Recently in Culture, or the lack thereof Category

Yet another topic about which I can say "I'm shocked!!"

NOT.

The trend of men opting out of marriage has been growing, with more of them deciding it isn't worth all the hassles that go along with a modern marriage. I started seeing this about 10 or 15 years ago, particularly among those men who have been married before. They had no desire to "put themselves into that position again."

This is a phenomenon seen most among younger men (35 and younger). There are a number of reasons for this. Two of the most prominent causes: money and education.

Part of the answer is found in a Pew Research Center report released this week: A sea change in relationships is taking place as everyone adjusts to the new reality of women being better educated and in some cases more preferred than men in the workforce. Especially unsettling to some men is their role as second-best earner in the family. As the Pew report documents, 22% of men with "some college" are now outearned by their wives, up from 4% in 1970.

Personally, whether my spouse makes more or less than me hasn't been a concern. Growing up there were times when my mom made more than my dad and vice versa. None of us thought anything about it. (Maybe my parents did, but they never voiced opinions about it one way or the other to any of us that I'm aware of.) Maybe that means my folks were ahead of their time.

With the greater financial resources of today's single women, a long standing dynamic has shifted, and not necessarily for the better for such women.

Understanding this change requires dipping into the personal. "I've found a lot of Mr. Almosts, but I can't find Mr. Right," Ms. [Rachel] Downtain says. "I've been dating forever. Where is he?" When she brings men back to her very nice, four-bedroom home, they often comment about her success. A few flat-out say they're uncomfortable with her salary advantage, education advantage (master's degree), or both. The final blow comes when she tells them about all her prominent volunteer work in the Kansas City area. "I'm being honest and telling them about my life, but I feel like I'm coming across as too good for them. That is never my intention."

It may not have been her intention, but whether she realizes it or not she's sending out the wrong signal. Two commenters brought this up, too, and I have to agree with their analysis. The first one wrote:

I always find that interest in the other party is a good way to start off and maintain a relationship. Perhaps whatshername can remember this the next time she talks about herself and all her "accomplishments" on a first date. It sounds like bragging to me, which is a turnoff in either sex.

Followed by this response:

I liked the line about her being concerned the men might think she's "too good" for them. It comes off as conceited and high maintenance which isn't very attractive. Even if that first impression is wrong, not many people would want to stick around to find out.

More than a few of my younger male friends and associates have voiced the opinion that there's no way they'd get married as they see marriage as a losing proposition. Some few of them realized they could never measure up to their prospective mate's expectation of perfection and didn't want to be emotionally or verbally beat up because they failed to meet an unrealistic and unreachable standard. More than one stated too many women they've dated have the expectation that the men would have to change who they are without a reciprocal change on their part.

Their griping may be over the top, but there's a kernel of truth in it. I've seen too many relationships go down in flames because expectations or demands on one side were far out of proportion to the other, with the men being on the losing end of that imbalance far too often.

She's beautiful, talented, educated, large-souled with a webpage filled with hundreds of wonderful pictures. But what are her goals? All lovely but with a conspicuous absence from my traditionalist heart: breeding.

You know...having a baby or two? Is that so hard to do, Eve Astrid Andersson?

When the best and brightest white girls can't even entertain the hopes of one day being a mother, is there any hope? It's a paradox that those who are most able to provide are least likely to choose to do so. Meanwhile, the opposite is true.

No pride in blood. Who's an aristocrat? No hope for the future. I guess all that traveling that Miss. Andersson does--it's good to be a Google employee--will have to be a surrogate for the foreseeable future.

My family is my treasure. A wife and four children. I wouldn't trade them for anything. Anything.

Even if I just had to wipe Brendan's butt. The four-year-old demanded I do it three times, "Like Mommy."

Poop is a part of it.

What we're not willing to defend we will end up losing.

Since 1973 adults in and around schools in Israel have been packing. It has put a stop to terrorist acts there that had been common, according to Sam Cohen. But what to make of these inane statements in a Boston Globe letter to the editor by Brockton High School math teacher Doug Van Gorder?

Although [immediate exodus] removes potential hostages and makes it nearly impossible for the shooter to acquire preselected targets, it unfairly rewards resourceful children who move to safety off-site more shrewdly and efficiently than others....But as a progressive, I would sooner lay my child to rest than succumb to the belief that the use of a gun for self-defense is somehow not in itself a gun crime.

Wow. Could it be satire? I'm thinking so.

Remember the Sokal Hoax that spoofed literary trends of meaningless in the academy?

HT: SayUncle

Interesting story of the first bona fide burial shroud from Jerusalem at the time of Jesus' crucifixion. And it doesn't match up well with the likely elaborate forgery, the Shroud of Turin, which some Catholics are too quick to proclaim as authentic.

I'm Christopher Hitchens skeptical of most claims of relics. I have a good friend who thinks he has a splinter from the One True Cross. I seriously doubt that.

I first heard of this on the BBC. I hope the pope is well after being pushed down by an apparently deranged individual. We have some of those in the US Senate, too.

Do you want to see the future of the US under the policies Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are trying to impose upon us? Then check out this video, courtesy of PJTV.

After 50 years of leftist policies and politics, Detroit has gone from the peak to the valley, having shrunk in population by 50%. Is that's what in store for us under leftist leadership for the rest of the country?

As the picture in this post says, "Do you miss me yet?"

I thought this quote was pretty good:

"I think the point of the comparison is this: Bush endured 8 years of wall-to-wall, 24/7 liberal bashing from multiple networks. Meanwhile, Obama was coronated and has enjoyed wall-to-wall adoration from the same multiple networks. If Obama's numbers, 11 months in, already approach Bush's after EIGHT years, then, baby, you've got serious problems."

Obama's tumbling poll numbers certainly aren't helping his administration, particularly when Democrats are saying they miss Bush.

This does not bode well for the Teleprompter/Teleologist/Apologist-In-Chief.

Could the falling poll numbers be one of the reasons Pelosi and Reid are trying so hard to ram through legislation a majority of Americans don't need, don't want, and don't have the means to pay for?

At Perkins you can have both your eggs and your waitress "easy over." Good luck, Tiger, in attempting to break Wilt's record. What is it with some women when faced with the rich and famous man? They delude themselves or something.

Guess who hates capitalism? Making $20 million a picture, what, six to nine months' work? Guilt will do that to you.

I know it sounds weird, but giving in to every impulse seems to be a sure way to ensure mediocrity as a young person. I'm thinking of young people in college. Sublimation, for want of a better word.

What's wrong with being sexually repressed? It works.

Paradoxically, liberalism, which tells people to seek what they think they want, undermines and perverts the true Anchors: truth, goodness, beauty, and justice. Thoughts inspired by this: Laura Wood on the Principle of Non-decoration

I read this piece in WSJ's Online Journal some time last week. I had to think about this one for a while because what it reported sounded true, but I had my doubts. I wanted to check things out for myself. A few days of asking questions as well as observing the interactions between members of the so-called "Generation-Y" proved to me the piece wasn't far off the mark. What am I talking about?

Their inability to read non-verbal clues from those around them. Such a deficit can lead to all kinds of social problems because they won't catch the subtle clues about how others are reacting to them in face-to-face social situations.

In September 2008, when Nielsen Mobile announced that teenagers with cellphones each sent and received, on average, 1,742 text messages a month, the number sounded high, but just a few months later Nielsen raised the tally to 2,272. A year earlier, the National School Boards Association estimated that middle- and high-school students devoted an average of nine hours to social networking each week. Add email, blogging, IM, tweets and other digital customs and you realize what kind of hurried, 24/7 communications system young people experience today.

Unfortunately, nearly all of their communication tools involve the exchange of written words alone. At least phones, cellular and otherwise, allow the transmission of tone of voice, pauses and the like. But even these clues are absent in the text-dependent world. Users insert smiley-faces into emails, but they don't see each others' actual faces. They read comments on Facebook, but they don't "read" each others' posture, hand gestures, eye movements, shifts in personal space and other nonverbal--and expressive--behaviors.

How many times have we seen teens sitting off to one side during a family social gathering, busily tapping away at the keypads of the cell phones, texting friends rather than interacting with people in the same room. It isn't necessarily that the teens are being rude. Instead it's because they really don't know how to interact without that electronic crutch as an interface, be it a cell phone, computer, or Blackberry.

So far my son has been able to avoid the 'need' for such an electronic crutch. For him a cell phone is nothing more than something you use to make a phone call. Beyond that it has no allure for him at all. While he does chat occasionally with friends on Facebook, he's rarely at it for more than a few minutes before he returns to what he was doing before the chat window opened. He much prefers to talk with his friends face to face.

So do I.

I guess I must be in a lazy, borrowing mood tonight.

The following bumper sticker 'ideas' came from two commenting to neo's post about the radicalization of the Center/Right by the Left.

Rational = Congressmen Who Support 1000-Page Bills They Don't Read
Irrational = Citizens Angry At Congressman Who Don't Read 1000-Page Bills

Troublemakers = Those Who Know More About Proposed Bills Than Their Congressmen Do

Obamacare: Good Enough For You But Not For Your Congressman

Congress: If We Wanted Your Opinion, We Would Have Asked For It

Support Faith-Based Legislation! Vote For It But Don't Read It

If They Disagree With Obama, They're A Mob. If You Disagree With Obama, You're Divisive.

Obama '08
Poverty '09
Fascism '10

Consult an Expert: Ask a Cuban How Socialism Works

Change, Hell! Obama Took My Whole Wallet!

Vote Democratic - It's Easier Than Getting A Job

1984 - Published In 1949... Public Policy In 2009

One Who Confuses Change With Progress Will Get Too Much Of The One And Not Enough Of The Other.

Purple...It's the new Brown (Insert SEIU logo here)

Democrat Utopia = Detroit

Cemetery Residents for Obama!

More gems such as these can be found here.

Received via e-mail:

(Whoever wrote this one deserves a HUGE pat on the back!)

Like a lot of folks in this state, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes, and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test, with which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.

So here is my Question:

Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check, because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their rump - doing drugs, while I work. Can you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out'.

I have no idea of the origin of this e-mail, nor could I find any mention of it at Snopes.com. But I must admit I agree with the sentiment.

For the first time in a long while, we actually had a nice sunny day yesterday, even if it was marred briefly by a quick moving thundershower.

It being the first day of the three day Fourth of July weekend, the tourists and summer residents arrived in droves, clogging the roads with heavy traffic and the supermarkets and shops with people picking up the victuals needed for the holiday. Deb and I braved the local supermarket for our bi-weekly grocery shopping (she usually handles this part, seeing as she's off Fridays and can get in and out of the supermarket before the weekenders start arriving in the early/late afternoon). As expected the supermarket was packed.

The large number of out of state license plates on cars in the parking lot told us the summer folk had arrived. Most of the plates were from Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Jersey. There were also quite a few from Florida, but they likely belonged to 'snowbirds', folks that summer up here but live in Florida over the winter. Surprisingly we saw none from New York, but that could have been because there were none at the supermarket at that time or we just plain missed seeing them.

Inside the supermarket people were milling around, looking for the groceries on their list. Some were confused because the supermarket had been renovated recently and everything had changed since last summer. The checkout lines were long and every register was running.

For the most part everything went smoothly. And then it happened: I heard the voice of one of the dreaded 'summah people' complaining about something trivial that to them was the most important thing in the world. So ended the dream of a perfect day.

I could continue, explaining about the dreaded 'summah people', but instead I will return to the Weekend Pundit Archives and resurrect posts I made about the topic, starting back in August of 2002 when I was living in the original Weekend Pundit Lake Winnipesaukee Manse. I could just repost them as written, but there are some additions that should be made to give a better idea of what it is that we and others must put up with when the 'summah people' are around. It doesn't apply just to the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, but many other summer places as well. (My friends out on Martha's Vineyard Island can attest to that.)

Before I go any farther I must make something perfectly clear: there is a difference between summer folk and 'summah people'. The first are likable and rarely cause any problems. The second are a pain in the a** to everyone, including the summer folk.

From August 4, 2002:

I happen to be fortunate enough to live on the shore of Lake Winnipesaukee in central New Hampshire. Most times it is a joy. But once the summer season rolls around it becomes a mixed blessing.

The summer people arrive.

Now those of you that live near summer tourist destinations know what I mean when I say 'summer people'. There are two kinds. The first kind are the folks that come for a week or two and stay at one of the resorts, rental cottages, or camp grounds. I'll also include the folks that only spend weekends at a family owned places. They are, for the most part, pretty nice people, friendly and giving. They enjoy the area and have a good time. The second kind, however, give the rest a bad name. They are the 'summah people'.

This term is spoken in such a way as to be unmistakably derogatory. These are the folks that come to one of the summer resort areas and act as if everyone having the good fortune to live there year round are their servants and underlings. They have no concept of private property, except that their property is private and yours is not.

I've had the misfortune to have to deal with one of the second kind since the weekend after Memorial Day. He rents a boat slip located behind my home. On one occasion he left his dog tied up to a tree in my back yard for the entire day while he was out on his boat. The dog was a Boxer, and not particularly friendly. Due to the length of the rope he used to tie up his dog, access to my back yard and the rest of the boat slips was impossible as the dog would lunge at anyone approaching the dock or entering the back yard.

The local police department was called when one of the other slip renters couldn't leave his boat because the dog would snap and growl at him and his family every time they stepped on to the dock. Just as the Animal Control Officer was about to slip a control noose over the dog's head in an effort to take him away, the owner arrived back at the dock. The invective that followed would have made a longshoreman blush. His attitude was "I rent this damn slip and I'll do what I want!" It didn't matter to him that the only thing he was renting was the slip and access to it through a private yard.

This fellow has also parked in my driveway, blocking access to the garage and everything inside. The first time his SUV was there from Friday afternoon until Sunday evening. I didn't know it was his until he returned and I saw him loading his gear into it. I asked him to please park on the side of the road like all the other slip tenants. His response was "F**K YOU!" He then got in to his SUV and drove off.

My neighbors have use of the driveway when they have relatives visiting for the weekend. On one particular weekend, this fellow again parked his SUV in front of the garage, blocking access. My neighbor's relatives were also visiting, so they parked their cars in the driveway, blocking the SUV in.

Late Sunday afternoon rolls around and the fellow arrives back at the dock. After loading his gear in to the back of his truck, he pounds on my door and demands that the other cars be moved so he can leave. I told him I had no way to do that. I explained that the cars belonged to the neighbors and they had permission to park there. I also reminded him that he did not.

He left, went to the neighbor's door and pounded on it. He got no response. He was then back at my door demanding to know where they were. I told him that they were out on their boat. He then wanted to know when they'd be back.

My response: "How the hell should I know?"

After he sat around and stewed for a while, he called his wife on his cell phone so she could drive up to Lake Winnipesaukee and pick him up. She arrived a couple of hours later. Not more than five minutes after they left my neighbors pulled in to their slip.

When I got home from work Monday afternoon the SUV was gone.

Since then, his SUV has been towed from my driveway once; the Marine Patrol has cited him for dumping oil into the Lakeport Channel when he pumped his bilge; and the city fire department billed him for cleaning up the oil slick.

I guess he just doesn't get it.

This is one of the most egregious examples of 'summah people', and my first run-in with one on a personal basis. I quickly found out there were plenty more like him in the Lakes Region.

How many times have we heard the saying "Violence never solves anything." It's a nice platitude. Unfortunately it's wrong.

Many people like to use Mohandes Ghandi as an example of non-violent protest winning the day. But the only reason Ghandi's tactics worked is because he was using them against a civilized adversary, the British Empire. Had he tried to use them against some one else, like Nazi Germany, he would have ended up with a bullet to the back of the head or in one of the cremation ovens after being worked to death in a concentration camp.

Violence does solve things. It has ended brutal dictatorships, saved citizens from the predation of criminals, prevented injustices on a small and large scale, and prevented wars.

Perhaps the old saying needs to be modified. Instead, it should be "Violence never solves anything if it is used at the wrong time in the wrong place." Violence in and of itself solves nothing. It is the proper use of violence under the right circumstances that solves problems.

Am I advocating violence as a cure to every problem? Of course not. Violence should be the last resort, used only when all other alternatives have been exhausted. But when that time comes it should be used without hesitation and without pity. What level of violence to use would be determined by the circumstances. (If it comes down to life or death, make sure it's the other fellow hitting the ground with a bunch of 9mm holes in him and not you.)

(H/T Maggie's Farm)

How many times hove you entered into a debate with someone with a different viewpoint from yours only to realize they really didn't have a valid argument to put forth because their opinion was based solely upon something they were spoon-fed and not upon their own experience or research? It's happened far too often to me to count. One more than one occasion my opponent's argument was based entirely upon emotion and not upon fact or even anecdotal evidence. How is it possible to enter intelligent debate with anyone about anything under such circumstances?

The answer: You can't.

Skip over at GraniteGrok illustrates just such a scenario, relating the experiences of a retired career military officer invited by a professor at California State University in Chico to discuss his experiences with culture in the military community. The phenomenon I mentioned above became quite apparent to this retired officer in a very short time.

A few years ago I was asked by the instructor of a philosophy class, then titled "Roots of War," to discuss with his students the culture of the U.S. military community. After identifying myself as a former career military officer, I discussed my impression of our military's culture. When I was done, a young woman who had been glowering at me and holding her arms tightly across her chest raised her hand. When called upon she vehemently said, "I don't agree with you. I don't think it is anything like that. You have just been brainwashed by the military."

"OK," I said, "what do you think our military's culture is like?"

"Well, certainly nothing like that," she sputtered. I could see some heads in the class nodding in agreement.

I asked, "Could you share with us your experience in or around the military?"

"I haven't had anything to do with the military," she indignantly replied.

"Have you extensively studied the U.S. military or worked with current or former members of the military?"

"No," she angrily said.

"So where have you gotten your impression of the military's culture?" I tried to ask softly.

"I am entitled to my opinion, and I think you are a Nazi!" was her voracious reply. The class was clearly enjoying her attack on me at this point and the philosophy professor sat smugly satisfied.

I decided to end this ridiculous exchange: "So let us review. You have no personal experience or knowledge of the military. You have not studied the military. You cannot explain why you disagree with me. And you think you are entitled to your opinion. Well, I agree with you on one point. You do have a right to an opinion, and I have a right to point out that yours is an ignorant opinion--ignorant because by your own admission it is not based on any facts, education, research, or experience. Your opinion is apparently based on nothing more than simple ignorant prejudice."

The class was silent for a moment. The young woman began to sob and yell at me, "You can't say that to me!"

I replied, "Yes I can, because it is the truth."

Perhaps that was his crime, using the truth rather than his emotions to put this poor ignorant lass straight. But wait! It gets even better!!

A short post tonight for a good reason:

The final episode of Battlestar Galactica aired tonight.

I am depressed. No more Adama. No more Number Six.

Damn.

Received via e-mail:

********************

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:

We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

Here is a model separation agreement:

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).

We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood.

You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security.

We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N. but we will no longer be paying the bill.

We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

You can give everyone health care if you can find any practicing doctors.

We'll continue to believe health care is a luxury and not a right.

We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World.

We'll practice trickle-down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag.

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWR which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.

Sincerely,
John J. Wall
Law Student and an American
P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you.

I wish I had written this. It seems it borrowed a number of ideas from Atlas Shrugged, but that doesn't make it any less poignant.

I have no idea whether the alleged author even exists. Snopes had nothing. Regardless, this sounds like an interesting idea.

I have to agree with Insty on this one:

The best TV commercial, ever.

Believe it or not, it's an ad for a Siemens washing machine.

Note: Not safe for work. See the video here or view it below the fold.

As much as the "multi-culti" folks might disagree with me, I have to state in no uncertain terms that all cultures are not equally valid. Let's face it, there are some that are the antithesis of everything good and decent in the world. Multi-cultis will accuse me of being prejudiced, that I have no basis to make such a claim. But they are wrong. There are things in some cultures that are so debauched, so evil that they cannot be seen as being just as valid as Western culture. Frankly, I am willing to say our culture is better than many out there.

[T]he West suffers from an excess of toleration for those who do not share its tradition of tolerance. "We believe that -- 'we' means the political elite -- that all cultures are equal," [Geert Wilders] says. "I believe this is the biggest disease today facing Europe. . . . We should wake up and tell ourselves: You're not a xenophobe, you're not a racist, you're not a crazy guy if you say, 'My culture is better than yours.' A culture based on Christianity, Judaism, humanism is better. Look at how we treat women, look at how we treat apostates, look at how we go with the separation of church and state. I can give you 500 examples why our culture is better."

Wilders goes on to explain that cultures that sanction the execution of homosexuals, the beheading of women, the genital mutilation of girls, or treating women as nothing more than chattel, are in no way equal to or superior to Western culture. Many of these same cultures described by Wilders have no such thing as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of (or from) religion. Some of them also sanction genocide, ethnic cleansing, religious persecution, 'honor' killings, infanticide, and a host of other customs that we in the west find heinous and barbaric. The list could go on and on.

These are not the hallmarks of cultures that are equal to Western culture. Many of them produce nothing but misery. Instead, they are cultures that either need to change or to wither away and disappear into history as have so many others well deserving of it.

I know people really wanted to get an early start shopping on Black Friday, but knocking down and killing store employees is not a good way to do it.

Apparently a mob of shoppers waiting outside a Long Island, New York WalMart figured they'd waited long enough and forced their way into the store, knocking down several employees and trampling one of them. 34-year-old Jdimytai Damour, to death.

"He was bum-rushed by 200 people," said Wal-Mart worker Jimmy Overby, 43.

"They took the doors off the hinges. He was trampled and killed in front of me.

"They took me down, too ... I didn't know if I was going to live through it. I literally had to fight people off my back," Overby said.

Damour, a temporary maintenance worker from Jamaica, Queens, was gasping for air as shoppers continued to surge into the store after its 5 a.m. opening, witnesses said.

Even officers who arrived to perform CPR on the trampled worker were stepped on by wild-eyed shoppers streaming inside, a cop at the scene said.

I know people are looking for bargains during their Christmas shopping, but this is taking saving on their purchases to a new low. It is depraved behavior.

I wonder how many kids would want their Christmas presents if they knew their parents actually killed someone to get it?