Monday, December 4, 2017

News Nuggets

Here are my thoughts on a couple of news nuggets from the weekend:

● Trump has endorsed Roy Moore. I'm not a fan of that because Moore is the kind of cliche that kills conservatism. On the other hand, I do find it interesting that Trump is playing out of the Democratic playbook: support your side even if they are worse than Hitler. It's an interesting change for conservatives. Not sure if I like it. What do you think?

● Sheryl Sandberg, of Facebook fame, has raised an obvious point that the media has to date ignored. She's worried that the me-too list (also known as the sexual harassment scandal) will ultimately hurt women because men won't want to hire women as they will be seen as too much trouble. Well duh. Actions have consequences. And when millions of women whine about being "sexually assaulted" and think they should be able to bring this up YEARS later to destroy men's careers... often after following them from job to job... and when their "sexual assault" complaint is "He asked me out" or "I could just tell he was having impure thoughts about me" or "I consented at the time, but I changed my mind later," and there is a presumption of guilt, then what rational person would want to take on that kind of trouble?

I have personally witnessed the extreme vetting that law firms go to before hiring blacks for this very reason and I have zero doubt that this issue will do the same for women. The natural response of employers will be to avoid women who display slutty traits, who whine/complain, and who seem litigious. I can also see "The Pence Rule" kicking in with employers making sure never to meet with women without witnesses. The result won't be an end to female advancement, but it will be slowed and will come only with higher security.

● I'm kind of chuckling about college football. The obsession with figuring out which team is the best is an irony wrapped in idiocy. For one thing, you will never truly know who is best because it's just not possible. Given the ambiguity of picking who gets a chance to play, the interference of weather conditions or other uneven factors, and the ability of any team to win randomly on any given day, it is simply impossible to know who is the best. Nevertheless, the people needing to know have imposed a system that they claimed would solve this issue and make all the games even more important.

But of course, the opposite is true. The sad truth is that the media has done exactly what you would expect: they've redefined college football through the prism of the playoff system. In the process, they've changed the bowl games from prizes for great seasons into consolation prizes for those forgotten by the playoffs. And now it's been pointed out that many of the conference championships are meaningless as well, with winners like Ohio State this year and Penn State last year not making the playoffs either. Then there's Central Florida who went undefeated and weren't even considered for the playoffs, making all their games meaningless and showing that most teams will always be seen as ineligible for the playoffs no matter what they do.

To solve these problems, the idiots who caused it are now suggesting expanding the playoffs to eight games, which solves none of these problems. Oh well.


Anthony said...

1. Embracing a guy who was big on sex with minors is just another milestone of decline. As for 'The Democrats did it' argument emulating an opponent one has been steadily beating makes no practical sense. It is like The New England Patriots deciding to pattern themselves after the Washington Deadskins.

2. So you are saying companies will be less likely to hire woman they view as litigious, whiny sluts? I can't argue with that. I would think the first two traits are always seen as undesirable by employers.

Another outcome might be companies getting firmer about discouraging sex between managers and managees, at least for a while. People being people it will never go away but become less overt and slightly common.

Anonymous said...

Andrew; politics is forever. If there's a sleazy person who's going to vote my way against a sleazy person who's going to vote for things I don't believe I'm going with my sleazy person. If there's a sleazy person who agrees with me going up against a saint who disagrees with me well then hello Sleazy! I want Moore to win anyway. I want the voters of Alabama to ram their thumb in the, uh, ...eye of the dems, the establishment republicans and the media.We'll see soon.

BevfromNYC said...

I had an interesting conversation with a good friend of mine on the harassment issue. I will continue this as soon as my internet connection stabilizes...

AndrewPrice said...

Another Democratic fund raiser is going down. Ha ha. The pattern continues.

Sexual harassment = liberal conduct

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, You've missed the point. This is conduct which changes hiring behavior. Sandberg is right.

AndrewPrice said...

GypsyTyger, I'm really just surprised that the GOP is finally doing what the Democrats have always done. The GOP response is usually to wet themselves at the first sign of an allegation.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, I look forward to hearing about it. :)

Tennessee Jed said...

point one # me too - there is a chance that could happen although if firms keep declining to hire women, we will see something akin to affirmative action or class action lawsuits. seems more likely Pence syndrome which will set back the cause
as far as Roy Moore, I.kind of agree, but am glad to see Repubs finally circle the wagon. wish they would on Meuller investigation. I no longer trust the impartiality
college football should go back to mythical national champs. playoffs screw sports up. i liked it when baseball had 16 teams and they didn't play each other. pennant winners met in the series. games scheduled for kids. now it is all way too corporate and expensive

Tennessee Jed said...

earlier comments made on phone in poor lighting, but hopefully you got the gist o.k. If women can only meet with the boss with witnesses present, how can anything be said or discussed confidentially, hence the problem.

I have never really seen the Roy Moore evidence, but it seems he did like much younger women. He is very problematic, of course, though I tend to be distrustful when charges are leveled 40 years later before an election. And, since I am getting tired of liberals behaving badly but getting their way, there is a part of me that is glad the R's are finally learning a few of the tricks.

Lastly, it is hard to have a real play-off with enough teams to make it a true test. Plus, there is the question in all sports about de-valuing the regular season through play-offs which got to my comments about the old days of major league baseball. I love the notion of playing 154 or 162 game season and the team with the best record gets to go to the big show. It was even better because National and Americans didn't play each other so there was an element of the unknown between the teams.

Anthony said...


I conceded your point that companies will be less likely to hire woman who they view as slutty, whiny and litigious.

My point was that they will also more strongly discourage managers from having sex with managees.

Also, you seem to be misreading Sandberg's widely reported arguments. Firms declining to hire woman because they might complain is a recent phenomena she worries about but firms letting powerful goons prey on women ('You got one way up babe') is something she has complained about for years. Her proposed solution to both problems is clearer harassment policies and more female bosses.

That fear could prevent women from being hired, mentored and promoted — or even talked to — Sandberg said in a Facebook post on Sunday.
This is a critical moment for anyone who faces unwanted sexual advances at work. Sexual harassment has been tolerated for far too long in the halls of government and companies large and small. For the first time in my professional life, it feels like people are finally prepared to hold perpetrators responsible," she wrote.

BevfromNYC said...

Okay, now for my take. So I was having a long conversation with a female friend of mine and I was very surprised that we agreed on the whole "sexual harassment in the workplace" issue.

The bottom line is that we both worked/work with blue collar entertain industry types (electrics, carpentry, loading/unloading trucks etc) and white collar types(paper/phone call making clean jobs). Though there are less women in these traditional blue collar jobs, women are a lot less likely to be harassed too.

REASON: To get a blue collar (SEE: above list) one actually has to have the skill and those guys respect skill. Also, women in those fields tend to not be whiners 'cause they know they have skills. Not to say it didn't get bawdy at times, but when you're 25 feet in the air on top of an A-frame ladder hanging lights, or on the other end of a piece of scenery, it's kinda' hard to get handsey.

One might say that "Idol hands are the Devil's workshop"...

BevfromNYC said...

1. Russia has been banned from THE 2018 Winter Olympic in South Korea because of doping.
2. Trump has told Abbas/Palestinian leader that he will be moving the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. This will either usher in the Biblical "End Times" or finally bring a peaceful solution to the 2-State solution where Israel actually gets to exists...


tryanmax said...

There's a lot packed into the Roy Moore episode and not very many willing to do the unpacking. For starters, we need a national conversation about what "credible" actually means, because I don't think many people know.

The GOP should circle the wagons as Democrats do, but not like Democrats do. Democrats close rank as on impulse and they urge calm and patience for the facts to come out. Then they let the story wither and die or, if need be, cover it up. Republicans may forgo impulsively battening down, but they should adopt a wait-and-see approache while they pursue the facts. Once the facts are sufficiently in hand, the party should react accordingly.

As regards Moore, the split in the GOP is between those who think Moore is innocent of any wrongdoing, and those who hold that not even innocence is a defence against charges of pedophilia. The few stragglers who claim to think Moore did it but whatever, are such a perfect case for the anti-Moore tribe that I have a hard time deciding whether or not they are trolls. I should probably make it known, non-germane though it is, that Moore would not be a first-pick for me should I have lived in Alabama. I'm not big on the religious caracature conservatives. However, neither do I believe that an obvious political smear job should be rewarded with success.

While the anti-Moore tribe seems to be content with the fact-finding efforts of The Washington Post and Gloria Allred, despite not giving either two whiffs on an ordinary day, the efforts of those protesting Moore's innocence are, to me, enormously convincing. Breitbart, which I had largely given up on, has produced investigative journalism the likes of which I haven't seen from them since the days of Patrick Courrielche breaking the Obama/NEA scandal. They've established that there is a mere 12-day window for the narrative spun against Moore to have taken place, and uncovered contradictions to the story from the accuser's own mother, this despite her continued support of her daughter.

Further to that, Allred and her client won't turn over the alleged yearbook signature for analysis. The allegations that Moore was banned from the Gadsden Mall, sports games, and other venues have all been disproven. Several of the accusers have been found to be less than forthcoming about their political connections. And many of the "accusers" haven't actually accuesed him of anything criminal. That Moore was dating late-teenagers when he was in his 30s is, yes, gross, but hardly news given that he has been married to a woman 14 years his junior since 1985. And it certainly doesn't approach the worst accusations against him. The only defense against these findings has been a steady "how dare you!" from those who profess to find the women "credible."

In my estimation, the late endorsement by Trump is reflective of that wait-and-see attitude I think the GOP should have adopted long ago. Trump clearly isn't reacting to any wave in his base (they've always backed Moore) or the party (they've always opposed Moore) or the polls (within the margin of error). The only information that has changed is that relating to the allegations against Moore, and that information has cast nothing but doubt on them. It just so happens that the Moore episode provides a perfect case study for the approach that the GOP ought to take.

AndrewPrice said...

Jed, I think what you will see if little change at the Walmart level -- maybe managers will be told to bring a buddy. But at the higher level, I think you will see increased vetting and other precautions.

I agree about baseball. There was a real charm about the AL and NL never meeting until the World Series. But people don't like mystery. They NEED ANSWERS!! LOL!

AndrewPrice said...

Anthony, I'm not misreading Sandberg at all. She's "worried" about the exact thing that I see as obvious. She just wants to do something to prevent it. I know that's impossible.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, And after Jerusalem becomes the capitol, the world won't end.

I think you and your friend make a good point. But let me add this bit of sexism. In my experience, women who are lower on the economic ladder seem to have stronger personalities (are more secure) than female professionals. I'm not sure why as that seems backwards, but it seems to be true.

AndrewPrice said...

tryanmax, I would like to see Moore gone. I see him as truly disastrous to conservatism. That said, I think your analysis is correct and this is a smear.

tryanmax said...

Moore could be disastrous for conservatism, but so is allowing smear jobs against conservatives to succeed. It's really a pick your poison scenario. Doug Jones seems cut from the same cloth as Nancy Pelosi, so him winning would be a double-dose.

Post a Comment