tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post4199500604245203102..comments2023-12-20T04:18:41.617-06:00Comments on The Hunting of the Snark: The Hunting Of The Snark Cookie Of Gratitude: Thanks For The Sex At DawnSusan of Texashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-26916574726239032152010-09-07T14:57:16.802-05:002010-09-07T14:57:16.802-05:00My response to a description of Sex at Dawn which ...My response to a description of <i>Sex at Dawn</i> which claims people are naturally polyamorous, would have been, "Well DUH!" Thousands of years of men and women fooling around ... all the strict, even vicious rules made to try and stop all the polyamoré are there for a good reason. It don't come easy.<br /><br />And I ordered the book from Amazon.Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03176801494652946278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-60070267557757225042010-09-07T00:18:37.567-05:002010-09-07T00:18:37.567-05:00McArdle and Althouse together? Dangerous!
Clev...McArdle and Althouse together? Dangerous! <br /><br />Clever Pseudonym points out an important distinction about venue. But let's be honest - both of them often offer opinions that are unfounded or poorly argued, and sometimes preposterous. McArdle is more likely to just make crap up, while Althouse is more likely to seek refuge by being pedantic (See Roy Edroso's most recent Althouse posts). Both tend to get hostile when challenged. It’s a bit refreshing to see Althouse admit that her standards are as low as they are. Of course, she's still trying to justify them. There's nothing wrong with a free-wheelin', opinionated blog – but if the opinions are poorly supported, and offered authoritatively or snottily, it's not surprising there's criticism in response. If you dish it out, you should be able to take it. And if you want to be taken seriously, you should make substantive arguments. <br /><br />Two of Althouse's funniest are still her claims that great artists are conservative, and that fiction shouldn't be taught in school. (Both wound up involving multiple posts and comments.) <br /><br />As for McMegan – shilling crap <i>is</i> her job. It's sad to see <i>The Atlantic</i>'s decline.Batocchiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02193752396025012825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-52909343022064725512010-09-05T22:30:00.500-05:002010-09-05T22:30:00.500-05:00So Megan reads the first couple chapters, complain...So Megan reads the first couple chapters, complains that there's no chapter on jealousy, and then when confronted with the fact that there is a chapter on jealousy, she simply writes it off as "terrible"?<br /><br />This reminds me when I was in college and somebody handed me a guitar. Some smug a-hole said, "I bet you can't play Unchained," and as I played the opening riff the a-hole guffawed and said, "Ha! He can't even play the rest of the song." <br /><br />Just as I couldn't play the entire song within the 8 seconds it took this jerk to criticize me, it was the fault of the authors at Sex at Dawn that their chapter on Jealousy didn't pass through McArdle's brain before she decided to put down the book and review it. The chapter on jealousy doesn't exist because she didn't read it. Isn't that like the early stages of infancy where objects that aren't in the child's field of vision don't exist?atatnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-5723229603153107242010-09-05T14:38:45.138-05:002010-09-05T14:38:45.138-05:00That is:
McMegan 5 days ago in reply to kimcmich...That is:<br /><br />McMegan 5 days ago in reply to kimcmich <br /><br />I've known a number of people who experimented with polyamory; most of them found that jealousy made this very, very tricky. Not impossible. But very difficult. Even when there was explicit agreement on the rules. <br /><br />Also: (heh)<br /><br />McMegan 5 days ago in reply to yahoo-JZX5MGJ7X2MQEOFLR2M2CQBZUA <br /><br />The chapter [on jealousy] is terrible; it consists of saying "If parents can pretend to love siblings equally, why doesn't that work for sexual partners?" In fact, parents don't usually manage to conceal their favoritism, and there is enormous competition between siblings as a result. This is not a serious treatment. Nor does the chapter refute the notion of sexual jealousy as a universal; it simply posits that some societies have managed very stringent social mores to control it. Indeed, the fact that they emphasize these social mores implies that jealousy is a universal, hard-to-deal-with force. <br /><br />timb116 3 days ago in reply to McMegan <br /><br />Someone was not part of a loving family....apparently <br />Flag 4 people liked thisSusan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-35094284521966322872010-09-05T14:31:58.144-05:002010-09-05T14:31:58.144-05:00I'm still trying to figure out why Ezra Klein ...I'm still trying to figure out why Ezra Klein still links to McArdle. I'm guessing <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2010/08/is-monogamy-unnatural/62273/#comment-73233490" rel="nofollow">this</a> has something to do with it.Susan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-88755964688828873622010-09-05T14:17:04.907-05:002010-09-05T14:17:04.907-05:00Isn't Althouse a law professor at the Universi...Isn't Althouse a law professor at the University of Wisconsin? I'm sure her colleagues are mighty proud of that reasoning.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-19244727949046694352010-09-05T14:15:01.085-05:002010-09-05T14:15:01.085-05:00How many times can one person have such blatant id...<i>How many times can one person have such blatant idiocy and incompetence exposed and still keep their job?</i><br /><br />Ann or Megan?TBogghttp://tbogg.firedoglake.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-56684763906951816012010-09-05T13:56:45.174-05:002010-09-05T13:56:45.174-05:00Well, the major difference for me is that Ann is a...Well, the major difference for me is that Ann is a blogger with a Blogspot site and, as Dr. Ryan illustrated with his assumption that Megan's review must have been an intelluctually stunted hiccup rather than representative of her usual low quality output, because she writes for the Atlantic and it's a respected publication. That's the difference, Althouse. You: Hobby blog. Megan: Professional blog at an aged, once respected magazine founded by some of the greatest figures in American letters.<br /><br />And Dr. Ryan also illustrated how wrong Ann's assertions are that it should be okay to review a book you haven't finished. One of the main points Megan used to prop up her arguments was her claim that the book did not address the issue of jealousy, while it turns out we're told there is indeed an entire chapter on the subject. I guess rightie female bloggers must have the urge to stick together, because there's no way anyone with a brain could not only defend, but claim Victory!!! Megan!!!, a supposedly professional journalist making a huge mistake like that.<br /><br />How many times can one person have such blatant idiocy and incompetence exposed and still keep their job?Clever Pseudonymhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00782313892753904678noreply@blogger.com