Miscellaneous: December 2014 Archives
"Privilege" is special treatment someone gets because of an elevated status. "Privilege" is not normal, default, and expected treatment, even in the face of others being mistreated.
If I am judged well because I am "white" and male, that could be called privilege. But that generally doesn't happen. What actually happens -- sometimes -- is that people are mistreated because of their gender or race. There is no privilege conferred in such a situation.
For people to say that I am privileged because I am not mistreated not only misuses the plain meaning of the word "privilege," muddying the language, but it has the negative effect of implying that the treatment I get as "privileged" isn't the normal and expected treatment that everyone should get. It implies I am getting treatment I don't deserve, just because someone else is not getting treatment they do deserve.
And I think this is intentional. The people who started using the term, I think, want me to feel guilty for being treated properly. I don't, and I won't. I will not feel guilty because someone mistreats someone else ... unless I was able to do something about it, and didn't.
So I will continue to speak out against jerks who mistreat others, and I will continue to point out the fact that those jerks mistreating others doesn't magically make me privileged, and I will continue to feel no guilt or shame about any of it.
The sad thing about all of this is that most of us are on the same side: we are against jerks mistreating others (whether it's unwanted crude comments, criminal harassment or assault, or anything in between). Not that we're in agreement about everything: for example, some people want to end sexism in video games, whereas many people think it's just fine because that's what many people want, and it's not meant to be taken seriously. But the main problem is the jerks, and we're largely in agreement about them.
But some folks try to turn the jerks' behavior into some sort of larger cause wrapped in psuedoscience and generalizations in order to alienate people in order to try to win an argument using emotion, rather than simply going after the jerks. And I don't want to only blame the one side: the folks who are generally on "my" side often respond with unreasonable and unnecessary derision and dismissal, which not only pushes the sides further away, but also can have the effect of enabling the jerks.
So to both sides: stop treating everyone who doesn't agree with you about how to characterize the problem as the enemy, instead of treating the people who are actually causing the problems as the enemy.
(Oh, and stop pretending that I am privileged for not being mistreated.) 
This can't be serious. It has to be a joke.
OK, I know it's not a joke. But it is a joke.
This video is based on the article "Playing with privilege: the invisible benefits of gaming while male" written by Tropes vs Women in Video Games producer J...
I am not a Seahawks fan. I am a Patriots fan who lives near, and works in, Seattle. I want the Patriots to play the Seahawks in the Super Bowl and crush them.
But I absolutely love Marshawn Lynch's handling of the news media. I could do without his crotch-grabbing, but newsflash to the media: almost everyone I've heard complain about Lynch's handling of the media are in professional media. You (well, and the NFL) are the only people who have a problem with this. The rest of us mostly think it's just fine.
I gave up on most sports journalism a long time ago. Unless there's a really big story -- which few sports journalists are equipped to handle anyway -- sports journalism tends to be tediously uninteresting at best. It's the same old story day after day, week after week. I love watching my teams play, but I don't want to hear about how Lynch "feels" about his great touchdown run. I'm satisfied to let the touchdown (and his crotch grab) speak for itself.
And don't even get me started on the train wrecks that occur when folks like Bob Costas and Christine Brennan try to cover "issues" in sports, like offensive team names and guns. They spread lies and ignorance and act like everyone should care what they think.
Just give me the scores and show me the big plays. That's all I want from you. And you're not very good at anything else, anyway.
So sports journalists, get over yourselves. Most of us have gotten over you already.
Penn Jillette says you're helping enable hackers to commit crimes when you click on stolen material like the Jennifer Lawrence nude photos and Sony emails
+Uber has a social obligation to increase prices at times of high demand, including during tragedies. Yes, really. That's how they ensure that the people who need their service the most, are able to use it, by encouraging more supply and discouraging demand by customers who don't really need it.
By not increasing prices, the people who need the service the most are less likely to be able to get it.
Uber offers refunds after charging $100 minimum fare in a hostage crisis.
I have a black thumb. The thumb of death.
I've been using Mac OS X as my main OS for more than ten years. I've been using the System Preferences probably on average about once a week, or more. Yet, to this day, cannot quickly find what I am looking for in the app.
It took me about 5-10 seconds to find "Sharing" today. I knew it was called "Sharing." I knew it was in the middle of the window somewhere, but I just couldn't see it there. And this happens to me regularly.
Maybe it's time for me to give up and use View -> Organize Alphabetically, because 10+ years of this futility is long enough.
Dear Internet,
Please stop treating Rolling Stone as though it engages in journalism. It never has. It unapologetically prints lies, and has for years.
This faked rape article is just another in a long line. Remember RFK Jr.'s article in Rolling Stone about how the GOP stole Ohio in 2004? Almost the entire article was based on lies, as was easily demonstrated by anyone who bothered to look up the cited sources with a remotely critical eye, but the mainstream media certainly never cared about being critical of those claims. At least now, for c change, everyone is on board with recognizing Rolling Stone's lies. But don't be fooled into thinking this is an exception. Whether it's elections or rapes or any of numerous leftwing causes, Rolling Stone habitually ignores counterevidence and willfully prints dishonest articles in the hopes of manipulating their uncritical readers.
It's how they roll.
(Sorry.)
An odd story. We don't know why the children were removed, exactly, but it seems likely that the fact of the home birth had nothing to do with it.
The intro to the story seems like nonsense, too: they claim the couple was using "homeopathic medicine," but no evidence of that is provided. Perhaps the anchors meant "naturopathic medicine," but those are two very different things.
(Homeopathy is the belief that if a substance can cause symptoms in a healthy person, it can cure those symptoms in a sick person. Further, that substance is, in homeopathic remedies, usually *not even actually used, because it is diluted from the remedy to the point where it no longer exists in the remedy. So when you see "homeopathy," think "a substance that causes sickness can cure it, as long as it isn't actually used." It's literal nonsense.)
A Bellingham couple is fighting the for their children, claiming CPS seized them after a home birth and natural remedies.
Finished watching about 20 hours of appendices for the first two Hobbit films. I now know the names of each of the 13 dwarves.
I'll watch the extended edition of the first film this weekend, and the second film next weekend, followed by seeing the film on the 16th at a +Marchex company event.
It's a lot of Hobbit.
"... because so many people attempt to abuse the system and use the word 'God' in conjunction with profanity, in an abundance of caution our system is forced to catch and prevent any use of the word on [Disney] websites."
headdesk
It turns out you can give thanks for a lot of different folks on the Disney Channel website – but you can’t thank God.
"I stopped playing colleges, and the reason is because they’re way too conservative...Not in their political views — not like they’re voting Republican — but in their social views and their willingness not to offend anybody." - +Chris Rock
There's plenty to dissect in Frank Rich's comprehensive interview with Chris Rock. The comedian covers everything from Bill Cosby (he hopes the allegations
Dear Internet,
It is impossible, without significant evidence, which we apparently do not have, to prove or disprove the allegations against Bill Cosby.
Therefore, it is irresponsible to even air the allegations, because he cannot defend against them.
Maybe he's guilty. But maybe he's completely innocent.
I could not care less about your irrational rationalizations. "Their stories are believable," "he's acting guilty," etc. We simply, literally, do not know whether these things happened, and we do not have any available path to find out. If it is possible that he is innocent -- and it is -- then it's completely unfair to him to even talk about whether he's guilty.
I am not criticizing the institutions that have cut ties with him; they have to worry about their bottom line, and no matter how unfair this is, the perception is all that matters for them. This is the news media's fault more than anything, interviews and reporting on things that cannot be demonstrated true, nor defended against. It's simply irresponsible, from top to bottom.
Yes, if he is guilty, it's terrible, and terrible for the people he allegedly harmed. But that doesn't justify the inherent unfairness of the campaign against him. We do not abandon reason and fairness and justice simply because they are hard.
Well, apparently, we do. But we shouldn't.
I bought Bill Cosby is a Very Funny Fellow, Right? a couple of weeks ago. I loved listening to it growing up, and I won't let unsubstantiated allegations ruin my enjoyment of it. I won't give in to the hysteria.
"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
