"The happiest place on earth"

Get email updates of new posts:        (Delivered by FeedBurner)

Saturday, September 30, 2023

Faisal Al Mutar on Media Bubbles, the Two Faces of Al Jazeera, and Nuance

Faisal Al Mutar on Media Bubbles, the Two Faces of Al Jazeera, and Nuance

"What do you call a white Republican who is against same-sex marriage? If you call them a bigot, then you’re calling 90% of Muslims bigots. While you accuse others of racism, you are actually being racist here because you’re applying different standards to different people based on their race because Islam is viewed as a “brown man’s religion”. You are not being liberal by supporting illiberal ideas coming from people from different countries, religions, and cultures.

I would ask somebody who reads Salon, if you claim to be against homophobia, like I am and many people are, you should stand against it whether it comes from the Evangelicals, the black church, or the Muslim in Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Iran. Otherwise you are the racist. If you think it’s acceptable for “other” people do it just because they’re a different race other than a “white male” then you’re not really a liberal — you don’t subscribe to the concept of equal rights and anti-racism. You’re propagating racism and you’re part of the problem. This might sound aggressive but I cannot find a polite way to call people delusional.

It should be easy for a supporter of same-sex marriage, women’s rights, and the first amendment to just apply those principles to everybody. I’m asking them to believe that gay Muslims or gays living in Muslim dominated countries  are also human — and those who kill and persecute them are bigots and part of the problem.

All I want is for them to acknowledge that if they think a Republican who does not like gays is a homophobe, then a person in the Muslim Brotherhood who does not like gays is also a homophobe...

I think many people who study liberal arts and subjects like sociology are exposed to only one type of history — which is white history and white colonialism. They’re inculcated with the idea that the Holocaust, genocide against Native Americans, and Japanese internment camps represent white people. When people are only exposed to these ideas, of one oppressor — meaning white people — what they’ll do when they hear a person criticize a foreign culture is to get immediately defensive on behalf of that culture. And they’ll do it to protect a former victim of imperialism, racism, etc.

But the people who are most hurt by this — by preventing this discussion — are the minorities within the minorities. So when people don’t talk about Islamic homophobia, the people who are hurt by this are the gays living in Muslim families in Qatar, Iran, or America...

Liberals try to stand with the underdogs. But the most important underdogs here are the minorities within the minorities...

I think another problem is that people see Muslims as a minority, but they’re not a minority globally. They’re the second biggest religion in the world. The true minorities are those living within them who do not subscribe to conservative Muslim values...

If you subscribe to the concept that Arabs as an ethnicity are a bunch of savages, and that they’re just the bad guys, you’re leaving no room for reform. You’re thinking there’s something wrong with them internally — something genetically wrong and they’re incapable of being civilized. That is racist, first of all, secondly, it’s unscientific.

I’m all for acknowledging the problem of Islamic extremism and how we should fight it. But that means you have to look for the people with good values within these communities, the individuals who subscribe to ideas of universal human rights, liberal values, and you have to stand with them...

One of the things many people don’t know about Al Jazeera is that is mostly owned by the royal family of Qatar which is financed by oil and gas. It’s a company that doesn’t rely much on advertising because they have other sources of revenue.

The version I grew up with of Al Jazeera is a channel that is literally the spokesperson for the Muslim Brotherhood and a light version of Al Qaeda. You can see them entertaining the idea of supporting groups like Jabhat Al Nusra in Syria — which is literally Al Qaeda’s affiliate. Let’s not talk about what they think about homosexuality and Jews and their anti-semitism, because it’s bad.

I think I saw an article on there saying something like “The theory of evolution is a myth.” So, if you’re a liberal and whatever you think of Fox News, Fox News would look like a progressive or liberal channel if you compared it to Al Jazeera Arabic. Al Jazeera Arabic is a hub for xenophobia, hardcore conservatism, social conservatism, anti-women’s rights, anti-gay rights.

But then you have Al Jazeera English speaking about Black Lives Matter, pandas, climate change, because what they’re trying to do is make Islam look as good as possible. They want to make Muslims appear victimized. And they want to make the West look as bad as possible. They show the worst that exists in the West. Flint, Michigan — they were reporting on that constantly. Standing Rock as well, you get the idea.

But you never see them criticizing Islam, Islamists, or the Muslim Brotherhood. They only show you the side of Aleppo that is controlled by Islamist and Jihadist groups. They never criticize Qatar but they criticize Saudi Arabia because they’re rivals.

Anybody that has an understanding of Qatar foreign policy would see that Al Jazeera is just a PR company for them. You can hardly see them ever criticizing slavery in Qatar of Indians, Pakistanis, Bengalis and other human rights abuses happening there...

They show the best things of Islam and the worst things of the West because they want the West to not interfere in the Muslim world. And that means the Muslim Brotherhood wins. They show the atrocities in Egypt by Sisi and then they show that there’s a solution — it’s the Muslim Brotherhood. The “democratically-elected” Muslim Brotherhood. This way they’re able to pander to liberals and progressives.

The more they show the terrible things in America, the less likely people are to be critical of Islam. They want to tell people in the West: “Oh, you have the same thing over there. You want to talk about racism? Oh, black people are being shot without regard in the streets.”...

They want to make the West so critical of itself, to an extent, that they’ll not want to say anything else to any other culture and more importantly: they’ll forget about challenging Islamism.

I don’t think this is a conspiracy. I’ve maybe watched 70 or more videos of AJ+ and compared them with Al Jazeera Arabic and I can really see their agenda. It fits. If I’m an Islamist what do I want to do? For Arabs, I tell them this is what Islamism is and what Shariah law truly is.

But how can I make progressives in the West support me? I know, I’ll make them so critical of their country that they don’t intervene in Muslim countries so that Islamists can take over. This way I’ll win. So it seems like a very orchestrated PR campaign...

The biggest backlash people like me face is actually from Islamists. They think my ideas are antithetical to Islam and an enemy according to their ideology.

The far-Left, or the regressive-Left as Maajid Nawaz refers to them, believe in the narrative that to criticize Islam and even Islamism is a form of imposing your own values on them. Regressives consider values like liberalism to be Western values so they think that you are imposing the white Western values on the brown Muslim — and to them that’s terrible. They think that Islam is a brown man’s religion. Even though there are many adherents to Islam who are white, black, Bosnian, Sudanese, Chinese. So any criticism of it from a white person is a form of racism. Any criticism coming from a brown person who was adhering to that religion is the equivalent of a black person supporting white slave-owners. That’s where terms like “Uncle-Tom” and “House Muslim” come from. They think  you are trying to assist the white imperialist “agenda” against the brown victims.

On the far-Right there are strong elements of xenophobia. There are many people who adhere to the concept of white superiority — which is a bad idea — and they subscribe to this idea that there is a clash of civilizations. That there is a war between the East and the West. That’s wrong. There are many people from the East who are liberals and who adhere to universal liberal values. Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia, Ali Rizvi from Pakistan, I’m from Iraq. So there’s many people in the East who support universal human rights — sometimes more than the people in the West!"


Liberals don't love "minorities" - they just hate "majorities".

Too bad he conflates a clash of civilisations with a clash of everyone in one civilisation with everyone in another - the presence of some liberal Muslims doesn't mean most Muslims aren't conservative

Friday, September 29, 2023

The Identity-Politics Death Grip | Democrats' Blue-Collar Constituency

The Identity-Politics Death Grip | Democrats' Blue-Collar Constituency

"Normal politics—liberal politics, classically understood—involves speech, argument, and persuasion, followed by voting on ideas or proposals that can be overturned in the next election cycle. Normal politics presumes that we can rise far enough above our small-group attributes—our race, class, gender, ethnicity, religion—and that we can arrive at a political arrangement that works well enough for us to live together as part of a larger polity until the next election, when we commence the process again. But for the Democrats, absolute certainty has prevailed over normal politics—and the certainty, at bottom, rests on a single idea: identity politics.

Identity politics rejects the model of traditional give-and-take politics, presupposing instead that the most important thing about us is that we are white, black, male, female, straight, gay, and so on. Within the identity-politics world, we do not need to give reasons—identity is its own reason and justification. Because identity politics supposes that we are our identities, politics does not consist in the speech, argument, and persuasion of normal politics but instead, in the calculation of resource redistribution based on identity—what in Democratic parlance is called “social justice.” The irony of identity politics is that it does not see itself as political; it supposes that we live in a post-political age, that social justice can be managed by the state, and that those who oppose identity politics are the ones “being political.” What speech does attend this post-political age consists in shaming those who do not accept the idea of identity politics—as on our college campuses. In the 1960s, college students across the country fought so that repressed ideas would receive a fair hearing. These days, college students fight to repress all ideas except one: identity politics...

When identity politics provides the lens through which one sees the world, changing the perspective is regarded as self-blinding. The suggestion that this outlook might be harming the Democratic Party is thus denounced as racist, as insensitive to gender issues, and as inattentive to the purported needs of various identity groups. Identity politics can’t self-correct; it can only double-down. Here is the strangeness of our current moment. Untreated, diseases don’t heal; they metastasize.

One key problem with identity politics is that it is blind to the nature of class in America. Since the beginning, the United States has had the poor, the rich, and everyone between. But those occupying each stratum in America are not classes in the way other countries have understood class, that is, in terms of patronage and reciprocal obligations (noblesse oblige), however poorly honored or disregarded, which have been authorized by law and by mores. In his great unfinished work, The Old Regime and the French Revolution (1851), Alexis de Tocqueville noted that one cause of the hatred of the hereditary aristocracy at the outset of the French Revolution was that the state had for some time stripped French society of the reciprocal obligations that characterized aristocratic patronage. When those obligations disappeared, the hereditary aristocracy had social standing but no relevance. It was against this irrelevant privilege that a revolution in the name of the Universal Rights of Man erupted. Money largely supplanted the older view of class, as Tocqueville (and then Marx) noted. Nowadays, money is increasingly becoming the single measure of standing in society nearly everywhere, though the older understanding of wealth and its obligations endures in some measure—but not in America, where class based on patronage is essentially unknown. We don’t have “class” in America; we have stratifications based on money. It is in this sense that Americans use the term “class.”

When people are stratified by money and not patronage, something new emerges: middle-class anxiety. In a patronage system, you have some assurance that you will not fall too far. You may have a host of fears, but you will not have class anxiety. When patronage disappears, though, this assurance disappears with it. In the early 1830s, Tocqueville had already foreseen the emergence of this new middle-class anxiety and described it in Democracy in America. Because nearly everyone in America would taste enough of the goods of life to know what it meant to enjoy them, but almost no one would be secure enough not to fear losing them, anxiety would be the great disease of the democratic age. This prescient observation also explains why Tocqueville thought that there would be far more mental disorder in America than in Europe.

A political party seeking power in an America haunted by middle-class anxiety must be attentive to it. The party must, in fact, be devoted to ameliorating it. The Democratic Party has not provided this service for some time. Instead, Democrats have favored everyone but the middle class, granting privileges, for example, to the wealthy in the form of crony capitalism, in which large companies often benefit from trade agreements and regulations at the expense of smaller competitors, which cannot absorb the compliance burdens; and by guaranteeing government assistance to the poor not only in the form of generous benefits but also through identity-politics rhetoric and what I’ll call “debt points.”

Identity pertains not simply to the kind of person that we are. People have been sorted (and self-sorted) into kinds throughout history. Identity is different. First, it carries a determination about guilt or innocence that nothing can appreciably alter. Its guilt is guilt without atonement; its innocence is innocence without fault. No redemption is possible, but only a schema of never-ending debts and payments. Second, this schema is made possible because identity politics is, tacitly or expressly, a relationship—something quite different from sorting (and self-sorting) by kinds. In the identity-politics world, the further your distance from the epicenter of guilt, the more debt points you receive. What is the epicenter of guilt? Being a white male heterosexual. (Throw in “Christian,” and the already-unpayable debt mounts still higher.) The debt points are not real currency, but they offer something that mere money cannot: a sense of moral superiority. “Join us,” says the Democratic Party, “and though your actual wounds cannot be healed, or even eased, by our policies and programs, they can be covered with the cloak of righteousness.” This is the stuff of religion, not normal politics.

Thus, the strange drama of the 2016 presidential campaign: a progressive white woman candidate who promises to double-down on identity politics and who calls those who would chart another course “deplorables.” The righteous white woman gives; nonwhite people and other injured groups, made pure by entering the revival tent of identity politics, receive. Anyone not in on this debt-point dispensation and reception is the wrong kind of white person—Donald Trump and those who voted for him, for instance. They are to be regarded not as mere political opponents but as defendants awaiting the judgment of a religious tribunal...

As for the poor, a half-century of federal payouts, introduced with Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society, has not eased their burden. These government programs proved so unsuccessful, in fact, that Democrats have needed to create new narratives to explain their failure: perhaps the real reason for poverty in America, they came to conclude, has nothing to do with money, which politics can presumably fix, but with fault and guilt. The poor are poor because of their identity, the Democrats now say: they are innocent, finding themselves in adverse circumstances because of the irredeemable fault and guilt of others. The Democrats will champion the faultless and guiltless, calling out white privilege, male privilege, heterosexual privilege. With the new economy of identity-politics debt points, conjoined with massive federal spending, the Democrats position themselves as the vanguard of the innocent.

This new symbiosis has been a catastrophe for both the Democrats and for the poor. What began in the 1960s as an earnest hope that the national government could do great things—like fulfill the age-old longing of men to go to the moon and heal the deep historical wound of slavery—has become malignant. Americans are not citizens, engaged in fulfilling a national covenant, in this corrupted worldview, but righteous or irredeemably damned bearers of identity. They can never be reconciled because of the chasm that separates those who deserve salvation and those who deserve perdition—namely, the deplorables.

If one key problem with identity politics is its blindness to the nature of class in America, the other problem is that it misrepresents the long arc of history, which may not bend in the direction of identity-politics justice after all...

We need to return to the twentieth-century locus for the idea that the arc of history bends toward justice—to Martin Luther King, Jr. and, before him, to Reinhold Niebuhr, the mid-century Protestant theologian whom King greatly admired. President Obama cited both men during his terms in office, with a view to declaring where the arc of history tends.

Yet between King and Niebuhr, on the one hand, and the Democratic Party of President Obama, on the other, the arc of history has been stripped of awe, of religious mystery, of its power to offer hope and to counsel patience. King and Niebuhr were Christian theologians who spoke to the never fully healed wound of human suffering in history. They grasped, as Democrats at their best do, that the problem of suffering operates on a different plane, in which the central issue is the broken human condition and its sorrowful reverberations in history. Suffering cannot be fully understood, in other words, without reference to human fault and guilt. That is the important insight of the Democratic Party—now gone horribly astray.

Identity politics shares with King the insight that fault and guilt must be addressed, but it rips them from their Christian theological context, and instead conceives them in worldly terms alone: as a relationship between the source of fault and guilt (white male heterosexuals) and those (women, gays, Hispanics, Muslims, and so on) whose innocence is measured by their distance from that source. In this framework, there is one original sinner: white male heterosexuals—either alive or haunting us from the grave in the form of the Dead White Men studied in old Western civilization courses. Everyone else gets to sigh with relief; whatever their guilt may be, at least they are not that...

Identity politics is only quasi-Christian. It begins from the observation that there is worldly fault and debt. That, every Christian sees. But identity politics stops there, content that we need go no further than call out fault and debt and use political power—worldly power—to settle the score. I doubt that this quasi-Christian viewpoint, which refuses reconciliation, is a stable one. .. It is no small irony that today’s political Left, which owes more to Nietzsche than to Marx, has so badly understood him: the fault-and-debt points that identity politics tallies are precisely what Nietzsche wanted post-Christian man to repudiate. Our post-Christian Left, however, wants it both ways: it wishes to destroy Christianity by using the battering ram of (white male heterosexual) fault and debt.

We should shudder to think what the world will look like if our post-Christian Left is successful, for it will be a world in which those who have been the object of its derision fully agree to Nietzsche’s terms, throw off Christian guilt altogether, and chant “blood and soil,” as white-nationalist demonstrators did recently in Charlottesville. Christianity has battled pagan movements, of the sort that Nazism is, since before the Roman Empire fell. When it loses, fault and guilt are replaced by pagan vitalism, the cruelty of which knows no bounds.

But return to the question: In what direction does the arc of history bend? For King, America is a covenantal community, whose mission can be fulfilled only when blacks and whites work together to heal the wound of slavery. For King, that was the direction toward which the long arc of history bent. In the identity-politics world, however, the wound of slavery is not simply a malignancy to be healed. It is a template to be used to identify and catalog an infinitely proliferating array of wounds and grievances, tallied—indeed, fomented—by the Democratic Party, with a view to gathering power and votes. There is no watchful yet merciful God, who calls us to repent and to forgive; there is only ever-expanding grievance, over which righteous, largely white, progressives preside. Identity politics depends on the wound of slavery to provide its initial coherence—but it does not stop there. Instead, it ceaselessly seeks to expand its mandate.

That is why the community most harmed by identity politics is the African-American community. Because identity politics combines all nonwhite, heterosexual males, the African-American wound is seen as just one wound among many, different in degree but not in kind from any other wound that a nonwhite heterosexual male might claim. Yet that is not true. The African-American wound is different in kind, not in degree... In the identity-politics world, my father’s immigrant family would have been granted the fault-and-guilt debt points to which his immigrant identity entitled him. To which every immigrant family with a long history in America should say, “Nonsense.” And to other immigrants today, who, by Democratic Party logic, are granted fault and guilt debt points, those same now-assimilated immigrants should say: “Stand in line; it will take you and your family several generations to adjust. It won’t be easy, but it’s an amazing country if you work hard for your family, for yourself, your community, and your nation.” Every immigrant group that has entered America for the last 300 years can offer some variant of that lesson.

The African-American wound, by contrast, still festers. If fault and debt were only a worldly matter, as identity politics stipulates, then the never-ending fault and debt of white America would require that it eternally repay the African-American community with money transfers orchestrated by Washington—overseen by the Democratic Party, needless to say. But trillions of dollars have been spent, while the African-American wound remains unhealed. Does this not prove that fault and debt cannot be resolved on the worldly field where politics plays out? If the wound reaches beyond the world to divine things, to repentance and forgiveness, then it is not through politics but rather through our houses of worship that it will be healed. Political action can supplement the work of these societal institutions, but it cannot be a substitute for them, as it increasingly has been over the past half-century.

However unlikely, one can imagine a Democratic Party addressing the middle-class anxiety symptomatic of U.S. democracy while also working to heal the particular wound of slavery. King’s vision of spiritual reconciliation ultimately served both ends because he saw a future for blacks in which they enjoyed the fruits of American prosperity, which invariably would put them in the anxiety-ridden middle class. It may be that the only way that the Democratic Party can rise, Lazarus-like, from its deathbed is if African-Americans call out identity politics as the disaster that it has been—for them and for the country. If the party cannot find a cure for its confusion, it will expire in the paroxysm that identity politics produces."

Links - 29th September 2023

OCBC’s new anti-scam measure upsets some users; bank clarifies only apps with risky permission settings flagged - "OCBC said that only Android apps with risky permission settings that could put a user’s mobile phone under the threat of malware will be flagged by the bank’s new security feature.  It said not all apps from unofficial platforms will be flagged by its latest security update.  Mr Beaver Chua, head of anti-fraud at OCBC group financial crime compliance, made the clarification on Tuesday (Aug 8), two days after the bank announced its new security feature that prevents users from logging onto their Internet banking and OCBC Digital app on their mobile phones if it detects apps downloaded from unofficial portals."

Dad batters schoolgirl with metal bar for wearing make-up then walks free from court - "A thug, dad to seven kids, beat his 15-year-old daughter with a metal bar, and even bit her, for wearing make-up.  Hussein Alinzi was spared jail even though he beat his daughter outside her all-girls school during an argument. The 59-year-old hit her with a metal bar on June 22 last year, on the morning of her English GCSE at Whalley Range High School, in Manchester, when he dropped her off early at school to find the gates locked still. She had been advised by teachers to arrive early for her English exam.  During the assault Alinzi accused his daughter of secretly planning to meet a boy ahead of the exam and berated her for wearing makeup. She briefly lost consciousness but came around and subsequently tried to sit the test. However she complained of feeling dizzy and nauseous and was taken out of the exam hall before being admitted to A&E.   The youngster was found to have suffered 14 different sites of injury including facial bruising and was also treated for a bite mark to her left temple. She later filed a report to her teachers, and then police telling how her father had previously bullied and abused her over a two year period. This included threats such as: "I will run you over," and "I will kill you," and "I hope you die." She also said he had prevented her from going to the park and she was only allowed to have female family friends. It emerged she had only been wearing makeup to school on the advice of her mother to cover up bruises he had inflicted on her in earlier beatings... he got off with an eight month prison sentence suspended for 18 months when his daughter said she still loved him."
When you have a dual track justice system

Court dismisses CBC copyright infringement lawsuit against Conservative Party - "A lawsuit launched by the CBC against the Conservative Party of Canada in the final days of the 2019 federal election accusing the party of copyright infringement for using the broadcaster's footage in an online ad and tweets has been dismissed by a federal court.  In his written decision released Thursday, Federal Court Justice Michael Phelan found that the use of such material fell under "fair dealing" and there was "no objective evidence of the likelihood of any reputational damage" to the CBC... At issue was a video titled "Look at What We've Done," published around Oct. 4 on a Conservative Party website (notasadvertised.ca), a Facebook page and a YouTube page.  The video included footage from CBC's The National and Power & Politics. It also included footage from CTV News, Citytv and Global News.  The Conservative Party also published four tweets from the 2019 federal election leaders' debate, which was broadcast on 15 different online platforms and by 10 different TV networks, including the CBC."
CBC media bias is a myth.

Revolt over paying for UK TV licence - "A record 2.84 million people now insist they are no longer obliged to pay £159 for the annual charge because they don’t watch BBC channels or any kind of live TV.  This figure is an increase of more than 360,000 in the previous twelve months."

Men Set Their Own Cites High: Gender and Self-citation across Fields and over Time - "How common is self-citation in scholarly publication, and does the practice vary by gender? Using novel methods and a data set of 1.5 million research papers in the scholarly database JSTOR published between 1779 and 2011, the authors find that nearly 10 percent of references are self-citations by a paper’s authors. The findings also show that between 1779 and 2011, men cited their own papers 56 percent more than did women. In the last two decades of data, men self-cited 70 percent more than women. Women are also more than 10 percentage points more likely than men to not cite their own previous work at all. While these patterns could result from differences in the number of papers that men and women authors have published rather than gender-specific patterns of self-citation behavior, this gender gap in self-citation rates has remained stable over the last 50 years, despite increased representation of women in academia. The authors break down self-citation patterns by academic field and number of authors and comment on potential mechanisms behind these observations. These findings have important implications for scholarly visibility and cumulative advantage in academic careers."
I saw someone claiming that an organisation citing its own paper means the research is not credible

Meme - *Guy in front of Magnum ad so it looks like a woman is sucking his dick*

Meme - Fatima @fatimaxsr: "My poor parents bought me a pride balloon for my graduation because they thought it meant they were proud of me"

Meme - "It's just a carpet woven from pure evil"

Meme - "Religious People: Death is not the end.

Meme - ianstagram: "My freshmen year roommate was a complete fucking disaster but he would throw parties and everyone would pass out in our living room and every morning I left for class at I would just get little choruses of "have fun at class, good luck" from hungover stoners and let me tell you, as someone who thrives off attention and positive reinforcement, this setup really worked for me"

Whig and Tory | Definition, Difference, History, & Facts | Britannica - "Originally “Whig” and “Tory” were terms of abuse introduced in 1679 during the heated struggle over the bill to exclude James, duke of York (afterward James II), from the succession. Whig—whatever its origin in Scottish Gaelic—was a term applied to horse thieves and, later, to Scottish Presbyterians; it connoted nonconformity and rebellion and was applied to those who claimed the power of excluding the heir from the throne. Tory was an Irish term suggesting a papist outlaw and was applied to those who supported the hereditary right of James despite his Roman Catholic faith."

Boy who wounded teacher Abigail Zwerner boasted: 'I shot that bitch dead'
Six-year-old’s shocking boast after shooting his teacher revealed - "Newly unsealed court documents reveal that the first-grader who shot his teacher earlier this year later bragged to school officials, claiming “I shot that b**** dead.”  Abigail “Abby” Zwerner was left with severe injuries to her torso and her hand after being shot on 6 January at Richneck Elementary School in Newport News, Virginia.  The six-year-old boy who pulled the trigger of his mother’s gun made the shocking comments... Ms Zwerner allegedly told investigators there had been multiple “disciplinary incidents” involving the boy before the shooting. The incidents involved physical violence and threats of violence. A retired Newport News elementary school teacher who had been assigned to Richneck told investigators that she was choked in September 2021 by the same student."
Damn racism! Clearly she needed a gun to protect herself

Facebook, Social Media and Love: Facebook official - FML - "Today, after dating my girlfriend for about a month, she changed her Facebook status to taken. When I saw the update, I immediately clicked "Like." Then I looked up and saw I wasn't the person she had put herself in a relationship with. FML"

Meme - "Kangaroos are just deer that have been to prison"

Meme - "They meant your address bro

Meme - "Millionaire: Makes $20m in 2020
Millionaire: Hires "artist" to make "art" for $25k
Artist: Puts one streak on canvas
Millionaire: Thanks artist and has art appraised by an appraiser in his same circle of friends
Appraiser: Values artwork at $20m
Millionaire: Donates $20m artwork to museum to get $20m tax write off
Millionaire: Pays no taxes in 2020
Me at museum: This is stupid, it's just a line on a canvas
Hipster next to me: No, you just don't understand it because you're uncultured."

Meme - "The reason these toys are critical as kids... *fitting blocks into holes*
*trying to fit a large mattress into a small car*"

Cardi B throws microphone into crowd at gig after being hit by drink - "The 30-year-old reacted by throwing her microphone at the concertgoer from the stage.  Although the rapper no longer had a microphone, her voice was still heard on the pre-recorded backing track playing through the speakers... Although Cardi B's microphone was live, the fact that her voice was still heard on the backing track after she threw the mic prompted accusations of lip synching, as many jokingly compared her with the 1980s group Milli Vanilli."
"A black woman not needing a mic to be heard over a crowd of people is NOT evidence of lip syncing"

Meme - "Please don't touch yourself... ask your server for help... Thank you!!"

Sean Davis on Twitter - "The state of Georgia criminally indicted the former president of the United States for tweeting that people should turn on the television.  They criminally indicted the White House chief of staff for asking for a phone number.  And they criminally indicted the former GOP state chairman for reserving a room.  Understand what time it is and what they’re willing to do to you to keep their grip on power."

How apocalyptic is now? - "The Soviet state was believed — by the new government and its progressivist camp-followers in the West, if not by the majority of Russians — to be building a society that would be better than any that had existed before. Curiously, the collapse of the Soviet state was greeted in the West with an outbreak of apocalyptic optimism much like that which accompanied its foundation... In line with this thinking, a number of Right-wing foundations cancelled their international relations programmes on the ground that foreign and defence policy would no longer be needed.   That a reversion to history as usual should be unthinkable testifies to the mind-numbing power of secular faith. While progressive ideologies are often divided into reformist and revolutionary varieties, the difference is not fundamental. Both rest on the faith that history is an accretive process in which meaning and value are conserved and increased.  Actually history is repeatedly punctuated by discontinuities in which what was gained is irrecoverably lost."
Covid didn't change that much

"I'm a Barbie girl" again, but in the style of 6 classical composers 🎹 🎤 - Josep Castanyer Alonso - YouTube - " 00:06 In the style of Mozart
00:49 In the style of Beethoven
01:33 In the style of Schumann
02:35 In the style of Schubert
03:43 In the style of Chopin
05:02 In the style of Ravel"

Meme - "For $250.00 an hour I Will pose as a couples therapist & convince your loved one they are wrong about everything"

Meme - "sigh. I'm so starved for real human interaction... I know!
One small pepperoni pizza, please. Delivery!"
*drone drops off pizza*

Meme - "A Life Time Gamer
Kid: *playing computer game to get #1. Father cheers him on and mother thinks he's smart"
Teen: *playing computer game to level up. Father is puzzled and mother says he should concentrate on his studies*
Adult: *playing computer game to get #1 rank. Father is dead and old mother brings him food and drink and tells him to get a job*
Older adult: *playing computer game to get #1 Father is dead, with portrait hanging crookedly, even older mother is slumped over in a wheelchair and place is dirty*
I'm a Winner , I'm the Best."

Meme - "The sunset was beautiful tonight"
*red, white and blue*
"Is this what American sky's look like?"

Meme - "Glory Hole Attendant
Open Lot - Las Vegas, NV 89103
Cash pay - Lots of tips - Free meals"

Meme - "States with the most talking during movies
"It's true, we southerners have a hard time shutting up. I'll own it"
"That's not a map of southerners..."
This is USA 2000 black density.png

The REAL Little Mermaid was their surprise wedding singer. - YouTube - "Jodi Benson, the voice of The Little Mermaid appeared at her first non-family wedding to sing "Part of Your World.""
She did it for free too

Meme - Breeke Lo: "Last time Ah Boy's teacher always say.. "You all very lucky born in Singapore, children in China or India can't even afford a good education, so you all better study hard ok?" So Ah Boy study very hard. Today, Ah Boy's manager is from China and his CEO is from India."

Singapore MP Tin Pei Ling leaves Grab after seven months for 'external-facing' fintech role

Girl behind ‘Girl Explaining’ meme says she has a new boyfriend now - "The girl in the image is Denise “Denu” Sanchez, who told Know Your Meme that the photo is of her and her then-boyfriend at a club in Argentina. They have since broken up... But she wasn't actually explaining something to him. In fact, she told Know Your Meme, she was just trying to sing a cumbia song.  The meme is a distant cousin of the “Bro Explaining” meme, which refers to a photo of a man in a Houston Astros shirt speaking to a blonde woman in a white tank, according to Know Your Meme... she said some have treated her like she's a “toxic girlfriend.”  “It’s funny to see how people draw conclusions from a photo and think they know a lot about how you are!” she said.  She said she hadn’t realized the image had resurfaced until recently.  "Friends laugh a lot whenever I mention it," she said, "and they were surprised when I started to get famous.""

Slavery Old and New | Desiring God - "Many Christians, keenly aware of the evils of early modern slavery, have suggested that the slavery mentioned in the New Testament was far more humane than its American counterpart. Yet the historical data suggests that Greco-Roman slavery could be just as oppressive and abusive as the later system — and in some ways even more so."
Some Christians were insisting to me that the slaves mentioned in the New Testament were really servants, and not slaves, and they kept going on about mistranslation. Apparently almost all translators are wrong, and the historical context of the Roman world is irrelevant, because feelings

Why getting permission for air conditioners is so hard in Switzerland - "Geneva’s rules are among the strictest in Switzerland  When applying for a permit to install a unit, you have to prove that you need temperature control in your house — for instance by submitting a medical certificate stating that your health condition requires it. Being comfortable in your own home is not a valid reason, as far as Geneva officials are concerned... Zurich is another canton with strict AC-related rules  In order to save energy, the installation of conventional air conditioning systems is generally banned.  Local ordinance requires all applicants for authorisation to prove that the air conditioner is particularly energy-efficient. Because this was not the case, the city of Zurich refused to grant permission to an elderly care facility to temporarily run their older AC model during a heatwave in 2018.  Rules in some other cantons are a bit laxer, requiring, as is the case in Vaud, to cover 50 percent of AC’s electricity consumption with renewable energy sources."

Geneva’s strict rules boost sales of most polluting air conditioners - "Other cantons require air conditioners to be powered by solar panels. This increases the upfront cost for anyone without solar panels, putting them out of reach of many home owners.  Given the restrictions and administrative hurdles to install an inbuilt air conditioning solution, people are buying mobile units instead. Emrush Dermaku, a manager at an Interdiscount electronics store in the canton told RTS that sales of portable air conditioners were up 50% on last year.  The problem with mobile air conditioners is their high ecological footprint. Because the whole device is placed inside, it heats and cools the room at the same time. One way to let the heat out is to place the back of the unit near an open window. However, this can let out much of the cold air coming out the other side, requiring the device to be run on higher power for longer.   Florent Tempion, an air conditioning installer told RTS he receives up to 100 calls a day from people wanting to install air conditioning private homes. When people are told they can’t they don’t understand he said."

Americans Unseat Chinese as Top Foreign Homebuyers in Singapore - Bloomberg - "Americans replaced Chinese as the top foreign buyers of private apartments in Singapore, according to OrangeTee & Tie.  Mainland Chinese have been the largest foreign buyer group in the Asian hub since 2016, accelerated by an influx of wealth into the city-state during the pandemic. To keep a lid on prices, the government doubled stamp duties for foreign buyers to 60% — the highest among major markets — and also raised levies for buyers of second homes in late April.  Property buyers of certain nationalities including the US, however, are exempt from such tax hikes. They’re given the same stamp duty treatment as Singaporeans due to respective free trade agreements"

Why Is “Moral Grandstanding” Even Supposed to Be a Thing? - "grandstanding is about using “moral talk to dominate others”. So, virtue signaling is about fitting in, while moral grandstanding is about taking over... “hypocrisy” has been the defining sin of modernity. We explain away other sins, Judith Shklar argued, but “not hypocrisy, which alone is now inexcusable.” But why should that be? Especially, if it’s true, as the cases above suggest that, at least sometimes, it’s better to be a hypocrite than not? Consider what John Rawls calls the “fact of reasonable pluralism.”... Hypocrisy becomes the defining vice where pluralism is pervasive because authenticity becomes the only universal virtue.  But the truth is, you don’t get very far criticizing people for not living up to the standards they profess.  First of all, we are all hypocrites sometimes. And it’s a good thing too. I pontificate on the virtues of swimming for exercise and tell people I swim a mile a day – even during the times when I actually do not. I talk a lot about the injustice of economic inequality – including to students in my classes. But I have done almost nothing concrete to address the issue in real life. But I think it’s still better to profess these views, and have these aspirational standards and fail to meet them, than not to have any standards at all – or not talk about them unless you always live up them. Arguably, people who have higher standards are apt to always be the biggest hypocrites, since they leave themselves more room to fail. Anyway, as Kant said, “Every action is a new beginning.” One may always yet succeed. Secondly, the important question behind the question of people living up to the standards they profess is what the standards should be. If you profess to be a “effective altruist”, a socialist, a libertarian, or a Methodist, why should I care the most about, for example, how well you really followed the effective altruist strategy of maximizing your income potential so you can give more away? I care more about questions of economic justice and what to do about economic injustice and, yes, even what your view of economic justice is – much, much more than I care about whether you are living up to your own professed ideals in regard to economic justice."

Azerbaijan military assistance waiver delayed as review drags on - "The Biden administration appears to be slow-walking the renewal of a long-standing military assistance program to Azerbaijan amid growing warnings of ethnic cleansing in the breakaway region of Nagorno-Karabakh."

Chris Selley: Democracy dies behind Ottawa's veil of secrecy - "The past 20 years in the media business has been characterized by all manner of wrenching upheaval and existential dread, but one thing has remained constant: The federal government’s endless communications bureaucracy stands relentlessly athwart most any attempt by journalists to extract information from it. No matter how banal the inquiry, the access-to-information (ATI) machine is capable of astonishing feats of redaction... Parliamentarians themselves are facing the same problem... I counted 32 people contributing to or copied on various interminable email chains discussing how the ministry should respond other than with facts. Reporters have seen these chains many times before, in which a platoon of well-paid and presumably intelligent human beings spends days on end failing to deliver boilerplate nonsense, never mind on deadline. (The response to an ATI request about how the government handled your previous ATI request is often far more interesting and informative than the response to your original request.) There’s no excuse for that. But as swollen as our heads might sometimes be, journalists aren’t MPs. It’s still striking to see the bureaucracy and a minister’s office collaborating so earnestly to thwart an elected official’s perfectly banal inquiries...  Article content  Global Affairs funds various Canadian cultural activities overseas — art exhibits, music recitals, etc. — through what it calls the Mission Cultural Fund, which the Liberals seem to fancy as an arm of our reputed “soft-power” influence worldewide.  The Canadian Taxpayers Federation discovered that such funding had gone toward a show titled “All the Sex I’ve Ever Had,” in which (per Postmedia’s report) “a select group of seniors recounted their sexual experiences, including their ‘first time, best time, worst time and last time’.” Other funding recipients have included Canadian artist and musician Peaches, for a sex-toy-themed multimedia exhibit in Hamburg titled, “Whose Jizz Is This?”  Rempel-Garner again had some very specific, very basic questions for the Global Affairs Department. For example, “what are the details of all spending from this fund, broken down by month … for each initiative funded?”  The response: “The department concluded that producing and validating a comprehensive response to this question would require a collection of information that is not possible in the time allotted.” There’s no spreadsheet of this program’s expenditures? No one scrawled them on a notepad? The ministry really can’t add up the figures … given a month and a half? True or not, something is seriously amiss."
Government funding only provides an imprimatur when liberals disapprove of the project, like modern fairy tales

At NYU, Students Were Failing Organic Chemistry. Whose Fault Was It? - The New York Times - "In the field of organic chemistry, Maitland Jones Jr. has a storied reputation. He taught the subject for decades, first at Princeton and then at New York University, and wrote an influential textbook. He received awards for his teaching, as well as recognition as one of N.Y.U.’s coolest professors.  But last spring, as the campus emerged from pandemic restrictions, 82 of his 350 students signed a petition against him.  Students said the high-stakes course — notorious for ending many a dream of medical school — was too hard, blaming Dr. Jones for their poor test scores.  The professor defended his standards. But just before the start of the fall semester, university deans terminated Dr. Jones’s contract."
When doctors become incompetent, the excuses will be plentiful

Rapists above 50 exempted from caning: Any change to law needs ‘serious debate’, chemical castration an option, say lawyers - "Changing a law that exempts male rapists above the age of 50 from being caned may not adequately deter these culprits from targeting children, some lawyers said.  One proposed that it may be better to explore having chemical castration as a sentencing option for rapists, while another voiced concerns about health safety measures should men above 50 be caned.   They were responding to TODAY regarding President Halimah Yacob’s suggestion on Monday about this matter, saying that her intentions may be good but there are considerations to be made... if the law is changed to allow for caning of male rapists above 50, it could possibly lead to a “slippery slope” situation of people seeking similar changes to Section 325’s provisions to further other punish offenders, such as those facing the death sentence.  Mr Peter Ong, managing director of Peter Ong Law Corporation, said that many offences are committed without the realisation of their consequences until it is too late. “Caning may be a (form of) retribution, but not a deterrent.”   He also said that raising penalties for various offences have not always led to the desired outcome of preventing the crimes from happening.  For instance, changes to the Penal Code were passed in Parliament on Sept 13 last year to increase the maximum penalties for three types of sexual offences, including outrage of modesty.  Yet, police crime data released in August this year showed that cases of molestation rose to 773 in the first half of this year, up from 739 cases in the same period last year."
When you don't understand the role of the President

Man-made chemicals blamed as many more girls than boys are born in Arctic - "Twice as many girls as boys are being born in some Arctic villages because of high levels of man-made chemicals in the blood of pregnant women, according to scientists from the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (Amap).  The scientists, who say the findings could explain the recent excess of girl babies across much of the northern hemisphere, are widening their investigation across the most acutely affected communities in Russia, Greenland and Canada to try to discover the size of the imbalance in Inuit communities of the far north."
From 2007

Bernard Montgomery - Wikipedia - "In 1925, in his first known courtship of a woman, Montgomery, then in his late thirties, proposed to a 17-year-old girl, Betty Anderson. His approach included drawing diagrams in the sand of how he would deploy his tanks and infantry in a future war, a contingency which seemed very remote at that time. She respected his ambition and single-mindedness but declined his proposal of marriage"

Women, Periods and Hormones

Lauren Southern on X

It's really awful how we discuss women's periods and hormonal cycles. It’s been disastrous for gender relations.

One thing I’ve noticed as my female friends and I have gotten older, is we’ve had to independently garner so much information about our own hormones that is not obvious general knowledge - and it’s been life changing in a positive way.

The increasing denial of gender differences has a part in this, but also cultural stereotypes have been destructive. (SOME) Men began making a joke out of menstruation, and weaponizing hormonal cycles against women “oh you're just a psycho cause you're on your period".

Leading women to get reasonably defensive - particularly when they say perfectly salient things that get cast aside by vulgar comments about their biological and hormonal experiences.

Unfortunately this went a step further into society fighting so hard against the “emotional woman on period” stereotypes that we began denying hormonal fluctuations all together.

I remember growing up as a young girl and being sold the idea that the entire notion of menstrual cycles affecting emotions was just a sexist stereotype. Leading to me never fully being aware of how my own hormones were impacting me.

This has been catastrophic for both men and women, and particularly their relationships.

As women, understanding how your cycle works, how your hormones fluctuate and how this may impact your reaction to certain events is critical to your success in life and relationships. It’s also critical to your health and knowing if something is off about your body.

Men, sympathizing with and realizing hormonal fluctuations are real and understanding them, are critical to having a healthy relationship with a woman. Your own hormonal cycles impact you as well.

It literally impacts every aspect of one's life.

If a man in your life is extremely ill, in pain etc. maybe that is not the best time to bring up a sensitive subject that needs to be addressed, or to put a ton of things on their plate to do.

This works similarly if a woman in your life is at a certain point in her cycle, sometimes experiencing pain, mass hormone fluctuations and changes. You need to be aware and acknowledge this strategically. And ABSOLUTELY not mock or minimize a serious biological function.

Tracking these cycles are integral to trying to get pregnant or avoid it.

Tracking cycles is critical when you make certain plans, considering whether they’re going to require large amounts of energy or will increase stress levels.

If hormone fluctuations are extreme, how you eat as a family or a couple may need to change and be adjusted to maximize both physical and mental health. (sugars, carbs etc. can spike inflammation and hormones)

Man or woman, physical health and gut health severely impacts your moods, ability to focus and have healthy well tempered relations.

I know so many women that will lose their periods entirely, or be struggling with symptoms of serious disease like endometriosis and never find out for ages because they don’t discuss these things with their partner - or their partner assumes they are exaggerating - and they wonder why everything is on the decline.

I sympathize with men, that it’s extremely difficult to understand an experience you have never had in your life. Which is why dismissing, mocking or ignoring it can seem easier, but once again will make everyone's life more challenging and everyone more ignorant.

It’s wild how few people are really in tune with their bodies, and the bodies of their loved ones. It’s particularly catastrophic when people make a mockery of or completely deny these realities.

I see men on here who think the bleeding part of a period is “ovulation” - or worse don’t see any point in trying to understand them at all because that’s “women’s business”.

Ladies, for your own sake start tracking your cycle! Really get into how your hormones are impacting your weight, skin, mood and general life flow.

Men, if you are in a relationship express a desire to understand - and definitely if married or in a very serious relationship, you should be just as aware and in tune with your ladies cycle as well. You should literally have the same tracker on your phone. Don’t shy away from this! Work together!

Solutions to modern gender chaos require acknowledgement of real biological phenomena on a serious level devoid of mockery, coming from a place of love.

Thursday, September 28, 2023

Links - 28th September 2023 (2 - Socialism)

Meme - "200 years ago 85% of the world lived in extreme poverty. Today that number is less than 9%."
Commie: "cApiTaLisM hAs fAiLed!"

Meme - Morgan Artyukhinaa @LavenderNRed: "Did it hurt? When you realized everything you'd been taught about the Soviet Union and communism was a lie and that their existence was an enormous objective good for mankind rather than its biggest failure?
What about when you realized that China is not just socialist, but the biggest force for good in the world today and represents the future of mankind?"
Morgan Artyukhina @LavenderNRed: "They/them I autistic trans socialist & activist I writer @SputnikInt | bylines in @monthly_review @mintpressnews @globaltimesnews | Opinions & tweets my own."
Conflict of interest is never an issue for the left, because they are Right

Meme - "Oh, my tools fell *Hammer and Sickle*"
"Our tools"

Meme - simi @simimoonlight: "I'm sorry but it makes no sense for us to not hibernate in the winter. Other mammals do. We'd likely be so much more efficient, and happy. But capitalism."
Eli @eliburketttt: "bruh, we don't hibernate because our physiology doesn't allow our metabolic processes to adapt within the timeframe of a single winter. Not because of capitalism"
William Gladstone was right @wildgunman: "Shows how much you know. Prior to the incorporation of the Dutch East India Company in 1602, all of Europe slept for 4 straight months a year in a cave. Look it up!"

Meme - "Tankies be like "it's only year 147 of late stage capitalism but it'll get there eventually:^)"
"Fuck off I don't believe in that made up nonsense"
"RICHARD WOLFF Is Coronavirus the end of Capitalism?"
"So true!!!"

Meme - "If capitalism is greed then communism is envy"

Meme - "Former Soviet citizen: Most of my mother's family starved to death, Stalin is a murderer.
Collectivist millennials: UM, ACTUALLY THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN SWEETIE"
Or they say his mother's family deserved it because they were counter-revolutionaries

Meme - "LAZY, ENTITLED, ANTI-WORK COMMIES: Tell me the truth... I'm... I'm ready to hear it

4 in 10 Canadians prefer socialism but not higher taxes to pay for it - "42 per cent of Canadians believe socialism is the ideal economic system. That’s slightly lower than in the United Kingdom (43 per cent) but higher than in both the United States (31 per cent) and Australia (40 per cent). Just one problem: few Canadians want to pay higher taxes to fund it. Younger Canadians’ support for “socialism” presumably is due in part to their lack of real-world experience with genuine socialism and the misery it imposed. The polling data bear that out. Support for socialism drops from 50 per cent among Canadians 18-24 years old to 38 per cent among Canadians over 55.  There’s also the question of what its 21st-century supporters actually mean by “socialism.” Unlike other polls on this subject, this one, which was conducted by Leger in the fall of 2022, included definitions of socialism. Only 25 per cent of Canadians polled define socialism as the government taking control of companies and industries, which is the classic definition (i.e., “owning the means of production”)... According to the poll, which offered all respondents four tax options to help finance socialism, the two most popular options by far were a new wealth tax on the top one per cent, which got 72 per cent support, and an increase in personal income taxes for the top 10 per cent, which got 59 per cent support. The logic seems straightforward: most respondents assume these two taxes would not affect them. The other two tax options were far less popular. An across-the-board increase in personal income taxes garnered only 31 per cent support, while only 16 per cent of respondents supported a GST increase. In its eight years in power, the Trudeau government has already increased the top personal income tax rate from 29 to 33 per cent and has mused repeatedly about introducing a new wealth tax and raising capital gains taxes. As things stand, the top 20 per cent of families already pay a disproportionate share of the total tax burden, earning 44.6 per cent of all income but paying 53.0 per cent of all taxes (federal, provincial and local). The problem for Ottawa and the advocates of socialism is that because these targeted tax hikes don’t raise enough revenue to cover the costs of new spending the money has to be borrowed, which raises government debt and slows economic growth. Since the current federal government came to power Canada’s total national debt has increased from $1.1 trillion to an estimated $1.9 trillion this year. Canada is on an unsustainable fiscal path as governments, particularly the federal government, expand existing programs while adding new ones without being honest with Canadians about the ultimate need for broad-based tax increases to pay for them. The Trudeau solution from day one has been to borrow, which simply defers the tax bill to the future.  And the bill is already starting to come due. Ottawa expects to spend $43.3 billion next year solely on interest on the national debt. That’s more than it spends on employment insurance, the Canada Child Benefit or the Canada Social Transfer, and almost as much as total health transfers to the provinces ($49.3 billion).   The financial pressures from new spending, coupled with increasing debt and interest costs, will eventually force a decision on governments and Canadians more broadly. If we want larger government, we’ll have to pay the price in the form of higher taxes. As Nobel laureate Milton Friedman often reminded us, there’s no such thing as a free lunch, not even for advocates of socialism."
Online, I saw people dismiss the poll due to loaded questions (with no proof, of course).

POVERTY EXISTS FOR MILLIONS OF SOVIETS, USSR ADMITS – Chicago Tribune - "Soviet authorities, who once denied that poverty existed in their country and pronounced it an evil of capitalism, now say that tens of millions of Soviet citizens-at least 20 percent of the population-live in poverty, compared with about 14 percent in the United States. Their condition has drawn a remarkable amount of attention in the Soviet press in the last year, with frequent letters from poor people bemoaning their misfortune and articles by economists and sociologists blaming the government for neglecting the problem... There is no state plan, however, for dealing with poverty, according to interviews with several Soviet officials. There is no government agency to which people in need can turn, and the word ''poverty'' is not even used in state documents... While some officials still insist poverty is the result of laziness, most say the country`s economic instability is a major contributor... the average Soviet person works 10 times longer than the average American worker to earn a pound of meat, 4.5 times longer to earn a quart of milk, and three times longer for a pound of potatoes"
From 1989. Poor tankies

Under the Frog: Why Tibor Fischer’s 1992 Booker-Nominated Novel May Have Found its Moment - "Tibor Fischer: Most people on the Left (apart from Arthur Scargill) had realized that the countries of the Warsaw Pact weren’t workers’ paradises by the 1970s, but there was a curious reluctance to fully face up to the truth. I worked on a documentary series about Eastern Europe for Channel 4 that was broadcast in 1988. We were attacked by the Independent for being too harsh on Ceaușescu. A year later his own compatriots put him up against a wall and shot him.  I spent half my life having to explain that Communist Hungary wasn’t some noble experiment. One of my teachers, who, of course, like most staff room sages, knew fuck-all, argued that “at least they don’t have the rat race,” unaware that if there’s less cheese, the rats have to race even harder. And it seems I’ll have to spend the second half of my life constantly denying that Hungary is some fascist backwater. János Kádár, a dictator who was installed by Soviet tanks and whose regime executed hundreds of Hungarians got a better press in the West than the current, democratically elected prime minister, Viktor Orbán. You can’t make it up.   The far-Left have largely given up on the Five-Year Plans and Central Control of the economy, but they have retreated into the universities and schools where you will still find boastful Marxists. It’s what Gramsci called the “war of position.” You mislead the youth. There is, in fact despite the prattle about diversity, very little diversity in British universities, intellectually. Žižek, an avowed Communist has a position at Birkbeck University. Why not? But I’d love to see Birkbeck offer a position to someone who advocates a challenging form of neo-fascism.   I suppose every generation has the sensation of living in strange times. The sifting process in job applications and university applications in the UK, with the emphasis on ethnicity and social background is an intriguing mixture of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. There is an alarming polarization of politics almost everywhere... Please show me a successful Communist country. There has never been one. Anywhere. And any progress or achievement has always come at high human cost. They could have electrified the Soviet Union without murdering millions of people. It is possible to do that. No one has got Communism right, because it’s not possible.
RA: Much is made of the fact in the book that Gyuri is Class X—from a formerly well-heeled family—and so is last in the queue for things like good jobs and university places. He’s told, “You’ll have to work twice as hard as everyone else to make amends for your background.” Are we moving towards this at all, do you think?
TF: I hope not, but there does seem to be a mania for social engineering again. In my lifetime, everything has been done to make education more “accessible,” which has happened. But it’s been done by lowering the standards. Really, really lowering the standards. I only know about the humanities but I can tell you, categorically, from what I’ve experienced, that there are students getting MAs now who wouldn’t have passed an English A-level in the 1970s.
RA: In your recent journalism you’ve written a lot about declining standards in education. You’ve said that “the educational absurdity of Dickens’s Dotheboys Hall in Nicholas Nickleby is being recreated in our arts faculties” and that “essays in history, literature and social sciences are [now] often little more than rants.” What do you mean?
TF: The standards in humanities are very low. Obviously things vary from institution to institution, but the bar has been lowered. Everyone I know who teaches at that level is in despair. Students aren’t encouraged to study or think independently in the way they were in my time at university. They read less—indeed, literature students seem to resent reading the most, and they’re spoon-fed, as at school. What I read in one week would now count as a term’s work. And you can get away with a lot as long as you maintain history/literature is a sexist/colonialist conspiracy."

Eugene Lyons’s chronicle of the 1930s Left remains startlingly relevant today. - "It may be that the best book that will ever be written about today’s progressive mind-set was published in 1941. That in The Red Decade author Eugene Lyons was, in fact, describing the Communist-dominated American Left of the Depression-wracked 1930s and 1940s makes his observations even more meaningful, for it is sobering to be confronted with how little has been gained by hard experience. The celebration of feelings over reason? The certainty of moral virtue? The disdain for tradition and the revising of history for ideological ends? The embrace of the latest definition of correct thought? Lyons was one of the most gifted reporters of his time, and among the bravest, and his story of the spell cast by Stalinist-tinged social-justice activism over that day’s purported best and brightest—literary titans, Hollywood celebrities, leading academics, religious leaders, media heavies—would be jaw-dropping if it weren’t so eerily familiar.   Indeed, looking backward from a time when, according to surveys, more millennials would rather live under socialism than capitalism, it’s apparent that Lyons was documenting not just a historical moment but also a species of historical illiteracy as unchanging as it is poisonous, its utopianism able to flourish only at the expense of independent thought. On a range of issues, alternative views were defined as not merely mistaken but morally reprehensible; and among the elites who dominated the cultural sphere, deviants from approved opinion were subject to special abuse. Of course, having lived and worked in Soviet Russia, Lyons made distinctions about relative abuses of power. Under Stalinism, dissidents were liquidated, or vanished into the gulag; the American Left could only liquidate careers and disappear reputations... As screenwriter Richard Collins would later recall of his time in the party, Communism was, for its devotees, “a cause, a faith, and a viewpoint on all phenomena. A one-shot solution to all the world’s ills and inequities.”...   That it was all a colossal fraud was obvious all along, or should have been. For anyone willing to see, Stalin’s Russian paradise was a totalitarian horror show, equaled only by Hitler’s Third Reich. For all the regime’s numerous apologists in the press, led by the New York Times’s Walter Duranty (who won the Pulitzer Prize for his efforts), word of the true state of affairs in Russia was not hard to come by because by the mid-1930s, reports on the Great Famine (the planned execution by starvation of millions of recalcitrant Ukrainian peasants) were too persistent to ignore without sustained effort. So, too, were those of systematic state thuggery, culminating in the confessions-by-torture of veteran Bolsheviks in the purge trials of 1937–38 and, in Spain, in the guise of fighting fascism, the systematic elimination of rival leftist parties by Soviet secret police. By the time he published The Red Decade, Lyons, a rare journalist given to damn-the-consequences honesty, had come to know his twin subjects exceedingly well—that is, Stalinism and the American liberals so ready to overlook its savage immorality. Having arrived from Russia as a small child and grown up in the poverty of the Jewish Lower East Side, he came of age a committed leftist, and, as he’d later acknowledge, when he returned to the land of his birth, in 1928 as a 30-year-old correspondent for the United Press, his aim was to use that privileged perch to promote the Revolution. It was on this basis that, in 1930, he scored a stunning journalistic coup that brought him worldwide recognition: the first-ever interview by a Western correspondent with the reclusive Stalin. And, to his subsequent shame, he joined other leading reporters in mostly running cover for the regime, including on the famine.  Within a few years, though, he began harboring doubts, and before long he was running afoul of Soviet censors by finding ways to alert readers to the regime’s hypocrisy and cronyism, the failure of its various economic plans, and, especially, its ruthlessness and brutality... at least as troubling to Lyons as the reality of the Soviet paradise was the refusal to face it that he encountered in America on his return. To the contrary, he ran up against an almost perverse eagerness to embrace every fabrication in its defense and to cast doubters as hostile to all that was good and true. Stalinist methods, if even acknowledged, often met with tacit approval...   That during those Depression years, the legions of starry- and steely-eyed included a disproportionate number of what we’d now call millennials was unsurprising; for the idealistic, emotion-driven young, hard questions always have easy solutions, and even in good times, there’s no competing with the romance of the Left. But what Lyons found far more unsettling was the credulity of those in the vanguard of progressive thought: leading figures in academia, entertainment, publishing, media, and the highest councils of government, from New York to Hollywood and everywhere between. These were the powerful and influential, the men and women who shaped public attitudes and opinion... In one sense, the book could hardly have appeared at a more propitious moment. As Lyons wrote in his introduction, it was originally to go to press on June 22, 1941—the very day that Hitler stabbed his ally Stalin in the back by invading the Soviet Union, thereby necessitating a wholesale revision of the CPUSA’s line on the European war. Already that line had drastically changed once, only two years earlier, instantly moving from die-hard anti-Nazism to adamantly antiwar, when Stalin shocked the world by signing his infamous nonaggression pact with Hitler; as a result, thousands of anguished party members had quit, and multitudes of fellow travelers quietly slipped away. But the hard core had rationalized, casting Stalin as a master statesman who had done what he had to in defense of the world’s lone socialist republic, and now they rationalized again... Lyons showed a special disdain for the wealthy who embraced radicalism to salve their guilty consciences... Much as he faults young people for their susceptibility to socialism’s appeal, Lyons faults even more the grown-ups, observing that views of the young are always “crudely colored by undefined emotional urges,” which leaves them “perfect raw stuff for demagogic molding. . . . [T]he glorification of youth is a modern development, it puts a premium on lack of experience, mental fuzziness and intuition as against intelligence and maturity.”  Hardly least, there were those in the left-of-center media who habitually assumed the worst about their own country"
We are still told that liberals don't hate their countries

Xi Van Fleet on Twitter: "In a Communist kingdom, useful idiots will end up in gulags. But how about those in power?  Pre. Liu Shaoqi, Mao’s right-hand man was purged, exiled, died alone in misery.  Lin Biao, Mao’s hand-picked successor, died in plane crash on route to Russia after his plot against Mao was discovered.  Zhou Enlai was denied medical treatment by Mao & died of cancer, a reward he got for being Mao’s most submissive & loyal “servant”.  No one is safe in a Communist power structure. Not even the dictators themselves who lived in constant fear, which is well justified as proven by Ceaușescu!"

Meme - Zhang Yong @zhang_yong1: "america leftist claim "peace , tolerate , diverse" ,. endorse homo marriage .. yet hate fear chinese , russian, very racist . they say "zhang go back china !" when i speak wisdom . seem very racist , hypocrisy"
Junxiong Ma @JunxiongMa: "Translated from Chinese by Google
When the People's Liberation Army landed in the United States and then massacred the American leftists, they would know that the real revolution is not the same as the gay fantasy revolution they imagined."

Meme - "Where am I?"
"Karl Marx! We resurrected you to lead the revolution!" *Furry, Antifa, Trans woman*
"... of lumpenproles?"

Understanding the Return of Socialism - "How are we to understand the apparently paradoxical attitudes of Generation Z (the cohort born between 1997 and 2012) towards socialism? In its fifth annual report, the Victims of Communism Memorial (VOC) found that 49 percent of Gen Z view the term “socialism” favorably, compared to 40 percent in 2019. On the other hand, the report found that an abysmal six percent of Gen Z trusts the government to take care of their interests. A Pew Research Center report also found that young people are much less trusting of elected officials than older age groups. So, although most of Gen Z has little faith in the government to effectively act on their behalf, many of them support an economic system which gives more power to the state... Whereas 31 percent of Gen Z respondents to the VOC report said they support the gradual elimination of the capitalist system in favor of a more socialist one, only 12 percent said they believe society would be better off with the abolition of private property.  The discrepancies in Gen Z’s idea of socialism suggest that a Soviet-style October Revolution orchestrated by the TikTok generation is unlikely. A HarrisX poll reached similar conclusions, reporting that nearly half of young adults think that socialism simply means providing necessities and ending poverty, with no mention of abolishing the market economy...   It should surprise no one that this form of governance resonates with young people. Wages in the United States have remained stagnant for decades, and they are faced with an unforgiving housing market and national student loan debt totaling over $1.7 trillion... The uphill economic battle many young people are fighting today is only exacerbated by a system of government that seldom represents their interests. A study which analyzed nearly 1,800 public policy decisions over 20 years found that the desires of average American voters appeared “to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.” Economic elites, on the other hand, were more successful than any other group in having their interests reflected in legislation...   Nor is the popularity of left-leaning policies in America limited to Gen Z. Pew Research Center found that a majority of Americans, 63 percent in both surveys, are in favor of tuition-free college and believe that the federal government should be at least partially responsible for ensuring all Americans have healthcare coverage."

Working Class History on Twitter - "#OtD 15 Jul 1971 the ironically named United Red Army was formed in Japan. A Maoist group, it had 29 members and it killed 14 of them in less than a year in internal purges, considering them not revolutionary enough. Here is a critical history of Maoism:"

Meme - Carl Benjamin: "Control of information is control of reality.
Mass killings under communist regimes
This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. The verifiability of the claims made in this article is disputed. The neutrality of this article is disputed. This article or section possibly contains synthesis of material which does not verifiably mention or relate to the main topic."

FAMILIES : China : Communism Broke Grip of Tradition : Half a century of change has reduced role of family. But overseas relatives are imposing old values. - Los Angeles Times - "The late Chinese leader Mao Tse-tung, although himself a member of a strong Hunanese family clan, realized that political reform was was not possible unless people placed the interests of the state above those of the family, which up to that point had been by far the most powerful institution in China.  Even today in rural Chinese wedding ceremonies, peasant couples bow to a portrait of Chairman Mao rather than bow to their ancestors as was the tradition for more than 2,000 years.  Communist leaders were instructed to “draw a clear line” between themselves and their families. During the Cultural Revolution, youths were encouraged to love Chairman Mao more than their parents and were sent to the countryside to learn from the peasants. Parents were attacked by their own children in struggle sessions. Collective day-care centers became the norm."
From 1995. So much for the myth of the left being anti-family. This can still be seen today, e.g. narcissists urging people to cut off "toxic" family

Meme - "Another round of "7 year old or 40 year old tankie""
"My idea of what money might look like after the revolution"

Meme - Mystery Grove Publishing Co. @MYSTERYGROVE: "Reminder: Communism is when ugly deformed freaks make it illegal to be normal then rob kill all successful people out of petty resentment and cruelty. The ideology is all just window dressing."


Meme - "Landlords need to understand that no matter how you put it, no matter how horrible you try to paint the tenant, no matter what you say. you do not deserve income more than a person deserves a place to live. period. no matter how u slice it. i do not care."
"That's similar to saying the farmer doesn't deserve the income for the produce or frozen meats more than the grocery consumer deserves the food." "Eventually, allowing users to steal from providers means grocers, farmers and landlords will have little incentive to do business and they will stop providing groceries or produce/grains/meats or residences. Watch the scarcity and prices for remaining groceries, food or rentals skyrocket in price after that."
Of course, it'll be fault of counter-revolutionary traitors when things go to shit
Maybe commies hate landlords because they know they're such failures they'll never buy their own place no matter what

Meme - Karl Marx: "Work for the money to pay rent and share of utilities *No*"
Karl Marx: "Living off of someone else's inheritance while splurging on a bourgeoisie lifestyle simultaneously complaining about the landlord's greed *Yes*"

Meme - Chairman Yang's Red Army: "Sex workers need a union"
"Lenin orders the massacre of sex workers"
"Wow! He's JUST like me!"

Meme - "The Romanov children were....literally children. They begged for their lives and when they were dead their corpse were sexually assaulted. Grow up."
Kerfus: "The Tankies being pro-necrophilia is not surprising"
Johnny Betawi @JohnBatavia: "The fuck do you care? They were dead already and it's a small retribution for what they had stolen from the people"

Meme - Communist: "Nooo, you don't understand! Cuba's crisis is due to the US embargo, not the Communist dictatorship! How do you expect their Communist nation to succeed without access to Capitalist nations like the US?!?!"

Meme - *Bible*
>be old book full of failed predictions and vague flowery language
>have dozens of possible interpretations
>centuries later, rival factions claim to have the one true interpretation and JPG regularly fight one another
>millions have died in attempts to implement these interpretations
>writings treated as infallible truth by privileged, self- righteous white people
>be communist manifesto
>pic unrelated"

Meme - Marxist Soccer @MarxistSoccer: "Also, I will not and cannot train anything other than lower body, because the upper body muscles are mostly for aesthetic and show which are Bourgeois traits. Strong glutes and thighs are the base of any Proletarian movement."

Single Fathers vs Single Mothers

I keep being told that the children of single fathers have better outcomes than the children of single mothers, but no one ever provides me with any evidence, even as many keep claiming there's tons of it out there.

In my previous attempts to get to the bottom of this question, I haven't been able to find anything, but finally I have found some evidence for the claim: 

"Among the group of studies that discriminated between single-mother and single-father families, some used single-father samples only (Greif, 1985; Hanson, 1981, 1982; Meyer & Garasky, 1993;
Smith & Smith, 1981), others compared single-mother with single-father families (Ambert, 1982; Cohen, 1995; Defrain & Eirick, 1981; Downey & Powell, 1993; Fricke, 1982; Schnayer & Orr, 1983), and a
few compared single-mother, single-father, and intact families (Santrock & Warshak, 1979; Santrock & Warshak, 1982; Wadsworth, Burnell, Taylor, & Butler, 1985)

Researchers conducting these studies found that the difficulties facing single mothers and single fathers were similar. Both had to adapt to undefined parts of the single-parent role, and each had to cross gender boundaries to raise a family alone (Cohen, 1995). In spite of these similarities, comparisons across family structures revealed that there were important differences in how single mothers and single fathers carried out their roles. Single fathers were more confident in their parenting and they were more likely to involve their children in family responsibilities than were single mothers (Fricke, 1982; Orthner & Lewis, 1979).

In general, researchers conducting a meta-analysis of this group of studies found that the influence of the parent-child relationship on children's outcomes was strongest for children of school age. They also reported that children experienced fewer problems if single fathers, rather than single mothers, had custody, and that these patterns were consistent across all child outcomes (Arnato & Keith, 1991).

Many of the comparisons of single-mother and single-father families centered on gender differences in parenting. Downey and Moen (1987) reported that single fathers and single mothers specialized in the types of resources they provided their children. They found that single mothers provided their children with more interpersonal resources, such as time spent talking with a child about school and involvement in a child's activities. In comparison, single fathers provided their children with greater economic resources. Since single fathers earn almost twice the income of single mothers, it is not surprising that they had greater economic resources to offer their chil- dren. It is inaccurate to imply, however, that all single fathers are affluent. A significant number live in poverty, which has been shown to negatively impact the parent-child relationship and children's behavior, regardless of family structure (Cohen, 1995; Meyer & Garasky, 1993).

Other researchers reported that income did not influence the parent- child relationship in single-father families, and that single fathers provided as many interpersonal resources as single mothers (Greif, 1985, 1995; Hanson, 1981, 1982). These findings are consistent with the majority of studies that have demonstrated that single custodial fathers provide a healthy and supportive family environment and are concerned about meeting the emotional needs of their children (Downey & Powell, 1993; Hanson, 1986a, 198613; Orthner, Brown, & Ferguson, 1976; Orthner & Lewis, 1979; Smith & Smith, 1981). In these studies, single fathers were found to be warm and supportive, and they commonly tried to compensate for being the only parent by giving as much time as possible to their children. For example, single fathers went out of their way to be with their children and take them on weekend outings and to evening activities (Orthner & Lewis, 1979).

Overall, researchers agree that a positive and warm parent-child relationship is associated with good child outcomes in all types of families (Santrock & Warshak, 1979; Hanson, 1982). However, when single mothers and single fathers were compared, several differences in positive parenting behaviors emerged. Single fathers were found to be more confident of their parenting ability and to feel they had a better parent-child relationship than did single mothers (Fricke, 1982). Single fathers also seemed to command more authority and respect from their children (Ambert, 1982). Orthner and Brown (1978) found that single fathers were less emotional and more pragmatic than single mothers, and that they were less likely than single mothers to depend on television as a sitter for their children. Single fathers also were more likely than single mothers to involve their children in family responsibilities, and to encourage their children's independence (Orthner, Brown, & Ferguson, 1976; Orthner & Lewis, 1979)

Another difference that emerged was that negative parenting, in the context of discipline, was not the issue for single fathers that it was for single mothers. Defrain and Eirick (1981) found that custodial fathers did not change their disciplinary approach to children following divorce, but mothers did. Other researchers found that single fathers who did change their disciplinary approach following divorce became more relaxed and democratic and less authoritarian (Santrock & Warshak, 1982; Smith & Smith, 1981). In contrast, single mothers tended to become more critical and inconsistent in disciplining their children after the divorce (Bronstein et al., 1993; Santrock & Warshak, 1982; Webster-Stratton, 1989). Negative parenting behaviors that have been associated with poor adjustment in children include lack of parental control by custodial mothers and authoritarian parenting by custodial fathers (Hodges et al., 1983)

In terms of the impact of divorce on children's behavior, one study revealed no differences between single-mother families and single- father families in child behavior problems (Schnayer & Orr, 1989). In contrast, several other studies documented that children living with single fathers had fewer behavior problems than children living with single mothers, and that children living with more affluent single mothers had fewer behavior problems than children living with financially distressed single mothers (Amato & Keith, 1991; Ambert, 1982; Downey & Powell, 1993).

In examining the types of behavior problems that children experience, Hodges and Bloom (1984) reported that younger children had more externalizing behavior problems than older children, and boys had more internalizing and externalizing problems than girls. Other researchers have found that boys are more likely to engage in externalizing behavior than girls (Loeber & LeBlanc, 1990; Santrock & War- shak, 1979; Simons, Whitbeck, Beaman, & Conger, 1994), and that boys were more demanding and less mature with single mothers than with single fathers (Santrock & Warshak, 1979).

In yet another study, researchers found that the source of stress in the family made a difference in the type of behavior problems experienced by children (Hodges, London, & Colwell, 1990). Parental stress was associated with externalizing behaviors, while children's stress was associated with internalizing behaviors.

In terms of overall adjustment of single parents and their children, Ambert (1982) found that single fathers were more satisfied with their role than single mothers, and children in the custody of fathers appeared to be happier than children in the custody of mothers. Howev- er, Amato and Keith (1991) note that economic resources may account for most of the reported differences in functioning between single- mother and single-father families. A number of studies show that poor children are significantly more likely than non-poor children to have both externalizing and internalizing behavior problems, regardless of family structure (Gibbs, 1986; McLeod & Shanahan, 1993; Velez, Johnson, & Cohen, 1989; Werner, 1985).

Another factor to consider is that family size has been found to affect functioning in single-father families, but not single-mother families. Cohen (1995) found that single fathers did better when they had a small family, although Demaris and Greif (1992) found no influence of number of children on the functioning of custodial fathers.

Few studies were found that compared parenting and child functioning as reported by single mothers, single fathers, married mothers, and married fathers. This approach is useful because i t allows comparison of family structure (single-parent versus intact families), gender (mothers versus fathers), and role responsibility of the parent (the primary parenting role of single parents and married mothers versus the complementary or co-parenting role of married fathers). Using this approach, Santrock and Warshak (1982) found that single mothers were more permissive and more likely to allow their children to control them than were single fathers, married mothers, or married fathers. Authoritative parenting was linked to positive child outcomes in both single-mother and single-father families. Authoritarian parenting was linked to poor child outcomes in single-father homes and permissive parenting yielded worse child outcomes in single-mother homes. In another study done in Great Britain, children in both single-mother and single-father families had higher externalizing scores than children in intact families (Wadsworth et al., 1985)

In summary, there is general agreement that children are likely to experience behavior problems following divorce, especially in single- mother families. Furthermore, externalizing problems seem to be more prevalent than internalizing problems. There also is agreement that single mothers use fewer positive and more negative parenting behaviors than married parents or single fathers. Overall, children seem to do better when they live with single fathers rather than single mothers and single fathers appear to be more satisfied than single mothers with the role of single parent.

These results, however, should be interpreted with caution. The literature on divorced families is prone to methodological problems, particularly the earlier studies and those that included single-father families. A majority of these studies used small, non-representative clinical and convenience samples and most were atheoretical. In addition, many of the studies addressed specific developmental periods of childhood such as early childhood, middle childhood, and adolescence, but the most common approach was to analyze the behavior of children from all three age categories as a single group without controlling for the age of the child...

Across most outcomes, the single mothers and single fathers were more alike than different in their responses. However, they arrived at this common ground from different positions. In contrast to married parents, single mothers had become less positive in their parenting following divorce, whereas single fathers had become more positive. Specific positive and negative parenting behaviors of single mothers and single fathers were not significantly different from one another, with the exception that single fathers allowed more independence in their children. In terms of their children's behavior, single mothers and single fathers both reported more externalizing behaviors in their children than married parents, and the specific types of problems they encountered were similar. The one major difference between single mothers and fathers was that single mothers reported more internalizing behavior problems in their children than married parents, whereas the reports of single fathers were no different than those of any of the other parents.

Given the similarities in the role responsibilities of single parents compared to married parents, these findings are not surprising. According to ecological theory, it was anticipated that the role responsibilities of parents would be more important than gender in explaining parenting and children's behavior...

There was no evidence to support the effect of gender on parenting...

Gender was also of little value in explaining children's internalizing and externalizing behavior. When single mothers were compared with single fathers, no differences were found in their children's behavior problems. Furthermore, children in single-parent families had more externalizing problems than children in intact families, whether the single parent was male or female. Children in single-mother families were unique, however, in that they were reported to have more problems with internalizing behavior than children in intact families. This finding may or may not be gender based. Single mothers may be more sensitive to, or aware of, internalized types of behavior problems than single fathers, leading to a higher rate of reporting. On the other hand, single fathers may discourage internalizing behavior as an expression of their children's distress. Another possibility is that institutional forces, rather than gender, are responsible. Children may be responding to their mothers' economic distress with internalized feelings of insecurity, fear, and depression...

There also was strong evidence that family structure contributed to children's behavior problems. All of the significant differences in reported child behavior were between single and married parents, with both single mothers and single fathers reporting more behavior problems. Externalizing behavior was especially problematic. Compared to children in intact families, children in single-parent families were more likely to lie, destroy property, and associate with children who got into trouble . . . behaviors which are particularly disturbing given that the children in the sample were pre-adolescent. These findings support the conclusion reached by Downey and Moen (1987) that lack of any parent, whether it is the father or mother, appears to increase children's problem behavior. Perhaps the strain of one person having primary responsibility for childrearing is a structural problem in single-parent families that cannot be resolved without having other adults share the burden."

--- Comparison of Parenting and Children's Behavior in Single-Mother, Single-Father, and Intact Families / Jeanne M. Hilton, Esther L. Devall (Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 1998)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Latest posts (which you might not see on this page)

powered by Blogger | WordPress by Newwpthemes