"For me the best introduction is the human face." - Dalai Lama

For me the best introduction is the human face. When I see two eyes, one mouth, one nose, I know I’m dealing with another human being like me. I’m like those young children who don’t care about their companions’ background so long as they smile and are willing to play.

— Dalai Lama (@DalaiLama) 24 October 2019

The whole thread.

‘Infamous Since 1864’

Cut from Adweek

Some brands have to create dramatic advertising or packaging to make up for the incredibly bland true stories behind them.

But not Smirnoff, whose vodka began as the hand-picked favorite of czars and then (to avoid the czars’ bullet-riddled fate) was spirited away on a decades-long, byzantine path to eventual global success.

That history of how the brand fled Russia amid revolution and eventually became one of the world’s largest liquor brands now fuels Smirnoff’s first global campaign in 25 years: “Infamous Since 1864.” ...

There's advertising, then there's ...

What you think you know about the climate is probably wrong

Tomorrow the Global Climate Strikes are set to start. So this article in 'The Conversation' is more than apt and H/T goes to Richard Murphy.

Here is a snippet:

We humans have a natural tendency to focus on negative stories. We tend to assume things are worse than they really are, and going downhill fast. We forget how bad things were in the past and how far we’ve come.

In reality, the world is often better — and getting better — than we think, something I wrote about in my book, The Perils of Perception: Why We’re Wrong About Nearly Everything. Murder rates, deaths from terrorism and extreme poverty are all down. Life expectancy, health and education levels are up. And yet, there is one vital, urgent exception to this rule: we still don’t realise how badly wrong our global climate and environment have gone.

A new survey of Britons which tested understanding of some key facts about the environment reveals the extent of environmental misperceptions. Rather than asking people what they thought might happen, this study instead focused on assessing knowledge of the world as it is right now.

One question, for example, was how many of the past 22 years have been the hottest on record?

The answer is 20, but the average guess was just 12. And one in five people guessed five or fewer.

Britons also overestimated some facts, such as how much air travel contributes to greenhouse guesses. The average guess was that 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions come from air travel, when in fact it only accounts for around 2%. Respondents also assumed that air travel’s emissions are about equal to that of all other forms of transport put together, when in reality, the latter contributes about ten times as much as flights. This is due to the relative rarity of flights compared to other forms of transport.

Misperceptions about the source of greenhouse gas emissions. The Policy Institute, King's College London

Full article here.

The Benefits Of Being Poor

“You know I’m rich, right?”

“What?”

“You know I have a trust fund, right? I can buy my own sandwich if I wanted it.”

This is the moment when after three years of friendship, Marcus sat down and told me his life story. His cottages in Norway. Sneaking into the family study. Learning about the cost of hardwoods and hearing his boorish, critical father sulk in 5-star hotel rooms.

Marcus did not act this way out of anxiety, grief, stress, or because he had nobody to tell him his habits will kill him. He lived as a starving writer not out of necessity, but for the aesthetic. Out of some desire to imitate the Bohemian 19th century writers. Out of artistry. Style. Intentional choice.

This is from the first paragraph of "The Real Problem At Yale Is Not Free Speech".

This is a story about an institution and an elite that have lost themselves.

Excerpt:

Western elites are not comfortable with their place in society and the responsibilities that come with it, and realize that there are deep structural problems with the old systems of coordination. But lacking the capacity for an orderly restructuring, or even a diagnosis of problems and needs, we dive deeper into a chaotic ideological mode of coordination that sweeps away the old structures.

When you live with this mindset, what you end up with is not an establishment where a woke upper class rallies and advocates for the rights of minorities, the poor, and underprivileged groups. What you have is a blind and self-righteous upper class that becomes structurally unable to take coordinated responsibility. You get stuck in an ideological mode of coordination, where no one can speak the truth to correct collective mistakes and overreaches without losing position.

This ideology is promulgated and advertised by universities, but it doesn’t start or stop at universities. All the fundraisers. All the corporate events. The Oscars. Let’s take down the Man. They say this in front of their PowerPoints. They clink champagne glasses. Let’s take down the Man! But there is no real spirit of revolution in these words. It is all in the language they understand—polite and clean, because it isn’t really real. It is a performative spectacle about their own morale and guilt.

If you were the ruler while everything was burning around you, and you didn’t know what to do, what would you do? You would deny that you are in charge. And you would recuperate the growing discontented masses into your own power base, so that things stay comfortable for you.

Yale students, if they weren’t powerful when they came in (and most of them were), they gain power by being bestowed a Yale degree. What would you do with this power? You don’t want to abuse it; you’re not outright evil. No, you want something different. You want to be absolved of your power. You are ashamed of your power. Why should you have it, and not somebody else—maybe somebody more deserving? You never really signed up for this. You would rather be somebody normal. But not, “normal,” normal. More like normal with options and vacations and money “normal.” Normal but still powerful. Or you want to be something even better than normal. You want to be the underdog. There is always a certain strange sense of pleasure in being an underdog. Expectations are lower. Whenever you accomplish anything at all—it is an accomplishment. You would rather have a narrative story of “coming up from the bottom.” Someone who not only does not have the responsibility of power, but someone who has a right to feel resentful of those who do. And better yet—someone who can use this resentment as a tool for self-interest.

How do Yale students give up their power? They do this in one of two ways. One way is termed “selling out.” This usually means taking a high-paying job at an institution that is at worst blatantly unethical, and at best not intentionally idealistic. A consulting job, a meaningless tech job, or a position at an investment bank. This is generally seen as the selfish route.

But there is more to selling out that nobody talks about. These jobs are the dream jobs of the middle class. They’re not supposed to be jobs for the sons and daughters of millionaires and billionaires—these kids don’t actually need the money. They want independence from their parents and proof that they can make it on their own—and prestigious work experience—but they have wealth acquired through generations that they can always fall back on. These people are generally as harmless as the middle class—which is to say completely harmless. They keep to themselves. They quietly grow their bank accounts and their 401ks. And just like the real middle class, they don’t want to risk their next promotion through being too outspoken. They have virtually no political power. This mindset is best encapsulated by: “I’ll go with the program. Please leave me alone to be comfortable and quietly make money.”

They effectively become middle class, because there is no longer any socially esteemed notion of upper class. They have a base of power, of f-you money, that they could use to become something greater than just another office worker or businessperson. But there is no script for that, no institutional or ideological support. What would it even mean to be an esteemed, blue-blooded aristocrat in 2019? So they take the easy and safe way.

How else do Yale students give up their responsibility?

They go in the other direction. These are the people who call themselves idealists and say they want to save the world. They feel the weight of responsibility from their social status—but they don’t know how to process and integrate this responsibility into their lives properly. Traditionally, structurally well-organized elite institutions would absorb and direct this benevolent impulse to useful purpose. But our traditional institutions have decayed and lost their credibility, so these idealists start looking for alternatives, and start signaling dissociation from those now-disreputable class markers.

The capacity to really think through what an alternative should look like, and create one, is so rare as to be effectively nonexistent. Instead, idealists are forced to take the easy way of just going along with dominant ideological narratives of what it means to do good. They feel guilty about their wealth and privileges, and feel that they won’t be doing their part unless they do something very altruistic, and the idealistic ideologies reinforce these feelings. So they go overboard, and rush headlong into whatever they are supposed to do. They purport to speak for and be allied with underprivileged groups. They get their professors fired for minor infractions. They frantically tear down whatever vestiges of the old institutions and hierarchies that they can, and conspicuously feel guilty about the rest.

These are the people who buy clothes from Salvation Army and decline your Sunday brunch invitation because it’s too expensive, sometimes with the implication that they are saving their money to donate to more effective causes, if they aren’t pretending not to have it. They are the people who might attack or cut off their friends for ideological reasons. They discharge their personal responsibility by sacrificing everything outside of their distant mission, including friendships and social fabric.

It’s an understandable impulse. After all, given the state of legacy institutions, what else are you going to do with the energy of idealism? But ultimately, by going along with the narratives of an ideology that can efficiently capture these impulses, but has no structural ability to deliver on its promises, it just diverts more energy from what a normal benevolent elite should be doing.

These people might sometimes say that they are “tired of fighting”—but this is not the full truth. Fighting is fun. It is always fun to be a warrior—to have something you believe in that guides you. To be part of a tribe, working for the good of mankind. To be revered and respected for being on the bleeding edge of the paradigm.

Especially when you’re winning.

Very much recommended reading.

Any thoughts on eScooters? Yeah, lots.

XKCD

Former AUDI CEO Rupert Stadler looking forward to an invigorating and fruitful exchange of ideas with the judge in Munich court

Rupert Stadler - nothing more encouraging to him
than finally again being able
to shag his wife in a relaxed manner (Image)

From his posh digs former AUDI CEO Rupert Stadler confirmed some days ago that charges have been brought against him by the Munich prosecution.

He said he feels flattered by the attention shown to him but in all honesty deems it undeserved as he was only doing his job and that was looking after the sole product of AUDI, 'Vorsprung durch Technik' (Lead by Technology).

He reflected on those precious six months he had been granted to live in luxurious government-provided housing and being able to taste the finest southern German provincial cuisine. He found time to contemplate his company's business and is now absolutely convinced this must all be based on a misunderstanding.

In a snide remark, he let it slip in that he has a hunch a certain person with a flamboyant moustache who just recently had shown his lack of gratefulness by driving off into the sunset in a strange car to be the snitch.

He expressed his full trust in the unblemished record of staunch impartiality of the Munich court and is looking forward to an invigorating and fruitful exchange of ideas with the judge.

In the end, he added, he is confident that he will be fully exonerated and his integrity proven beyond the slightest doubt. There is nothing more encouraging to him than finally again being able to shag his wife in a relaxed manner he concluded with a smirk adjusting his glasses.

Please show your generosity in Jarvis Dupont's quest to lead a life sans drudgery

In a display of our altruism we would like to present this eminent gentleman and apply to your moral obligation. No, make that duty!

Jarvis Dupont

Here is his Jarvis Dupont's Story. It is heart-wrenching.

Hi guys, I would love you all to donate some of your hard-earned cash to me because I absolutely cannot be bothered to get a job. I find work so utterly tiresome! It's such a BORE and in any case, I dedicate so much of my time and energy to fighting fascists on Twitter, I have very little time for anything else.

Father's allowance came through as usual this month, but I had already spent a good chunk of it taking my chums out for a slap up meal at The Square (yes, I know it's a tad on the expensive side, but their Poulette "Cour D'armoise" is simply to die for!)

£690 would allow me to renew my Luxury Wellness Yoga Spa subscription, and I'll also be able to splash out on a darling little pair of cufflinks I saw in Selfridges last week. Honestly they are just delightful and at only £205 they are an absolute steal. Can't wait to wear them when I'm strutting my stuff at Shoreditch House.

Please Donate

May we also draw your attention to Gentlewoman, Slam Poet, Activist, Healer, Radical intersectionalist poet. Selfless and brave Titania McGrath. Her fight is inspiring ... and oh so sad.

How Much did the Gothic Churches Cost?

After Notre Dame

An Estimate of Ecclesiastical Building Costs in the Paris Basin between 1100-1250

By Amy Denning

Bachelor’s Thesis, Florida Atlantic University (2012)

Abstract: Several scholars have studied the explicit (tangible) costs of the ecclesiastical buildings constructed in the High Middle Ages. However, no scholar has examined the implicit (opportunity) cost of unskilled labor required for their construction, or tried to estimate the total cost of their building as a percentage of regional GDP.

This thesis examines the implicit costs of building the Gothic churches of the Paris Basin built between 1100-1250, and attempts to estimate the percentage of the regional economy that was devoted to build them. I estimate that over this 150-year period, on average, 21.5 percent of the regional economy was devoted to the construction of these Gothic churches, 1.5 percent of which is directly related to the implicit cost of labor.

Introduction: During the High Middle Ages, Western Europe was plagued with famine, disease, and dismal economic growth. Population was increasing at a rate faster than the (Maddison, 2003), leaving the average person experiencing declining levels of sustenance every year. However, during the period known as the High Middle Ages, between 1100-1250, the Catholic Church built over 1400 Gothic churches in the Paris Basin alone. The lavish ecclesiastical building campaigns of the Church represented a portion of the GDP for the region, but what percentage of GDP does this building campaign represent?

Excerpt from the Pdf:

History and Background

At the start of the High Middle Ages, circa 500 C.E., the Church was in its infancy; however, by 1100 C.E., the Church had grown to possibly the largest private organization the world had seen to date. Today, there are over 1.1 billion Roman Catholics (around 17 percent of the world’s population). After the conversion of Constantine (circa 300 C.E.) and other important political figures, the Catholic Church proliferated throughout Western Europe. During the High Middle Ages and before the Protestant Reformation, the Popes had more power than at any time in history. The Church crowned rulers, such as Charlemagne, created laws, started wars, and served as the supreme authority on salvation and the afterlife. 

...

Opportunity costs

The Catholic Church maximized profits by utilizing what was essentially slave labor (Kraus, 1979: 11). This caused the burden of high opportunity costs to plague Western Europe’s economy. Ekelund et al. address opportunity costs and their effect on economic development, reminding us that “economic resources have alternative uses” (2006: 203). The authors estimate that 9 percent of adult men built ecclesiastical buildings in France between 1100 and 1400 C.E. Instead of building churches, they could have built “fences around common areas” or invested in technology, infrastructure, and education (Ekelund et al. 2006: 203).

Cathedrals as an entry barrier for other religions and signalling

In addition to being the seat of a bishop, Ekelund et al. suggests that the cathedrals (and other large churches) operated as both a limit-pricing device and as a signaling device. These two devices functioned as a barrier-to-entry for other competing religions, such as the Muslims and the Gnostics (2006: 198-231). Viewing the Church as a monopoly, the Church’s actions to increase barriers-to-entry allowed it to continue to function as a monopoly by dissuading competition. The medieval Church effectively reduced the threat of competition throughout the High Middle Ages. In fact, it was not until the Protestant Reformation during the 16th century that the Catholic Church lost control of its monopoly. The churches played a large role in the Church’s profit-maximizing agenda.

Another way the Church controlled the market was by “overproducing” goods to ensure that other religions would be unable to compete with it. One way to see the overproduction is by looking at the over 1400 churches built in the Paris Basin in a 150-year period. Large, adorned churches can be viewed as a marketing tool, projecting their market dominance over other possible competitors, and also representing its services to the consumer in order to maintain market share. In this case, the larger churches also functioned as a signaling device by presenting wealth and power to potential rivals of the Church and its general wealth.

How did they finance it?

In order to finance so many churches, the Church had multiple sources of revenue during this time, including “tithes, land rents, donations, bequests, fees charged for judicial services, proceeds from the sale of indulgences, and income derived from the monastic production and marketing of agricultural produce” (Ekelund et al., 1996: 33). These revenue streams created one of the richest and most powerful private organizations in the world. 

The resources needed were enormous

In the 150-year period between 1100-1250 C.E., 1,472 Gothic churches were built in the Paris Basin alone (James, 2003). According to Gimpel, “more stone was quarried in France [from 1050-1350] than in ancient Egypt during its whole history” (1961: 5). In order to understand the immensity of resources required for the Gothic churches, a basic understanding of church architecture and construction is imperative. 

The cost of one cathedral

The unit method developed by James uses the Building Inflation Index, which adjusts for building costs from year to year. He also adjusts for the changes in building techniques by inflating the cost of the units by 70 percent. The overall impact of this adjustment results in each unit being worth almost $73,000 a unit in 2011 dollars. The average unit per church is approximately 205. Thus, Chartres, at 7448 units, would be estimated to be $543 million to build (2011 dollars). The total estimated explicit cost of building these Gothic churches is just under $22 billion (US 2011 dollars). 

...

Two questions were raised: What would have happened if the Church had spent less on ecclesiastical buildings and more on schools, infrastructure, or other technologies? Could the low economic growth that plagued the High Middle Ages have ended sooner than it did?  

There is more. Interesting read throughout. 

Why Modern Architecture SUCKS.

"There is not enough Prozac in the world to make people feel OK of going down this block."

Architectural battleground and here.

Let's talk about sex, rough sex

Interesting insight in that sort of thing. Just so you know, rough sex does not correlate with violence in the relationship or abuse. On the contrary, both men and women often initiate rough sexual behaviors. Rebecca L. Burch and Catherine Salmon have more on

The Rough Stuff: Understanding Aggressive Consensual Sex

While a great deal of research has been done analyzing the prevalence and implications of sexual aggression and sexual violence. Less can be found on the topic of rough sex. In a sample of 734 male and female undergraduates, we examined the extent of rough sexual acts in romantic relationships. This study represents a first step in determining what defines, triggers. and differentiates rough sexual behavior... When asked to define rough sex: most men and women report only slightly aggressive behaviors such as slapping, pulling hair: biting: and being pinned down... Overall, rough sex appears to be a largely recreational and mutually initiated behavior that consists of mild forms of playful aggression and some mildly painful actions.

Interestingly, men also report greater female sexual satisfaction and women report a shorter latency to orgasm during rough sex. This harks back to the appeal of rough sex in the romance novel and other erotica for women: which includes scenarios where the hero engages in forceful or rough sex with the heroine. Such scenarios are also present in other female consumer genres where the focus is on powerful males as the objects of desire. The male’s focus and intensity increases female sexual satisfaction... In addition. playing out a fantasy was a frequently reported trigger for women= echoing the appeal of such scenarios in erotic genres aimed at a female audience... 

Men are far more likely to report sperm competition triggering rough sex; they are more likely to engage in rough sex when they are separated from their partners: when they are suspicious of infidelity: and after they break up with their partners... When men engage in rough sex: they thrust more quickly: deeply: more often: and with greater vigor. Female reports of thrusting corroborate male reports... It is also interesting to note that men also engage in rough sex when in a group sex context: a context where there is obvious sperm competition...The majority of other triggers were focused on curiosity and trying new things or physical play (wrestling)... 

Particularly because of the data indicating that rough sex is a mutually initiated: recreational sexual activity that is triggered by a need for novelty, teasing: and jealousy that does not result in serious injury, rough sex may be a sexual activity between trusting partners in a relationship incorporating jealousy in a consensual, non-hostile (and more instrumental) way that results in greater sexual satisfaction for both parties. 

H/T Rolf Degen

Happy Women's Day

The Day After

And now for something romantic

via Wirecutter

How to NOT lose weight

Hint: beware of the "cognitive bias known as the “level effect”. And do not be seduced by the left-most digit. But you knew this, right?

The following deals with indulgent foods and only if you "are high in health motivation", mind you.

"The present research shows that when consumers view indulgent foods with just-below (vs. round-ending) calorie amounts, they exhibit higher consumption intentions, purchase intent and consumption behavior, yet only if they are high in health motivation. This is due to a tendency for health-motivated consumers to overweigh the leftmost digit in multidigit numbers—a cognitive bias known as the “level effect.”

Intrigued to learn more? Here is the paper.

The Influence of Health Motivation and Calorie-Ending on Preferences for Indulgent Foods

Abstract 

 Food and beverage manufacturers now regularly display “just-below” calorie amounts (e.g., 99, 199, 299) in advertisements, presumably to appeal to health-motivated consumers. “Just-below” values are those that fall one or more digits below a round number, most commonly seen as nine-ending numbers. However, although nine-ending prices are known to stimulate purchase intent, it is unclear whether or when nine-ending calorie labeling shapes food preferences. The present research shows that when consumers view indulgent foods with just-below (vs. round-ending) calorie amounts, they exhibit higher consumption intentions, purchase intent and consumption behavior, yet only if they are high in health motivation. This is due to a tendency for health-motivated consumers to overweigh the leftmost digit in multidigit numbers—a cognitive bias known as the “level effect.” This bias results in the perception that just-below (vs. round) -ending indulgent foods have relatively fewer calories, decreasing anticipated guilt and increasing consumption intentions and behavior. The superiority of just-below calorie presentation under health motivation is attenuated with the addition of reference intake labeling (i.e., % daily calorie intake values), which equalizes the magnitude of nine- and round-ending calorie indulgent foods.

Environmental Impacts of Real Christmas and Artificial Christmas trees

May we ask for your attention in these last days of 2018 and on the eve of a beautiful event.

The American Christmas Tree Association (ACTA) commissioned this comparative LCA study in order to compare the life cycle impacts of artificial Christmas trees and real Christmas trees.

We feel there is potentially reason to be concerned but you can make a difference. Here are the

Results

The results of this study show that the choices made by the customer are a significant contributor to the impacts of both Christmas trees. For the real Christmas tree customer, the manner in which the tree is disposed of at the end of its life is a major contributor to the impacts of the real Christmas tree. For the artificial Christmas tree customer, the length of use is the primary contributor to the artificial Christmas tree impacts.

For the real Christmas tree, cultivation (planting, fertilizing, watering, etc.) is the largest contributor of environmental impacts, with one exception. The end-of-life phase of the real Christmas tree results in the largest contribution of greenhouse gas emissions in the real Christmas tree’s life cycle. This difference is, in part, due to modeling decisions concerning the handling of carbon sequestration in the cultivation phase and carbon release in the end-of-life stage.

For the artificial tree, the raw materials used in manufacturing, specifically polyvinylchloride followed by steel sheets, comprises the largest source of impacts in the artificial tree. Among the various life cycle phases, raw materials and transportation are seen to have largest impacts. Raw materials are primarily responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, eutrophication of water sources and use of non-renewable energy. Transportation mainly causes acidification of water, air and soil and smog in the atmosphere.

Given the quantification of environmental impacts across both of the trees’ life cycles, a comparative assertion shows the breakeven point between the two trees is 4.7 years. That is to say an artificial tree purchased and used for at least 4.7 years demonstrates a lower contribution to environmental impact than 4.7 real Christmas trees purchased over 4.7 years. This assertion considers all end of life scenarios for the real Christmas tree, and assumes that a customer of an artificial tree would purchase the tree and keep it for 5 or more years. The breakeven point can change based on the environmental metrics and end-of-life scenarios, but considering the most conservative calculations, purchasing an artificial tree and keeping it for 4.7 years is less environmentally impactful than purchasing the equivalent amount of real Christmas trees.

In 2010, a life cycle assessment by PE Americas was conducted to compare the impacts associated with a real Christmas and an artificial Christmas tree. The PE Americas LCA studied the differences in impacts for both trees over a similar period of time. The results of the PE America’s Study demonstrated similar results to the study completed by WAP Sustainability Consulting, LLC.. However, the results of these two studies must not be compared directly. This incomparability stems from several key elements, mostly owing to differences in methodology, and include:

... 

Despite the two studies’ limited comparability, the results of the two studies do support some important and consistent generalizations. These are basic trends that can be understood by looking at both of the reports individually and include:

Comparative LCA of the Environmental Impacts of Real Christmas and Artificial Christmas Trees. Public Release Version 2018

1) Both studies indicate that the impacts of sourcing of raw materials is the number one contributor to the environmental impacts across all categories for the artificial tree.

2) Both studies indicate that End-of-life treatment options for real Christmas trees significantly impact the overall footprint of these trees.

3) Both studies indicate a roughly 5-year average breakeven point favoring the artificial Tree as a comparative assertion, given the customer keeps the artificial Tree for at least 5 years.

Conclusion

This LCA was conducted in order to compare the life cycle impacts of artificial Christmas trees and real Christmas trees. The results demonstrate that on a one-to-one comparison, one real Christmas tree generates fewer environmental impacts than one artificial Tree. This statement considers all end of life variables for both trees across all life cycle impact categories.

The study also assumed that reasonable customers do not purchase an artificial tree and use it for only one year. The study demonstrated that if a customer purchases an artificial tree and used it for at least 4.7 years, vs. purchasing the equivalent (4.7) real Christmas trees, the environmental burden shifts and the artificial tree would generate fewer environmental impacts.

Public Statements about the study will aim to educate customers that the purchase of an artificial Christmas tree is environmental beneficial to real Christmas trees, provided the customer keeps the tree for at least five years.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

oh, full study here. In particular thanks to Tim Taylor.

Some positive trends in the MOST UNACCEPTABLE WORDS IN BROADCASTING in 2018

In case you are already outraged, this is from New Zealand.

KEY FINDINGS

2018 MOST UNACCEPTABLE WORDS IN BROADCASTING

• Cunt, Nigger, Jesus Fucking Christ, Cocksucker, and Mother fucker – remain the top five most unacceptable words across all scenarios
• However, notable decline in the proportion who find four of the five totally unacceptable
• Racial / cultural insults added to the list in 2018 appeared in the top 12 – Chink, Gook, Coconut
• Homo, also new, appeared at 11th most unacceptable
• Small but notable increases in proportion who find some gender-related words totally unacceptable, e.g. Bitch, Dick, Prick
• Level of unacceptability for some blasphemies has decreased significantly – Jesus Christ, God and Jesus Fucking Christ

You are of course interested in some details (A Minus means term has become more acceptable).

‘God’ from 22% in 2013 to now just 15% = - 7%

‘Mother fucker’ - 9% (way better)

‘Jesus Christ' beats all with - 12%

‘Slut’ unfortunately up 1%

‘Retards’ even worse at + 4%

To which community you belong is to be considered. “Faggot, fag, dyke, lesbo - if not used by someone from the LGBTQ community are unacceptable.”

YOUNGER GENERATIONS ARE TYPICALLY MORE ACCEPTING

Except for words relating to gender or sexual orientation – eg, higher proportion of 18-24 year olds find ‘Homo’ unacceptable.

The most open are in the 25-34 age bracket. So stay clear of the rest and THOSE OF PASIFIKA AND ASIAN ETHNICITY ARE LESS ACCEPTING.

You might enquire about gender differences. Here you go.

Significant differences between males and females in levels of acceptability of offensive language, particularly:

• Homo: 39% of males find it fairly or totally unacceptable cf. 61% females
• Retard: 38% males cf. 59% females
• Chink: 46% males cf. 65% females
• Cunt: 58% males cf. 76% females

The latter is hardly surprising. Probably because there are so many. Oops.

And ... OH!

Those who are Christian are least accepting, with higher or significantly higher levels of unacceptability for most words.

For those who would like to know the 2013 readings. They are here.

Fucking enjoy. Meant to say, it's been a pleasure serving you.

Fiction Shapes Political Attitudes

So it is not down to Trumpism alone. Should that be a relief? This paper tries to give an answer.

It’s the End of the World and They Know It: How Dystopian Fiction Shapes Political Attitudes

Given that the fictional narratives found in novels, movies, and television shows enjoy wide public consumption, memorably convey information, minimize counter-arguing, and often emphasize politically-relevant themes, we argue that greater scholarly attention must be paid to theorizing and measuring how fiction affects political attitudes. We argue for a genre-based approach for studying fiction effects, and apply it to the popular dystopian genre. Results across three experiments are striking: we find consistent evidence that dystopian narratives enhance the willingness to justify radical—especially violent—forms of political action. Yet we find no evidence for the conventional wisdom that they reduce political trust and efficacy, illustrating that fiction’s effects may not be what they seem and underscoring the need for political scientists to take fiction seriously.

The media landscape has changed dramatically in the last several decades. Technologies have diversified, access is vastly improved, and there has been an explosion in media choice, to name only a few of the most striking shifts. Political scientists are breaking ground investigating changes such as the decline in news audiences,1 the resurgence of partisan media,2 and the emergence of “soft news” mixing elements of news and entertainment.3 Yet significantly less attention has been paid to the lion’s share of contemporary media consumption: fiction and entertainment.

Fiction itself these days is often political.

Finally, a great deal of fictional media today is political media in the sense of containing themes and storylines pertaining to the exercise of power, the organization of society, and the ethics of political action. 

How they went about.

We argue here that our understanding of political media will remain incomplete as long as the political impacts of fiction remain under-studied and inadequately theorized in political science. Drawing from communications scholarship, we argue that applying a genre-based approach to the attitudinal effects of fiction offers a stronger foundation for generalizability than the prevailing topical approach in political science, which has examined effects driven by specific topics within idiosyncratic storylines. We focus on the totalitarian-dystopian genre due to its massive popularity and obvious political content. We define as totalitarian-dystopian any fictional work that portrays a dark and disturbing world dominated by an overwhelmingly powerful government or other controlling entity that acts to undermine core values such as freedom and justice. With the explosive rise of dystopian fiction in recent years, a number of “folk” hypotheses have arisen about the impact of this trend, making it an excellent test case for the study of fictional genre effects on political attitudes. 

They found for example

Scholars have found that the individual movie The Cider House Rules fosters more pro-choice attitudes toward abortion in the case of incest; exposure to particular episodes of Law and Order and other television dramas shapes attitudes toward the death penalty and the criminal justice system; and the film Wag the Dog increases support for conspiracy theories.

Not everything is dystopian.

Second, and more optimistically, some have also speculated that the frequent presence of ass-kicking heroines in specific examples of dystopian fiction may cultivate a greater sense of feminism. For instance, a critic at the LA Times wrote, “Katniss, with her bow and arrow, has inspired a generation to lift up their weapons, both literally (the surge in archery lessons) and otherwise.” 

Stay clear of consumers of the Hunger Games because ...

We also investigated whether prior exposure to the Hunger Games series, age, and gender moderated the effects of our treatment (table A3, in online Appendix A). Consistent with our expectations, prior exposure to Hunger Games was associated with being significantly more willing to justify violence. (Interacting prior exposure and an indicator for the Hunger Games treatment resulted in coefficients that were consistently positive but not statistically significant.)

Conclusions

Our research not only reinforces past work showing that people often fail to distinguish between fact and fiction in learning about the world, but also illustrates that the lessons of fiction may not be what they seem. While much ink has been spilled lamenting the darkness of the world presented through dystopian books and movies and analyzing the implications of Katniss as a feminist heroine, the actual impact of dystopian fiction like The Hunger Games and Divergent appears to be far afield from these anxieties. Rather than creating political cynicism in readers and viewers or showing them that girls can be powerful too—both lessons that are at this point probably amply supplied by the American news media and lived experience—dystopian fiction seems to be teaching them a more subtle and perhaps more concerning message: that violence and illegal activities may be both legitimate and necessary to pursue justice. Dystopian fiction appears to subtly expand the political imagination of viewers and readers to encompass a range of scenarios outside the normal realm of democratic politics, and what people then consider reasonable and thinkable appears to expand accordingly.

These results should also highlight the peril for political scientists in assuming that fiction is just entertainment. The stories we tell ourselves have profound implications for how we think about political ethics and political possibilities, and as scholars of politics, we can and should do more to map out the effects of politically-inflected fiction and entertainment.

Fair enough, but these results could also highlight the fact for political scientists to assume that this fiction is perhaps based on real experiences with politics.

Reading Lounge

1. What Is It Like to Be a Man?

2. How the bicycle beats evolution and why Steve Jobs was so taken with this fact

3. Beneficial wrongdoing

4. Will India's women decide the election?

5. Pun had asked for a safety strap, but his Chinese supervisor had told him: “It is just a three-storey building. You won’t die even if you fall.”

6. In defence of puns

European Court Upholds Prosecution Of Woman For Comparing Muhammad’s Marriage To A Six-Year-Old Girl To Pedophilia

This is a repost of JONATHAN TURLEY's post about the mind-boggling decision of the ECHR last week. In case you wonder who Mr Turley is here are some details. Note that he used "bizarre" as a keyword among others. The ECHR decision is just that.

A new decision from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) confirms the all-out assault on free speech that has taken hold of Europe.  In a chilling decision, the ECHR upheld a fine levied against an Austrian woman who called Muhammad a pedophile for his arranged marriage with a young girl while in his 50s.   The court ruled that such views are not protected by free speech because they violate “the right of others to have their religious feelings protected.” The decision confirms the near complete subjugation of free speech to religious and other views in society.  

In 2009, the defendant held two seminars entitled “Basic Information on Islam,” in which she compared Muhammad’s marriage to a six-year-old girl, Aisha, to pedophilia.

Most accounts put Aisha’s birth around  late 613 or early 614.  She was six or seven years old when she was married to Muhammad in Mecca and he consummated the marriage when she was reportedly ten. Muhammad was around 50 at the time.

For most of us in the free speech community, the differing views of this marriage is immaterial to the right of both sides to be free to state their views.  However, complainants have sought to silence critics like this woman by seeking criminal fines.

Moreover, I am not particularly interested in how the woman expressed her views since they raise core religious and political values.  The court said that she stated that Muhammad “liked to do it with children” and “… A 56-year-old and a six-year-old? … What do we call it, if it is not pedophilia?”  That was found to be “disparaging religion” and lower courts upheld the conviction.

The Strasbourg-based ECHR ruled that the woman’s “right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria.”

The ECHR engaged in what is now an all-too-familiar effort to deny its obvious denial of free speech by saying that freedom of religion did not protect religions from criticism but they upheld the punishment of someone for doing precisely that.  It simply declared that the woman’s comments “could only be understood as having been aimed at demonstrating that Muhammad was not worthy of worship.”

The opinion is perfectly Orwellian in saying that you cannot get away with using free speech by simply claiming the right of free speech.  The court rejected that people are entitled to free speech by simply “pack[ing] incriminating statements into the wrapping of an otherwise acceptable expression of opinion and claim that this rendered passable those statements exceeding the permissible limits of freedom of expression.”

That type of circular logic would be laughable if it were not so chilling.

We have previously discussed the alarming rollback on free speech rights in the West, particularly in France (here and here and here and here and here and here) and England ( here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here). Much of this trend is tied to the expansion of hate speech and non-discrimination laws.  These prosecutions are part of a new and dangerous attack on free speech. We previously discussed the rise of anti-blasphemy laws around the world, including the increase in prosecutions in the West and the support of the Obama Administration for the prosecution of some anti-religious speech under the controversial Brandenburg standard.  The effort by Muslim countries to establish an international blasphemy standard ran into opposition in the West so a new effort to launched to use hate crimes and discrimination law to achieve the purpose.

This new ruling shows the rapid abandonment of the European courts of fundamental values of free speech.  The ECHR has now established itself as legitimizing the criminalization of speech in Europe.

With thanks to Mr Turley. Nothing needs to be added.

Panhandling behavioral patterns consistent with rational profit-maximization

Beggars can be choosers—and they appear to be rational ones.

Panhandlers are commonly considered “mentally ill” or degenerate substance abusers, and perhaps many are. Even so, this does not seem to prevent them from panhandling optimally. We find that panhandlers behave as homo economicus would behave if homo economicus were a street person who solicited donations from passersby in public spaces.

Here is the appropriately named paper

Hobo Economicus

Abstract

We collect data on hundreds of panhandlers and the passersby they encounter at Metrorail stations in Washington, DC. Panhandlers solicit more actively when they have more human capital, when passersby are more responsive to solicitation, and when passersby are more numerous. Panhandlers solicit less actively when they compete. Panhandlers are attracted to Metrorail stations where passersby are more responsive to solicitation and to stations where passersby are more numerous. Across stations, potential-profit per panhandler is nearly equal. Most panhandlers use pay-what-you-want pricing. These behaviors are consistent with a simple model of rational, profit-maximizing panhandling.

How do they go about?

Some panhandlers beckon you with cardboard signs. Others beseech you with impassioned vocal pleas or by noisily shaking a cup. Some panhandlers stand passively, like urban wishing wells, waiting to receive your change. Others perform music or give away newspapers, and still others lie on the ground practically asleep. Panhandlers may solicit fixed sums from passersby, or they may invite you to pay what you want. And while panhandlers solicit in many public spaces, their locational distribution varies widely. Do panhandling behaviors display patterns? If so, what do they look like, and what explains them?

What they all have in common is their social engagement with passersby because that is their human capital.

We ground our model of panhandling in a few observations. First, panhandlers “support themselves by...engaging the consciences of passersby” through solicitation. Second, panhandler solicitation is generally regarded as a nuisance; it threatens to create “psychological discomfort...in pedestrians,” such as guilt, awkwardness, shame, even fear. Third, pedestrians are willing to pay a modest price to avoid this discomfort. For example, people seek ordinances that restrict or prohibit panhandling. And if they can do so easily, pedestrians divert their paths to circumvent panhandlers.

Panhandlers engage in profit maximization by observing spatial equilibrium.

The space where, ceteris paribus, passersby are more responsive to solicitation and, ceteris paribus, passersby are more numerous therefore tends to attract more panhandlers. An arbitrarily large number of panhandlers who choose sequentially among spaces at which to solicit will locate such that the potential profit available to a panhandler at each space is equal—panhandling spatial equilibrium.

The results reveal panhandling behavioral patterns consistent with rational profit-maximization. Panhandlers solicit more actively when they have more human capital, when passersby are more responsive to solicitation, and when passersby are more numerous. Panhandlers solicit less actively when they encounter more panhandling competition. Female panhandlers also solicit less actively.

Conclusion

Economists have shown that a variety of unorthodox behaviors seemingly unamenable to orthodox economics—from the behavior of pirates and prisoners to that of clerics, cults, duelers, diviners, even human sacrificers—belie rational maximization. Our study finds that the behavior of panhandlers, who are commonly seen as “mentally ill” or degenerate substance abusers, does too. This finding is consistent with T.W. Schultz’s (1980: 649) supposition that “poor people are no less...competent in obtaining the maximum benefit from their limited resources” than “those of us who have comparably greater advantages.” Beggars, it turns out, can be choosers—and they appear to be rational ones.

Full Pdf here

Reading Lounge

1. Censored in China

2. You Can Rent This Cottage Made Entirely of Chocolate

3. He Won $19 Million in the Lottery—And Became a Bank Robber

4. The Elusive Ninth Planet

5. Data factories - why not again Facebook?