“Hey baby, you got fries with that shake?” – some dopey guy to some random female walking past

Everylady and her mother has likely been the subject of catcalls at some point in her life. Some people can shrug it off, some can’t – some write articles complaining about it and some write articles complaining about the complainer. I expected, before reading the first article, that I’d find myself siding with the writer of the second, but after reading both I find myself agreeing and disagreeing with both.

Cosmo writer, Alex Berg, decided to keep a log of every time she got catcalled at by random men and what she thinks it means in the context of social justice (or whatever). Daily Caller contributor, Jena Greene, wrote an article fisking the Cosmo piece.

Greene mocks Berg for recalling the exact date, twenty years ago, when she was catcalled for the very first time, which seemed worthy of mocking until I saw in Berg’s article that the event was significant for her because she was only eleven years old and that she had also been groped.

Greene:

She starts with a fateful lede: “The summer of 2017 marked a less-than-illustrious anniversary for me. It’s been 20 years since I was first catcalled.”

Oh come on. I was expecting something like a 20 year anniversary since you were bitten by a shark or had to relocate because your house was swept away by a hurricane. Those are things worth mourning.

Marking the anniversary of your first catcalling is like marking the date you first had to wait in line for a public restroom. It stinks but everyone goes through it.

Berg:

But, I wasn’t nearly as shook up then as when I was catcalled and groped for the first time when I was just 11 years-old, waiting outside of a recreation center for my parents to pick me up from gymnastics practice.

And here I thought I was going to enjoy watching an SJW snowflake get melted for over-reacting to “microaggressions” and I find myself thinking I don’t blame Ms. Berg for feeling traumatized at all by the unwanted attention and assaults on her person.

Greene goes on to criticize Berg for what Berg says she had been wearing or doing during the incidents she had logged and suggests she find something better to do and cover herself up. She accuses Berg of being inflammatory, while flaming her.

Berg wrote of confronting some of the men hollering at her, and says she learned that some men were not aware that what they were doing was offensive and could make a person feel unsafe.

I never understood what would compel a man to shout stuff at strange women passing by about her appearance or what they’d like to do to her; do any of them actually expect that a lady is going to be impressed in a positive way to the point of wanting to date or hook up with them? What would they think if they saw some guy talking to their mother, wife, sister, or daughter in such a manner?

I agree with Greene that nearly all females deal with this garbage at some point or other and that there are bigger things to worry about in this life, but I also agree with Berg that it can feel intimidating. I give Berg credit for calling out some of the catcallers and making them think about what they are doing.

The title of Greene’s article sates that Berg’s article on catcalling “backfired” on her, but I don’t quite see it that way, which is a surprise to me since I generally disagree with the type of social commentary that can be found at places such as Cosmopolitan. In fact I never would have found that Cosmo article at all had it not been for the article criticizing it in The Daily Caller, so in that sense, I guess it is actually the DC post that “backfired”.

*******

MJ Stevenson, AKA Zilla, is best known on the web as Zilla at MareZilla.com. She lives in a woodland shack near a creek, in one of those rural parts of New York State that nobody knows or cares about, with her family and a large pack of guardian companion animals. 

It is resplendently clear that the POTUS will be criticized for whatever they do, but anything Pres. Trump does is chum for the critics’ shark pool.

George W. Bush flew over the Katrina disaster zone, Obama stayed at Martha’s Vineyard while Louisiana flooded. Both got their critics and their supporters.

**RANT ALERT**

WHAT FOLLOWS IS A RANT. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

Pres. Trump went to Texas and the media has gone berserk, even when – or perhaps because – rescue and relief efforts have gone very well. His visit caused minimal, if any, disruption to rescue and relief operations.

Since the reporters appear to get paid to gripe by the word and there was little to gripe about, several took to complaining about Mrs Trump’s shoes following an article by a Vogue fashion critic of clown-like tastes, who, in her own words,

When she is not writing about fashion, she can be found haunting flea markets all over the world.

After which she wears all her flea market finds, all at once.

But I digress.

The shoe outrage was so ridiculous that after a while my inner capitalist succumbed to the temptation of posting a link so I could make a commission on the Adidas Mrs Trump wore. Unlike the prior FLOTUS’s, these sneakers are not $540, but $60.

While the White House announced that Pres. Trump has pledged $1 million to Harvey relief, Politico ran a story saying that Pence shows Trump how to sweat it out with Texas victims – because sweat equity, or something. This is the same Politico that carried nary a word on Mitt Romney helping with the tree stump removal, but hey, Politico wants their POTUS good and sweaty (after which they would deride him as undignified).

Now the clamor is rising for a Healer-In-Chief, which I find most ridiculous of all. The lefties and the media (I repeat myself),

blasted his speech in Texas for its “lack of empathy”and the Twitterverse is all atwitter with prog criticism of the President for his poor skills as a “healer.”

I’m with The Diplomad (emphasis added)

I don’t want a “healer” for President. I can go to a doctor or a priest for that. I want the President to be a hard-ass realist who does his or her duty in line with the Constitution, especially the requirement to protect the country from all threats.

He concludes with,

I had noted many times before that I have had enough of candle-light vigils, “we are not afraid” marches, teddy bears, and empty words. We need real leaders who will confront issues openly and view them without politically correct glasses.

Since Pres. Trump will be “damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t,” confronting issues openly and viewing them without politically correct glasses while abiding by the Constitution is fine by me.

Enough of the clowns at Politico and Vogue.

When I need healing I don’t go to elected officials, and I certainly don’t need moral leadership from them, either.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes on U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog

There are many reasons why one should not fall for the insanity of climate change panic, the unwillingness of those who claim it’s a crisis to act like it’s a crisis, the massive amounts of money spent to massage a particular answer and the simple question of who has benefited from the vast amounts of cash generated by grants and subsidies for those who are most deeply invested in this nonsense.

But for my money the best reason is illustrated by these paragraphs from this story on Tropical storm Irma (emphasis mine).

As of late Thursday morning, Irma was a category 2 storm packing sustained winds of 100 mph and was located more than 3,000 miles away from Florida. The storm is headed west toward the Leeward Islands.

U.S. and European computer models show Irma heading in different directions.

“The American models take it to the Carolinas by next Sunday (Sept. 10). The European models have it going to Cuba and possibly threatening South Florida,” News 6 meteorologist Troy Bridges said. “It’s just too early to tell.”

Now consider these words for a second.

At this moment our understanding of Hurricanes is more advanced that at any time in human history and our knowledge continues to grow.  Consider this bit from the Earth Sciences page of Carlton College about studying Hurricanes:

Why Study Hurricanes?

Hurricanes are life-threatening, building-flattening, property-flooding storms. They are complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes, offering real-world reasons to understand concepts such as air pressure and heat transfer. When a hurricane is occurring, the human connection to our planet is real and immediate: land, water, air, and life are all whirled about by these intense storms.

Like scientists, you’ll study hurricanes in satellite imagery and visualizations, and do some hands-on experiments. You’ll also explore over 150 years of storm data to find out when and where these storms occur. If you’re studying hurricanes during hurricane season, you’ll be able to monitor the position and status of storms in real time.

So when it comes to Hurricanes we have exact data that can be gleamed in real time of every aspect of a storm as it happens to add to the various computer models.  Additionally we have live data dating back to the mid 19th century that has been studied by experts in the field for a century and a half to tell us how hurricanes have acted in the past including information made by first hand observation by the most advanced instruments available at the time.

Furthermore the computers now being used are leaps and bounds over machines of just a decade or two ago and unlike the mid 19th century we many venues all over the world that are a source of training in this information and an even larger pool of potential meteorologists available to allow those tasked with making these predictions to choose the very best.

Yet even with all of this, two weather services each with all the advantages listed,  have 850 mile gap between where they think this storm will go over the next 72 hours.

Now as a person familiar with both mathematics and computer science, this variation is not odd, in fact it’s completely understandable. After all a computer model is based on the best possible guesses from the available data and hurricanes are “complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes” so there is nothing at all odd about there being a 850 mile variation as to where it will it.  As we get closer to Sunday and we have true data to input the variation in the models will correspondingly decrease.

Now apply this to climate change models telling us we face disaster in 100 years.

You aren’t dealing with a single “complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes” you are dealing with EVERY complex natural phenomena that involve multiple interacting processes that exists on the earth. Every single additional item you add increases the variation of the data models. Furthermore you are also dealing with variations in the sun, variations in the orbits of the earth, its moon and more.

And that’s just the variations in natural phenomena, imagine the variation in industrial output on the entire planet for a period of 50 or 100 years.

Think of the computer modeling and tracking of that single hurricane and apply this thinking to the climate of the earth as a whole. How accurate that model is going to be over 100 years, 50 years, 25 years or even ten years?

Would you be willing to bet even your short term economic future on it, would anyone in their right mind do so?

And as you are pondering the answer to that question consider the most important distinction between the NGO’s and Institutions pushing the “climate change” models and those advancing competing hurricane models.

Neither the Americans whose model says Irma will hit the Carolina nor the Europeans who claim it’s heading to Cuba have any financial incentive or social incentive to vary their models to conform with the other, which is why you don’t see the folks at the National Hurricane center point to their European counterparts calling them “Irma Deniers” or vice versa.

Update: Instalanche, thanks Steve, Hi folks take a look around not only at my work but the latest each week from DaTechGuy’s Magnificent Seven Writers:

Jerry Wilson (Thursday Evenings) Of Woody Woodpecker and Natural Disasters
JD Rucker (Thursday afternoons and Sunday Evenings) Letting DACA lapse would be the President’s best move so far
Fausta Wertz (Wednesday and Friday Afternoons) A Call or sanity in the Wake of Harvey
Juliette Akinyi Ochineg (Baldilocks) (Tuesday and Saturday evenings): Stinking Facts
Chris Harper (Tuesday afternoons): A Guide to “Offensive” Statues
Pat Austin: (Monday Afternoons) Report from Louisiana: Hurricane Harvey, the Cajun Navy and Biblical Floods
John (Marathon Pundit) Rubbery: (Sunday Afternoons): Chicago’s ruling class thrives amid city’s decline
RH (NG36B) (Saturday Afternoons): The Bishop’s Junk Mail
Zilla of the Resistance (Friday Evenings): #WarOnStatues: Catholic School Removes Jesus and Mary

Your subscriptions and tip jar hits pay them each month

And Don’t miss our Part Time Riders either
Ellen Kolb (1st & 4th Wednesday Afternoons each month): Thoughts on a Torn Poster
Jon Fournier: (3rd Wednesday Afternoon each month) Why do the media insist on distorting the political spectrum?
Michigan Mick: (1st & 3rd Monday Evenings each month) Red Century story makes me see red
Tech Knight (2nd Wednesday Each Month) President Trump Six Months in


If you like what you’ve seen here and want to support independent journalism please consider hitting DaTipJar to help me secure a full paycheck for the week I have to take off (I’ve just been called back to my job starting today Update: and believe it or not just relaid off AGAIN) while Stacy McCain is here ($460) please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



There is a normal tendency, when faced with an event as vast and overwhelming as Hurricane Harvey, to, while not denying the disaster’s scope, pare it down to incidents and individuals more easily managed. The person helping a person; the rescuer with a beloved pet under each arm, wading through flood waters as he or she carries them to safety. These images we can digest, expanding outward from them to, as best we can, envision such a natural disaster’s immense scope.

Another normal tendency is, when events as momentous as what has besieged Houston and other cities in Texas, Louisiana, and elsewhere take place, kindly but firmly suggesting to others perpetually enveloped in their own personal drama that while (quoting Shakespeare) the quality of mercy is not strained (quoting no one I’m aware of) the amount of available sympathy is most likely severely rationed. It’s not that anyone stops caring about others when something heavy comes down, but you might have to accept a rain check and realize you’re not the universe’s center this week, with next week also in question. Spock noted in the second (and easily the best) Star Trek movie that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the individual or the few. This is a hard saying in today’s society, where self-definition demands the same glorification as self-glorification. Problem is, when everyone believes and acts like they are the star of the movie, the supporting cast is nowhere to be found and John Donne’s statement that no man is an island takes on a whole new meaning. The one-man or woman band quickly becomes a one-note samba providing no motivation for dancing.

This ties into the simultaneous beauty and horror of the Internet in general and social media in particular: fortunately, everyone can participate; unfortunately, so can anyone. Whether trolling others with differing views, hiding behind a screen name’s non-existent anonymity and deliberately provoking people in order to play the victim when they react, or constantly trolling for attention and/or sympathy while playing to the hilt the role of World’s Only Bereaved™, perpetually screaming online “look at MEEEEE” is the modern version of the boy who cried wolf: eventually, even if your complaint is legitimate, everyone else will have grown so tired of it and you that when you really need someone there will be no one around.

It may be utterly shocking to some – well, many – that were they to unplug once in a while the sun would rise the following morning. Equally astounding is the notion that there are other people in the world and they matter too. We all have our sorrows and our battles, this explaining why far more often than not pity party invitations are marked returned to sender. Even as it is improper to tell someone who is suffering they should get over it, it is inconsiderate to insist others allow themselves to be dragged with you as you wallow in your inability to get through it.

Loving someone is not manifested by there there-ing their perpetual plea for attention. It is manifested by knowing where sympathy is demonstrated via support. Don’t feed the attention-hungry trollers. Instead, suggest they shut up and go do something to uplift themselves other than be emotional vampires. Watch a Woody Woodpecker cartoon. Listen to some Grateful Dead. Turn off Facebook and Twitter in favor of feeling some sunshine on your face and listening to the birds tweet. Do something for someone.

There is enough rain falling on us all. Refuse to indulge your perpetual individual cloud. Embrace the sunshine daydream. Please.