do love actual printed newspapers, I now live well outside the newspaper’s physical delivery area. And I am paying $21.96 every four weeks for my digital subscription, more than I pay for The Washington Post, $99 a year, and more than I pay for The New York Times, $17.00 every four weeks. Given that I used to live in the Keystone State, and Philadelphia is the city about which I am most concerned, and about which I most frequently write, I’ll continue to pay that subscription. I think I have contributed quite enough to the Inky, thank you very much.

But the Inquirer needs to get better; it needs to report all the news, not just what Miss Hughes and Executive Editor Gabriel Escobar consider to be politically correct.

With the advent of digital publication, even though the dead trees edition has gotten physically smaller, newspapers in digital format are no longer constrained by word counts or assigned column inches. Newspapers have always had the ability to go more in depth than television news and their quick-fire show-and-tell stories, and now, with space constraints gone, really get into the heart of stories. The Inky can be better than it ever was.

Instead, it has gotten worse. Instead, the newspaper has gotten so thoroughly eaten up with ‘progressive’ ideology that the editors refuse to cover the news which might be politically incorrect, refuse to publish the news which might be outside Miss Hughes ideology. With Lenfest’s ownership, the Inquirer actually can call itself “An Independent Newspaper,” but they are failing in the “for All the People” part.

I’ve said it before: if I had Jeff Bezos’ money, I’d do what he did with The Washington Post: I’d buy the newspaper and rescue it from its financial problems. But I would also clean house, I would make sure that the Inquirer really did cover all the news, and publish all of the news, letting the chips fall where they may, regardless of whose feelings might get hurt.

That is what journalists, real journalists, are supposed to do.

References

References
↑1 As much as I really do love actual printed newspapers, I now live well outside the newspaper’s physical delivery area.
Posted on by

Six killed in Highland Park shooting, and everybody knows about it; ten killed in Philly, and no one cares. Could it possibly be because the Highland Park victims were 'innocents', and Philly's murder victims are mostly not?

Robert Crimo III, via Twitter.

This morning’s news is all about the shootings in Highland Park, Illinois, at a Fourth of July parage, allegedly committed by Robert Chimo III, who was arrested without incident. The left, of course, concluded that because he surrendered and was arrested alive, he was the recipient of some kind of ‘white privilege.’

But, while Mr Crimo (allegedly) killed six people, in a story which has swept across the nation, at least ten people were murdered over the holiday weekend in the City of Brotherly Love, and nobody cares. Of course, The Philadelphia Inquirer didn’t have anything on the Highland Park shootings, either, but that’s probably because the city had its own bullets flying at the Independence Day parade on the Ben Franklin Parkway.

According to the Philadelphia Police Department’s Current Crime Statistics page, 267 people were killed as of 11:59 PM EDT on Monday, July 4th. The previous update, done last Friday and including those killed as of 11:59 PM EDT on Thursday, June 30th, was 257 murders. The PPD only updates that page on normal business days.

What did we have? As closely as I could get the information –primarily from Fox 29 reporter Steve Keeley’s tweets — one person was murdered on Friday, and four on Saturday. I saw stories listing two murders on Sunday, so, if those counts are accurate, that means three more killed on the Fourth of July.

Two police officers shot on the Ben Franklin Parkway amid Philadelphia’s July 4th celebrations

by Justine McDaniel, Chris Palmer, Jason Nark, and Kristen A. Graham | Tuesday, July 5, 2022

Two police officers were shot and injured in front of the Philadelphia Art Museum while on duty at the city’s Independence Day celebrations on Monday night. The incident caused stampedes of people watching fireworks on the Benjamin Franklin Parkway to flee what they believed was an active shooting.

Investigators were still seeking to determine where the shots were fired from, how many were fired, and whether the shots were intentionally fired toward police or the officers were struck by stray gunfire. Police said no one else was shot.

It is possible, I suppose, that the shots fired were at random, but that they struck two Philadelphia Police Officers, and no one else, seems rather improbable.

No arrests had been made and no suspects were in custody as of 12:30 a.m. Tuesday, Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw said at a news conference outside Thomas Jefferson University Hospital.

Each officer suffered a graze wound, one to the forehead — the bullet was found in the police officer’s hat — and one to the shoulder. Both were treated and released from Jefferson within about two hours after the shooting, which happened just after 9:47 p.m.

“We’re all just extremely grateful that this wasn’t worse than what it was,” Outlaw said.

If they recovered the bullet in the officer’s hat, the police now have the ballistic evidence needed to tie it to a particular weapon, so if they catch some cretin with the weapon on him, he can be prosecuted.

Neither The Philadelphia Inquirer’s website main page nor its specific crime page had a single story on any of the ten, ten! homicides in the City of Brotherly Love over the long holiday weekend. Oh, there were older stories about a 16-year-old being sought after what appears to be an accidental shooting in Upper Darby Township, and four items on a senseless, apparent ‘road rage’ murder, in Springfield Township, but not a single item on any of the weekend killings in Philly itself.

Publisher Elizabeth ‘Lisa’ Hughes set forth several principles she stated were necessary to make the Inquirer an “anti-racist news organization,” including:

  • Establishing a Community News Desk to address long-standing shortcomings in how our journalism portrays Philadelphia communities, which have often been stigmatized by coverage that over-emphasizes crime.
  • Examining our crime and criminal justice coverage with Free Press, a nonprofit focused on racial justice in media.

Apparently the result of that is to simply not report on city homicides at all!

The story about Robert Crimo will be across the national news for days, because the left will use it to argue to further restrict our constitutional rights. He’s easy to use, because he’s white, though apparently #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, in that he actually has a tattoo above his left eyebrow that reads “Awake.” The Washington Post noted that he was a small-time rapper — see the “aspiring rapper” definition in the Urban Dictionary — and none of the major newspapers I checked had Mr Crimo’s photo with the stories, perhaps to avoid Ann Coulter’s tweet, “One gun control law I think we could all get behind is no guns for anyone with a face or neck tattoo.”

More, Mr Crimo’s victims are from a mostly white and Hispanic community; only 1.53% of the population are black, according to the 2020 census, and ‘innocents,’ in a randomly targeted assault. The editors of the Inky know that most, if not all, of the ten murders over the last four days are just as much bad guys as the guys who killed them; Philly’s 100 Shooting Review Committee Report noted that two thirds of the shooting victims had criminal records, most with violent felony records, most with prior firearms charges. The majority of the arrested shooters had violent felony records as well, had prior firearms charges, and PWID – possession of drugs with the intent to distribute – charges. Naturally, Publisher Hughes and Executive Editor Gabriel Escobar don’t want to say too much about Philly’s murders, save in the release of aggregate numbers, because that would not fit Miss Hughes’ “anti-racist” directives at all.

The truth shall set you free, but if you are looking for the truth, you will not get it from The Philadelphia Inquirer.

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

What happens when “racial inequities” are the choices of minority populations?

The newspaper I have frequently called The Philadelphia Enquirer[1]RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I thought it very apt. has been very, very worried about “racial inequities” afflicting “underserved communities”, especially since the beginning of the COVID-19 panicdemic. Now, more than two years later, they’re still worried.

Racial inequities in vaccination are emerging again, this time among Philly’s elementary age kids

From vaccines for kids to COVID treatments, old inequalities appear to be reasserting themselves.

by Jason Laughlin | Sunday, July 3, 2022 | 9:00 PM EDT

The Black Doctors Consortium was among the first in the city to offer newly approved COVID shots for young children in June, setting up clinics at its health center in a mostly Black neighborhood in North Philadelphia.

Despite the neighborhood’s demographics, most of the 100 families that showed up were white. When it comes to children’s vaccinations in Philadelphia, that’s not uncommon.

More than a year and a half since COVID vaccines became available, ensuring equitable access to all Philadelphians, regardless of race or income, remains a challenge. The demographics for vaccinations among children under 5 have not yet been collected, but among 5 to 11-year-olds, who have been eligible since last fall, about 37% of Philadelphia’s white children are fully vaccinated, compared to 25% of Hispanic children and 22% of Black children. Vaccination rates among Asian children are much higher than the rest in that age group — 57%.

White and Asian Philadelphians are more likely to have received booster doses, too, with 38% of white city-dwellers and 48% of Asian residents having received additional shots. Just over a quarter of Black and Hispanic Philadelphians have received a booster.

OK, let’s look at that. The article title and subtitle — possibly written by an editor rather than the article author — refer to “racial inequities” and “old inequalities”. But the clinic described is in a “mostly black neighborhood” in North Philly, so it’s not as though access ought to be a problem. There should be a lot of black families within walking distance of the clinic. More, the shots are free, so expense is not a factor. Add to that the fact that the Black Doctors Consortium plans to have their clinics that stay open until 7:00 PM, so that working parents have more of a chance to get their kids there, and there is no reason that children from “underserved communities” would be getting vaccinated at lower rates other than the conscious decisions being taken in those communities by parents.

Other health care workers noted child vaccinations may seem less of a priority because children are not in school, are away at camps, or are with their families on summer vacations. Others may not feel the need to vaccinate children because the virus is typically milder for kids.

So, personal choices.

“There are not enough people still involved in pushing for residents to bring their children to get vaccinated,” said Quetcy Lozada, vice president of community engagement and organizing for Esperanza, a Hispanic community organization in the Hunting Park neighborhood.

The end of mandates, and reduced rates of infection and death have made the virus feel less urgent, she noted, though the virus has waned before only to surge again.

“As the city started to open up, and folks were able to come back to their places of work and their places of worship, and the mask mandates started to become less and less required, the sense of urgency I think also became a little bit relaxed,” she said.

There are other ‘reasons’ given in the article as to why people are just not choosing to get their children vaccinated at the rates the health care professionals say they should, with, of course, an emphasis on ‘misinformation’ in the public and on social media, and the statement that the black community in the city simply don’t have as much trust in the health care system. But in every case, it all condenses down to one thing: the high muckety-mucks simply haven’t been persuasive enough, haven’t sold everybody on the need to get their kids vaccinated.

This raises the obvious, if nevertheless hugely politically incorrect question: if this particular issue has led to “racial inequities” and “inequalities” in minority communities, is it not possible, just possible, that other “racial inequities” and “inequalities” in minority communities are the result not of those communities somehow being discriminated against, but personal choices and decisions being taken in those communities?

Is it possible that the decisions being taken by individuals lead to an aggregate effect that might not be to the benefit of a community as a whole? Too often the left, the “progressives,” are left scratching their pumpkin heads trying to figure out why such things are so, and coming up with all sorts of excuses to blame everything other than the obvious.

References

References
↑1 RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I thought it very apt.
Posted on by

Even hormones and surgery are not enough! Without realizing what they've done, The Philadelphia Inquirer told the truth

The extremely #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 and ‘transgender’-positive newspaper that I have sometimes called The Philadelphia Enquirer[2]RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I thought it very apt. takes the position that the ‘transgendered’ really are the sex they claim to be, rather than their biological sex, and on Sunday published yet another article in support of that idea, never realizing that they were actually pointing out that the ‘transgendered’ are not the sex they wish they were:

Voice therapy can help trans people sound like themselves and feel safer

Voice therapy can be valuable for addressing the mental health challenges many transgender people experience.

by Abraham Gutman | Sunday, July 3, 2022

When Fenix Cobbledick speaks in an unfamiliar place for the first time, they often feel scared.

They have spent countless hours and thousands of dollars on hormone therapy, laser facial hair removal, and growing out a feminine haircut to make their appearance more accurately reflect their identity.

Note right away the stilted, incorrect grammar of the article, as Inquirer writer, Abraham Gutman, confirming to the newspaper’s stylebook, uses Mr “Cobbledick’s”[3]I assume that “Fenix Cobbledick” is a faked name, but I have been unable to find Mr “Cobbledick’s” real name in my research. preferred pronouns, “they/them”. It is jarring to the mind, as normal people read the plural pronouns and think that those pronouns refer to more than one person.

But even as they changed their body, Cobbledick, a 31-year-old nonbinary trans woman, felt at risk when they opened their mouth to talk.

“I love my singing voice. It’s beautiful; it’s just deep. And maybe one day we’ll live in a world where I don’t have to hide that voice,” Cobbledick said. “But we don’t live in that world.

Translation: Mr “Cobbledick” is a man male who thinks he’s a woman . . . maybe. I’m not certain how one can be both a “trans woman” and “nonbinary”. If one is “nonbinary,” how can he claim to be either a man or a woman?

From Moss Rehab:

Fenix Cobbledick (they/them) (featured above) started hormone estrogen therapy through the Einstein Pride Program three years ago. A teacher at the Philadelphia School of Circus Arts who identifies as nonbinary, Fenix is currently being treated by Hussein Safa, MD (he/him), who serves as medical director and attending physician in the Pride clinic. When discussing future potential gender-affirming services such as facial feminization surgery and laser hair removal with Dr. Safa, Fenix thought voice therapy would help achieve a more androgynous voice and better vocal control.

“Because I’m 5’10”, muscular and forthright, people overwhelmingly perceive me as male – and that is disheartening,” explains Fenix. “When Dr. Safa said the Pride program was partnering with a MossRehab speech therapist in providing voice therapy, I said I was interested. I’ve read enough to understand that I wouldn’t be able to train my voice properly without the guidance of an expert.”

Back to the Inky:

Voice therapy may be valuable for addressing the mental health challenges many transgender people experience. As a common identifier of gender, voice can contribute to gender dysphoria — an unease that arises from one’s gender not matching the sex they were assigned at birth.

“Voice is really integral to identity and listeners assume a lot about a person by their voice alone,” said Alyssa Giegerich, a speech-language pathologist at Einstein MossRehab, who specializes in gender-affirming voice therapy. “Our voice goals are to align the way that someone is perceived with their identity.”

Translation: humans, like every other mammal, can tell the difference between males and females, even without seeing them, by just hearing their voices. Even someone like me, who is mostly deaf, can tell the difference. I may not always be able to understand someone’s speech, because I’ve lost the ability to hear certain consonants, but I can still tell, from the tone of someone’s voice, whether they are male or female. In meeting their “voice goals,” “to align the way that someone is perceived with their identity,” is to note that no matter how many hormones they’ve taken, and regardless of how many surgical mutilations they have undergone, it’s still not enough to get other people to not recognize a ‘transgendered’ person’s biological sex. Normal people can just tell!

Hormone therapy, voice coaching, or surgery can help a person when their gender identity doesn’t match the sex they were assigned at birth. They are among the interventions known as gender-affirming care.

Yet more stupidity from the Inky. “Sex assigned at birth” is a wholly stupid phrase. As we have known for over a century, the sex of mammalian offspring is determined by the XX (for females) or XY chromosome pair, and the Y chromosome is only available through the sperm of the father. The sex of the offspring is determined at conception, and not at birth. In humans, the sex of the offspring is recognized at birth, through observation of the genitals of a normal baby — in some rare cases, this is not possible, but those cases are the result of genetic or developmental defects — and every sighted human being with normal knowledge can tell the sexes apart through observation at birth.

No one “assigns” a sex to a newborn which does not match observed biological sex, at least no one of normal intelligence and reasonable sanity.

But the #woke and ‘transgender’ activists have been attempting to push this “sex assigned at birth” meme for years now, hoping to have normal people swallow the cockamamie notion, and somehow normalize ‘transgenderism.’

I’m sure that Mr Gutman and his editors at the Inquirer never meant to point out yet another reason why the ‘transgendered’ will never be the sex they claim to be, rather than the sex they actually are, but that is the result, for any reader with anything like an objective eye.

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.

↑2 RedState writer Mike Miller called it the Enquirer, probably by mistake, so I didn’t originate it, but, reminiscent of the National Enquirer as it is, I thought it very apt.
↑3 I assume that “Fenix Cobbledick” is a faked name, but I have been unable to find Mr “Cobbledick’s” real name in my research.
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.