August 3, 2006

Do What Now?

Belle Waring at Crooked Timber links to a couple of posts about a woman who was raped and murdered in New York City last week. The first post is about how the New York Post changed the victim's eye color to make the story seem more racially charged. The second -- by Amanda at Pandagon -- is a response to the general trend of the comments to the first, and in particular a number of attempts to blame the victim. Apparently it's her fault because she should have known better than to go out partying.

Amanda's post is great, which is typical for her, except that the pentultimate paragraph starts like this:

The guy who killed Moore threw her body in the trash like it was a Kleenex. He did that because he lives in a society that endorses treating women like less than human beings but simply masturbation toys and/or baby incubators for male use.

Really? Are you sure? Because I'm thinking maybe it's because he's a sociopath. I agree that, to some extent, we live in such a society as she describes, and that this is a bad thing. But is that really all you think is going on in this case?

[A short pause while Todd goes off and reads the comments at Crooked Timber.]

Damnit. It looks like my points have already been made.

Once:

As to “how society perpetuates rape,” I’m equally at a loss: I don’t think stranger rapes are any less disfavored in society than bank robbery, and yet people still commit bank robbery. I don’t know how I would comment on the proposition that “society perpetuates bank robbery.” This is not to say that you couldn’t have a more particularized discussion about aspects of misogynistic violence and its social background—Catharine MacKinnon, for one, has a lot to say about that—but it seems unlikely that a particular case of stranger-rape/murder would provide an useful or interesting angle on that subject.

And again:

From the Pandagon post: [Quotes the same sentences I did]

This is bullshit with a captial ‘B’. The guy who killed Moore wasn’t only a rapist and murderer—he had a long criminal record. Did he commit his earlier robberies because ‘he lives in a society that endorses treating passersby like ATM machines’? No—he committed all of his crimes because he just didn’t give a damn what society endorsed or condemned.

Personally, I'll settle for a lowercase 'b'.

Posted by todd at 9:17 AM | Comments (3)

July 13, 2006

All in the Timing

And then, less than 24 hours after my flight, Beirut International Airport is bombed. I wish there were actually something funny to say about this.

Posted by tony at 3:37 AM | Comments (3)

June 29, 2006

England: Throwing Down the Gauntlet

Does any other nation dare to drink like the British?

Posted by todd at 3:58 PM | Comments (0)

March 20, 2006

Dude! You guys totally cheated!

Amusing post by Ed Felten at Freedom to Tinker. Apparently, some Princeton kids got in trouble, and were displeased.

The controversy started with a story in the Daily Princetonian revealing that Public Safety had used Facebook in two investigations. In one case, a student’s friend posted a photo of the student that was taken during a party in the student’s room. The photo reportedly showed the student hosting a dorm-room party where alcohol was served, which is a violation of campus rules. In another case, there was a group of students who liked to climb up the sides of buildings on campus. They had set up a building-climbers’ group on Facebook, and Public Safety reportedly used the group to identify the group’s members, so as to have Serious Discussions with them.

Some students reacted with outrage, seeing this as an invasion of privacy and an unfair tactic by Public Safety.

Honestly, who are these kids? An unfair tactic? That completely blows my mind.

Posted by todd at 11:12 PM | Comments (2)

March 7, 2006

South Dakota

I have nothing useful to say. Fortunately, there are smarter people than me on the internets.

Posted by todd at 9:47 AM | Comments (2)

October 6, 2005

So, the pot looks over at the kettle, and says ...

Some of my immediate reactions during the President's speech today:

The murderous ideology of the Islamic radicals is the great challenge of our new century. Yet in many ways, this fight resembles the struggle against communism in the last century.

Sweet! That means I can recycle the mindless fear and hatred of the sixties and seventies! Now I don't even have to come up with a new mode of generalized disgust!

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy teaches that innocent individuals can be sacrificed to serve a political vision. And this explains their cold-blooded contempt for human life.

Yeah, that's pretty bad.

In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo Van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, I do not feel your pain because I believe you are an infidel.

I'm sorry, but at least he gave a reason.

Like the ideology of communism, our new enemy pursues totalitarian aims. Its leaders pretend to be in an aggrieved party, representing the powerless against imperial enemies.

In truth, they have endless ambitions of imperial domination and they wish to make everyone powerless except themselves.

I get it. Jon Stewart wrote this speech. It's all a big joke. Right? Please?

[Transcript via NYTimes.com]

Posted by todd at 4:00 PM | Comments (2)