Good Cause, Muddled Argument

The first item in the Philadelpia Gay News LGBTQ Youth Supplement is an essay titled "The case for gender-neutral bathrooms in Philadelphia high schools." The argument is less persuasive than it might be because of the author's insistence on trying to frame it in ideological terms that don't really fit, as I argue in the letter-to-the-editor below.

Matthew Zarenkiewicz advocated for a good position in his recent article, but muddled the argument by trying to conform it to ideology bearing little relation to reality.

He claims current practices are "derived from misogyny, heterosexism and homophobia," yet fails to specify how. It's true the main objects of traditionalist fears are (transgender) women. But they're feared not because they're women but, on the contrary, because they're perceived to be men.

For comparison, consider another story in the news recently: the way some airlines discriminate against men by forbidding them, but not women, to sit next to unaccompanied minors (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/14/travel/unaccompanied-children-flights/index.html). If you peruse this story, you'll find no mention at all of gay, bisexual, or transgender people, and women figure only as perpetrators, not victims of discrimination. Yet the underlying issue here is in fact the same as with resistance to gender-neutral bathrooms: namely, the bigoted view of male sexuality as inherently predatory. Zarenkiewicz does mention this attitude in his piece, but fails to name it. It has a name, but its name isn't misogyny, homophobia, or transphobia -- it's MISANDRY. Learn the word, folks!

Urge Your University to Preserve Due Process

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE) is urging its supporters to write their alma maters about the worrying trend toward so-called "victim-centered investigations." I've written a letter to Penn's President Gutman laying out the case against this approach:

I am very concerned about the threat to due process rights and the presumption of innocence posed by the trend toward so-called "victim-centered" investigations, primarily being promoted in connection with accusations of sexual assault on college and university campuses.

By substituting partiality toward the accuser -- even to the point of deliberately refraining from gathering evidence in some circumstances -- this approach not only increases the likelihood of false convictions, but ultimately can only undermine the public's confidence in judicial processes, and make it more skeptical even of true accusations.

Indeed, inasmuch as the push for this approach is mostly restricted to the context of sexual assault investigations, it could end up making the public even less willing to believe these allegations than those of other crimes.

Please commit Penn to maintaining neutral fact-finding as the standard for all its judicial processes.

Leaving and Recovering from Cultic Groups and Relationships: A Workshop for Families and Former Members

Posting this for anyone to whom it may pertain -- and you or someone close to you may have been involved in a cultic group without realizing it yet:

http://www.icsahome.com/events/localevents/los-angeles-workshop

So... Now I Know What to Do with Myself

I've been wrestling with which way to take the rest of my life since I was laid off a few months ago. Today I attended an Idealist Grad Fair, half not believing it could do me any good, and fully undecided about which of numerous fields I might pursue. By partway through, after mentioning to one rep that psychological issues had got in the way of pursuing post-baccalaureate education or even a suitable job, it hit me: the one area I can make the most  difference is helping people dealing with the same issues that got in my way, especially the aftereffects of cult involvement. So now I am going to pursue a career in psychology where I can specialize in that, as a too-small handful currently do.

We're Here, We're Queer, and We Like to Say Hello

That was one of the chants by a crowd on Gollege Green today as I was heading toward Penn's Van Pelt Library.

When I first saw it I worried it might be part of the recent neo-puritan reaction to the "scandal" about a sexually oriented email sent to some freshwomen inviting them to a hookup party. It turned out instead to be a pro-LGBT protest in response to a handful of fundamentalist street preachers. The latter had a sign reading, "No one is born homosexual." After the chant under way as I approached, "Love trumps hate," died down, I volunteered through cupped hands, "No one is born a bigoted fundamentalist!" Another protester commented, "No, they have to be brainwashed!"

Speaking of brainwashing, while the term is probably apt for most homophobic street preachers, it isn't so much for people who are simply propagandized by right-wing talk radio. So, in preparation for an event this evening featuring a documentary about the rise of such media, I've printed out a number of copies of Margaret Singer's article "Thought Reform Exists: Organized, Programmatic Influence," incorporating a table comparing and contrasting the different varieties of social influence and persuasion programs, and will make them available at the event.

Of Paranoids and Pollsters

A friend made a point today that hadn't occurred to me: because paranoid people are apt not to answer pollsters -- and because, for the first time, a major-party Presidential nominee is aiming his message largely at paranoid people -- it's likely Trump will do better in November than the polls indicate.

He also noted that prediction markets, which historically have done better than polls, are predicting a closer race as well.

A Tale of Two Docs

This being the first day of school in Philadelphia, it seemed a fine time to put up some posters for Cassie Jaye's documentary The Red Pill. And where better to put them than where they'll be seen by fresh, bright young minds just turning back to academic studies, possibly just starting to take an interest in social issues, but not yet indoctrinated? So I started this morning with the environs of Central and Girls' High Schools, both of them geared to the academically gifted. I'll try hitting others in the coming days.

I got news yesterday about another film I'd taken an interest in, Kamala Lopez's Equal Means Equal. Between the trailer and the reviews I've seen, unfortunately, it looks as if this one is shaped by a deeply ingrained, totally un-self-aware gynocentrism. For instance, one question we hear in the trailer, apparently intended as an example of why we need the Equal Rights Amendment, is, "How is it that the United States has more homeless women and girls than any other developed country?" Where to begin? How about, "Because we have more homeless people than any other developed country"? That, in turn, is because we have much less of a social safety net -- but most of those many homeless we have are men. Indeed, the ERA might help us address this problem, because arguably much homelessness is caused by public laws and policies biased against men, which that amendment would prohibit. But that's not what the film is evidently suggesting, unless the trailer is intentionally misleading. I was holding some hope for the latter when I saw earlier versions of it, but those hopes are dashed by the fact there's no hint at any surprise twist in either of the reviews I've read.

Quote for the Day

Beware of "anti" formulas. They are always inadequate because they are purely negative. One cannot conquer a principle except by opposing to it another principle -- a superior principle.

This statement by Daniel Guerin appears in the 1945 preface to his Fascism and Big Business. I've chosen to read this for the next meeting of my left book group, at which fascism will be the topic.

Guerin may here be seen as anticipating frame theory, whose application to politics has been expounded on in recent years by cognitive linguist George Lakoff. Of course Lakoff is a social democrat whose political perspective remains within the horizons of capitalism and statism, whereas Guerin was a libertarian Marxist. But the psychological principle expressed is similar -- with Lakoff's version actually being somewhat more robust in that he suggests "anti formulas," by implicitly restating and thereby reinforcing the nominally opposed frame, are not merely inadequate but directly counterproductive.

Logically, One Shouldn't Need to Trade Votes to Be Pragmatic

All one need do is weigh the trade-off between the instrumental vs. expressive value of one's own vote, and choose accordingly. I came to that conclusion about fifteen years ago, but the argument is summed up well in this recent piece: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2016/08/youre-responsible-for-what-happens-because-of-you.

But I suppose some people may need to frame it as trading votes with a fellow citizen to allow them to be pragmatic without feeling they're "selling out."

At the same time, we can continue to work for proportional representation (PR) and instant runoff voting (IRV), which would render such trade-offs unnecessary.

Woo Hoo!

I just secured a ticket to the world premiere of Cassie Jaye's documentary on the men's rights movement, The Red Pill.

Looks Like I'm Still Looking

I did my first, training, day today with Community Voters Project, which turned out also to be my last. Possibly this had something to do with the fact that there wasn't much actual training.

We were given a talk about what we were supposed to do and how, and then assigned to teams. Once arriving at our sites, however, we each worked on our own.

True, my team leader asked if I'd like to spend some time watching him, and I declined since, in past experience, I've done well on things like registering voters, petitioning, etc. as a volunteer. Still, you'd think an organization that's serious about training wouldn't just let someone go because he overestimated how well he'd do unsupervised on the first day. You'd expect them to say, "Next time spend some time watching me so you can see how it's done."

Also, it seemed a little disingenuous of him to acknowledge that luck can be a factor but "rules are rules," since in fact, of those coworkers who gave me a precise figure when I asked how many people they'd registered, neither of them had met the quota either, although they'd come closer.

In this context it was interesting that, when I left the building, I saw someone sitting nearby with a sign reading, "Community Voters Project discriminates." He told me he thinks they wouldn't hire him because of his age, and I suppose that could have covertly been a factor in their letting me go, too. Another factor, perhaps in combination with bias, may be general incompetence. You might think, for instance, that leaders of an organization based and operating in Center City Philadelphia would be familiar with its streets. Yet, when I left with my team leader to go to our target site, he initially started us in the wrong direction, until I pointed out it was the other way.

Looks Like I Have a New Job

A few months ago I was laid off from the courier job I'd held for a long time. Today I interviewed with the Community Voters Project, which aims to increase registration and voting in communities of color, and the interviewer seemed quite enthusiastic about me, especially when she asked me to come back next week for training. So, unless I do poorly at that -- which I don't expect, since I already know I'm good at this sort of thing -- I suppose this means I'll have a new job. The starting pay will be slightly higher than my last one, with opportunities for advancement for which I likely will qualify.

Goggles

I've completed another piece of math art. In "Goggles," the color of each cell reflects, to the nearest whole number, the product of that cell's center-to-center distances from the two foci.

Another Kind of Political Principle

Ont the latest On the Media, a Canadian advocate for strategic voting explained how it helped that country elect a more progressive government without reducing the Green vote:
http://www.wnyc.org/story/voting-head-not-heart

Getting Refocused After the Cult

Last weekend I attended a workshop for those recovering from an experience with a high-demand, high-control group and its aftermath. Although a delay in the bus trip got me there a few hours late on Friday, and I didn't recover full alertness until Sunday, I still got some important insights I expect will help me make the most of the rest of my life. Even though my cultic experience was a long time ago, I'm still dealing with some of the aftereffects, especially since I didn't start to understand what had happened until relatively recently.

If you've had an experience with a high-demand, high-control group, it may likewise be affecting you in ways you don't yet recognize; such groups never advertise themselves as cults, and are very good at convincing you that if you leave -- voluntarily or otherwise -- there's something wrong with you, not with the group. I recommend that if you even think this might apply to you, or someone you know, you should check out the resources provided by reFOCUS and the International Cultic Studies Association. For that matter, these are things everyone should learn about to help them avoid psychological manipulation in the first place.

Remember, no one ever joins a cult. People join groups of friendly people who seem to be doing important things, and only later find themselves stuck in a cult. Asking what kind of person would join a cult is like asking what kind of person would step in quicksand.

An Unprecedented Rally in Defense of Trans People in Philadelphia

I spent part of this afternoon at The Great Wall of Love, a peaceful mobilization called in response to the Westboro Baptist Church cult's plans to protest the LGBT-oriented Mazzoni Center clinic, and its transgender patients in particular. The purpose was not to confront WBC, but rather to shield patients from having to see or hear their hatred. To that end music and songs were played by the Philadelphia Freedom Band, including my friend Erin Worrell whom I hadn't seen in several months.

I especially liked the WBC parody signs with messages like "God Hates Single Ply," "God Hates the Schuylkill Expressway," and "Legalize Gay Marijuana."

As it was winding down, I heard an organizer call it the largest specifically pro-trans rally ever. Apparently no more than five cultists actually showed up and they only stayed for about five minutes, so that most of us never saw them.

NPR Does Another Totally Gender-Biased Story About Sexual Harassment

In the wake of Roger Ailes's dismissal from Fox (So-Called) News, NPR ran yet another interview that blithely assumes men can only be sexual victimizers and women only victims. I posted this comment:

Another thoroughly sexist story about sexual harassment. If you'd thought to check your assumptions, you might have discovered articles like "Male Rape in America" (http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html), showing that women's capacity for sexual abuse is comparable to men's. Given this fact, what reason is there to believe West's claim that "when women are in power, this kind of thing will stop"? None whatever; more women in power would just mean a larger proportion of female abusers and a larger proportion of male victims.

Abuses of power aren't about gender; they're about power. If we want to eliminate sexual harassment, we have to end the class stratification that gives some people power over others.

Thom Hartmann, Retract Your Slander of Milo

On the 21 July edition of his RT show The Big Picture, Thom Hartmann insinuated that Breitbart commentator Milo Yiannopoulos had been engaging in racist and sexist harassment, yet totally failed to state any examples thereof, instead merely using his banning by Twitter to pivot into a more general discussion of Internet harassment. I've posted this comment in response:

In a possibly defamatory bait-and-switch, you led into the discussion of Internet harassment with a mention of Milo Yiannopoulos, yet never substantiated that reference with any evidence that he's harassed anyone. I don't follow his Twitter feed, so I wouldn't know if he's done so. What I do know is that he almost single-handedly scored an important victory for freedom of thought and expression by saving the latest project of Cassie Jaye, the award-winning feminist independent filmmaker. When she needed additional funds to complete it last year, she discovered that the progressive foundations who'd supported her work in the past were unwilling to provide any more support unless she gave up creative control -- a demand she'd never faced before. The evident reason was that, in the course of making The Red Pill, a documentary on the Men's Rights Movement, she'd found herself questioning some of her feminist convictions, and incorporated that into the film. This sign that it wouldn't be the one-sided hit piece her funders may have previously expected made them unwilling to leave her in charge.

 

Rather than give up her independence to an ideological litmus test, she decided to try and raise the rest of the needed funds through a Kickstarter campaign, which would guarantee supporters could have no influence over content. But it initially looked doubtful she could raise the necessary money in time -- until Yiannopoulos wrote a column about her plight. Then, overnight, a Kickstarter that was less than a third of the way to its goal was taken over the top, and then some, thanks to supporters of free speech who follow Milo and spread the word about this situation. For this reason alone, Milo deserves to be called a hero of free speech. You owe him an apology.

I Give Another TV interview

I was just interviewed by Philadelphia's CBS3 for a story about why politicians don't do more outreach to nontheists, despite our being more numerous than any other specific faith group. She apparently was endeavoring to get views on this from nonbelievers of various political bents, as my name had been suggested by the Green Party. She said it would air at 11 tonight.

My previous TV interview was a few months ago, when I was one of those demonstrating in support of Apple in its dispute with the FBI in front of its Center City store.

Suicide Is Painless (Not)

An appallingly ignorant side comment by Marty Moss-Coane on today's Radio Times provoked this comment from me:

I was appalled by Marty's reference to suicide as a "narcissistic" act.

A narcissist is preoccupied by concern about how others see them; they insist that others view them favorably (or pretend to). By contrast, a person who commits suicide -- except in the rare cases where they can be seen as doing it for a larger purpose with which others will sympathize -- is someone enduring such unbearable pain that they no longer care how others see them; they care only about ending the pain, even at the cost of condemning themselves to be seen ever after as a "quitter," and an embarrassment to those close to them.

It was particularly shocking to hear Moss-Coane's ignorant remark so shortly after Robin Williams' tragic death by suicide, followed by the explanations authorities on the topic had to make in response to all the insensitive, angry comments about it on social media by people lacking any understanding of depression. Did she learn nothing from all that? Is she actually expressing anger at how suicide "embarrasses" the survivors -- and projecting *their* narcissism onto those who commit it?