I was a parent then, but not a commenter here.
Also, how come so many people name daughters after Ireland (including Erin) and not other countries?
And how come "Dakota" is a girl's name but all the other state names that are used are mostly in male?
Why was BitchPhD sending so many links with dudes in skimpy briefs? How come those links still work after a dozen years?
Anyway, Baldwin got fired from Thomas the Tank Engine and never climbed back to that level again.
Boy, this place was more fun before I took over. Sorry everyone!
That's so weird. I remember that, and I remember having definite opinions about it (roughly, that Baldwin shouldn't have done it but in context it might be forgivable), but somehow I didn't say anything on the thread. We might have talked about it on a different thread? I can't believe I just kept my mouth shut.
The roast is a delightfully perverse institution. No wonder they hate you for your freedom. Anyway this "Ireland" person is about 50 feet tall and definitely not human.
3: I don't think most state names are male -- particularly if you exclude the states named after men (like Washington). Arizona, Georgia, Carolina, and Virginia come quickly to mind as feminine.
I mean state names that are used for people but weren't used for people before being a state name.
Like Indiana Jones, Minnesota Fats, Tennessee Williams, or what have you.
If Baldwin were such a bad parent he would have named her Massachusetts.
Clearly, if you are a man with a state first name, your last name must end in "s". It feels like the state name serves as a modifier: the Fats of Minnesota.
Éire/Erin etc. at least comes from a goddess (Éiru). As for Dakota, enh, I blame John Lennon. And that's probably just a regression to the mean of non-analyzable words ending with an "-a" being read as feminine.
All that being said, I'll put in a good word for naming our first-born New Hampshire.
You should name the second one that.
Now I'm imagining a poll to ask people what gender they would assume someone is based on names, and running through all states and territories.
Or, I could download the SSA baby names data and see what people are actually named!
Summing over 2014-2018:
Alabama: 73 female babies
California: 62 F
Dakota: 6,552 F, 4,620 M
Massachusetts: No matches
Montana: 618 F, 348 M
Texas: 6 F, 63 M
New York: 0
Pennsylvania: 0
Indiana: 427 F, 350 M
Illinois: 0
Oregon: 0
Washington: 70 M
Mississippi: 0
Florida: 0 (???)
Flo Rida should get a mention but he may be listed under Florence.
Connecticut edges out Massachusetts as the cruelest name.
That was me.
Nobody names their kid Pennsylvania for the same reason nobody writes songs about Pennsylvania, but at least it has good nickname potential in "Penny." (On the other hand, will surely get teased with "Penisvania". Which is probably also the worst new genre of video games.)
I recently was near a kid named Southern. One hopes his last name was not Power or Pride.
21: April is the cruelest name.
I was hoping somebody would explain that it was a phone number in New York, but the actual feeling when people did it is greater than I expected. Ye-es.
Now I understand the joy heebie got when she lured her father into explaining how to flush a toilet (or whatever it was).
26 was me. I figured that was a possibility, but felt it was worth establishing explicitly the fact of the matter since I needed to google it--I had been under the mistaken assumption that it was named after a model of locomotive engine.
But yes, I am very gullible.
Gullible AND can't use the "Remember personal info" checkbox.
I still feel the same way, though, which is that it was unexcusable ...
"Unexcusable" is a hard word. In fact, it apparently turns out, from Ireland's point of view, that it was, indeed, "excusable."
Is that an excessively pedantic point to make? Maybe I shouldn't be reading that word so literally, but I think the interesting part of the prior conversation was about precisely where to draw this line: What can be appropriately forgiven? It was and remains my view that Baldwin hadn't necessarily crossed that line.
I now claim vindication of that view from the content of Ms. Baldwin's roast, and propose that her ability to joke about it all is entirely healthy and reasonable.
@19 minivet, yay!
I was going to post, "I know a boy named dakota", but your answer: Dakota: 6,552 F, 4,620 M (59%M, 41%F) is way way better. But, why over 11,000 dakotas? That's weird. Also don't understand the absence of Floridas.
And, we should note that Georgia, Virginia, Carolina are all named after people.
Can someone look up Ireland? How does it compare to India?
It's cooler and not as nonviolent when it resists British imperialism.
I was not commenting before, and I have never listened to the entire message. My quick take is that it was 1) awful, and influenced my opinion of him but 2) its his loved ones, especially Ireland's, decision about whether to forgive. I'm a bit wary of relying too much on 2, but that decision would only play out in whether I'm willing to watch AB or not. And, I am (unlike Woody Allen, Charlie Rose, Kevin Spacey).
Also, I've never left a record or written an email like that, but I've probably said things to my children that if recorded and played back would horrify people. Fortunately no one cares to record me. So I feel a bit of pity for AB that someone would (including if it was his ex-wife. releasing that tape was not thinking of her).
And, we should note that Georgia, Virginia, Carolina are all named after people.
If America had been colonized this year, Virginia would be called Volcel.
Jenny lived on 86th Street. Her phone number was 7-5309. Direct dial killed people's social lives.
19: If you still have it, want to check my assumption that Dakoda trends male?
Is that an excessively pedantic point to make? Maybe I shouldn't be reading that word so literally, but I think the interesting part of the prior conversation was about precisely where to draw this line: What can be appropriately forgiven? It was and remains my view that Baldwin hadn't necessarily crossed that line.
Saying it's inexcusable just means I call bullshit on whatever excuse he gives, that he violated a tenet of being a responsible parent. It's not inexcusable in the sense that he's permanently unforgivable and should forevermore rot in hell.
Ireland: 1,166 F, 15 M
Eire: 5 F
Erin: 4,429 F, 241 M
Dakoda: 116 F, 303 M
Dakodah: 20 F, 20 M
Dakotah: 300 F, 204 M
Power: 23 M
Pride: 13 M
Greed: 0
Lust: 0
Envy: 148 F
Gluttony: 0
Wrath: 0
Sloth: 0
Desire: 447 F, 26 M
Heiress (found while looking for Eire): 192 F
Heir: 0
Aha - the rarest name they allow in the detail file is one given to fewer than 5 people per year, split by sex. So if a name is in reality given to 5 boys and 4 girls, it will appear as 5 M, 0 F in that year. And there could be a few Floridas per year that never crested the reporting threshold.
I've now read in all the data back to 2001, and it's interesting how popular "Barack" failed to become. Just a tiny blip: 52 in 2008, 71 in 2009, 28 in 2010, never above 20 thereafter.
How has "Donald" been doing lately?
"Donald" is on a steady long-term decline, about 5% drop a year, with no change to that slope in 2017.
"Ivanka" went up by more than "Barack" did in its time: 37 in 2016, 112 in 2016, 165 in 2017, 97 in 2018.
Is anyone named for New Jersey?
I don't know if this is violating any rules or not, so I'm not live-blogging.
It's not a meet up because only local.
Blog ahoy! We're having a meetup since I'm moving.
Almost nobody here is a Millennial.
Is anyone named for New Jersey?
That was my question, too. I figure naming your child after the state of New Jersey would be borderline child abuse.
Though even "Jersey," without the "New," is a bit problematic for me. Are you naming your child after a British Crown dependency, or a woollen sweater, or the US state of New Jersey, or just what?
Canadians do not typically name their children after the provinces and territories of Canada. Have never met a Mary Margaret Manitoba, nor anyone named "Ontario" or "Saskatchewan."
||
Ok, how do I resolve this?
In my city council run I was planning on just paying for my race out of pocket, but since I started running people have been wanting to give me money for my campaign. Which was a suprise to me, but, having thought about it, I recognize that accepting and spending contributions would significantly increase my chances of winning this thing. So, per CharleyCarp's suggestion, I'm trying to figure out how to set up an Act Blue account.
The complication is this: Act Blue wants to know where to send the checks. But, they can't just send it to "Franklin Pierce"... they need to make the check out to something like "Franklin Pierce - Campaign Fund" or "Friends of Franklin Pierce." Basically, an account for my campaign committee (such as it is.... as I understand it, the committee can be just me?)
Which, ok, fair enough.... I'm happy to set up a separate campaign account, despite whatever expense, because do I recognize that its better to keep that money separated. Although, on a practical level its kind of silly because I would expect the total donations received to remain well-below 4 figures here and its all going to be spent by November. But, if them's the rules, I'll play by them. I'll do what I got to do.
So, I called up my bank and they said they will give me an account but I need to provide them with a set of the official documents used to set up my committee. Which, uh, ok. Happy to do whatever documents need to be done.
Except that's where I've hit a wall. I need to have some official documents to demonstrate that a committee has been established, but, after a shitload of googling, I still have no earthly idea what these documents are supposed to be or how to get a government agency to accept them - which is what the bank wants to see.
The local government doesn't deal with this - there is no local campaign finance ordinance that deals with it, and in fact the city council voted against having one just a couple months ago. And there is no way to submit any documents to the state, because the Secretary of State only accepts documents for people running for state and county offices. There is also the federal level with the FEC, but I don't think setting up a federal PAC is what I am trying to do here.
Anyway, it looks like I need to get a special gold star stamped on some documents before I can get a bank account before I can accept contributions, but there don't seem to be any documents or gold stars available to me. This sucks! Any ideas?
|>
Are you running as a member of a political party? That is, your local Democratic club should know the answer to this. Come to think, Charley probably knows.
I'm not - the election is non-partisan.
Might they help you out anyway? That's where the people who know stuff are.
They might. Its an option I can try, although I'm not optimistic it would yield any quick answers.
To be fair, I should admit I can't calculate the tip.
In conclusion, the weather is stupid nice for Pittsburgh.
63: Don't you have to declare your candidacy by filing with the city? Here all the official form means is filling out the city's paperwork, which requires a couple of designated people.
Requires designating a couple people, I mean, like the treasurer of the campaign.
I'd use the filing paperwork as evidence of the "committee" is what I'm saying, since it's hard to imagine what else the bank has in mind. Have you filed your pink form in the green slot B at the ministry of committees?
Anybody know much about home schooling? Son #2 was just expelled from local public middle school until Oct. 23 and we will have to figure out the next six weeks. Also, sometimes I hate this world we live in.
Coincidentally, I ran into a friend yesterday who's decided to run for the state house, and he asked me to be his campaign treasurer. No! I don't know any of that shit!
As further demonstration of my ignorance, Franklin, let me ask: don't you have to have a treasurer etc even if you are just self-funding? I think you still have to file stuff.
The Baldwin-Basinger thread was a trip down memory lane. I particularly liked 182, and it took me way too long to figure out "Beefo Meaty".
Here all the official form means is filling out the city's paperwork, which requires a couple of designated people.
In my case, the only designated person was me.
I'm going to try the copy of my filing with the bank, but I'm pretty sure that's not what they want.
I'll turn on the ol' Franklin Pierce charm, and see if that gets me anywhere.
77 Or not, I say having read to the end of your comment.
78 then shall our names familiar in his mouth as household words: Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester, be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd
don't you have to have a treasurer etc even if you are just self-funding? I think you still have to file stuff.
No, apparently I don't have to file squat. Live free or die.
You fuckers were livebloggng? Now I'm hurt.
That was a lot of fun. It was great seeing yinz one last time.
Moby and I went to MobyBar due to mutual convenience. I'm home now. Turns out I can't drink much more the three drinks before I start getting fucked up. For a work day, anyway. Aging sucks.
If you're so sure the London post is a death sentence maybe you shouldn't take it?
I can't feel my face, so I can do go home now.
All the sober people are in the house. the
86: not my job. and I don't think it'll be a death sentence, I'm just worried about extreme tail risk in an environment where I'm an outsider without a safety net of friends and family, taken upon unnecessarily. It'll
probably be fine.
Moby, if you need help getting home, let me know, I'm close by.
I second LB's suggestion to check with your local Democratic party organization(s). That's where you'll find people who know how to do this stuff, even for nonpartisan races.
"Canadians do not typically name their children after the provinces and territories of Canada."
I wish you could meet my girlfriend
My girlfriend who lives in Canada
She couldn't be sweeter, I wish you could meet her
My girlfriend who lives in Canada
Her name is Alberta, she lives in Vancouver
She cooks like my mother and sucks like a Hoover
I e-mail her every single day, just to make sure that everything's okay
It's a pity she lives so far away in Canada
63: My state being highly regulated in campaign finance, most of my subject matter knowledge won't be applicable, but I have heard that banks vary in what documentation they require for a campaign committee account. Maybe shop around and see if there are other banks that understand the situation better? Or ask other politicians/treasurers, if you know them, which banks they use?
There was a meetup and nobody sent me plane tickets?
76: Very sorry to hear that, tough situation.
The last person I passed advice to about homeschooling was trying to sort out German-state curriculum for half-American kids in a third country and the connection I made was with a RWNJ friend from high school who, despite all of that, can be a mensch. To be honest, though, I think the homeschoolers went with other people's advice.
Maybe commenters actually in the US have more helpful things to say?
76: I'm so sorry you're dealing with that. I don't know a ton about homeschooling because I refuse to offer it as an option or else I'd be stuck with it for sure. A suspension that long seems totally unsafe and unreasonable. How is any kid supposed to catch up? I don't know what to tell you, though. Call your district's disability office if you think there's any chance they could do testing that would qualify your child for an IEP based on EBD (emotional and behavior disorder) and then you could write in stuff like not allowing suspensions. If you've already got a diagnosis you can ask for a 504 plan, but those don't offer as much leeway to be specific to your child's needs.
Our district just opened an online program with in-person options they're marketing as being for kids whose anxiety makes school attendance challenging or who are raising their own kids or caring for relatives. I'm trying to avoid making that an option either, but that sort of thing is one way to do homeschool. It sounds like your school is trying to signal that they are not interested in dealing with your child and want you to do all the hard work, which isn't actually supposed to be an option for public schools, though I've kind of been there and definitely know it happens. Please email if you think I could be helpful, but I don't really know what to suggest or what your options are. Fury and weary sadness would be my go-to.
Thorn: yes, fury and sadness are definitely where we're going. Fury especially. It's not anxiety on the boy's part. He said something stupid, a "threat" which the school district is treating as a THREAT. I had earlier sent Heebie a longer blow-by-blow which she may FPP as it the details may be grimly entertaining for y'all. I guess today we look into what combination of online instruction vs. in person we do, and whether we find a tutor to help or do the instruction ourselves, which my wife and I have flexible enough jobs to do, at least if we use weekends. He's supposed to get 4.5 hours of instruction per day, I assume 5 days a week. That's as far as we've gotten, but we need to get paperwork filed with the school district pronto so they'll acknowledge he's getting instruction. Will they make him repeat 8th grade anyway even though he is (was) in courses a couple grade levels ahead of his peers? Tune in for exciting new developments...
I think I may have been home when I posted 88. Timezones on this blog are hard.
From this distance, North America is basically all the same place.
I'm actually on the surface, looking down a chord through the lithosphere.
||
Was going to post this last night but didn't want to derail after chill's comment. Twitter thread about Piketty and domestic violence: 'every time that I post anything about his well-documented history of intimate partner violence people are like "Woah I've never heard that!" Left-wing media has failed *spectacularly* on this . . .'
I'd never heard this and have verified none of it. There's one screencap of a Telegraph article. Anyone else?
|>
107: I hadn't heard of it before, but in the interest of discussion here is the Telegraph article.
Okay, I have found no evidence beyond that one accusation in 2014, which may or may not be true, but I also want to know more about this theory that redistribution leads to gender.
Without redistribution of cells the emergence of wide, womanly hips or broad, manly shoulders would be impossible.
Definitely don't have time to get into it with a troll, sorry. Enjoy whatever last word you choose to get in.
Oh, bummer. I am slightly skeptical about the tone of the twitter thread: that is, "well-documented history of intimate partner violence" sounds like a weird way to describe the single story (not that one story can't be a big deal, but if you're talking about one story, the natural thing to do is to identify it rather than to refer vaguely to a "history"). And describing the lack of coverage as a failure of "left-wing media" is also weird unless you're in the sort of bubble where you think all media is left wing.
But I would love to see something written about this by someone who didn't make me skeptical.
Well yeah, exactly. And apparently that piece doesn't exist, and presumably the Twitter insinuator isn't quite sufficiently eager to make it exist to find a welcoming forum. And maybe it's bullshit!
Not a single named source in the entire article. No quote from Filipetti, just from 'a friend' and 'a police source'. The only verifiable facts are that on one occasion TP was arrested and then released without charge.
112: 107 was a (weak) joke, playing on Piketty's r>g, suggesting (unseriously) that left-wingers care more about economic redistribution than gender equality. 111 was a (weaker) joke made on the assumption 110 last was tongue-in-cheek. The missing pseud is a consequence of skipping between browsers.
It'd be interesting to see if there was coverage in the Francophone press, but not being able to read French, I'm useless.
107 was good! 111 was a cruel attempt to stupefy me with endless chained word games, and I decided to resort to incantations to protect my very, very valuable time.
Maybe you can have an incantation other than troll? Like, IDK, SAVE THE JOKES ASSHOLE. Or something.
117: there was this bare bones account in Nouvelle Obs at the time (2009) https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj7lpvimdvkAhUMnxQKHXNCC-MQzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nouvelobs.com%2Fsociete%2F20090924.OBS2364%2Fviolences-conjugales-avertissement-et-rappel-a-la-loi-pour-piketty.html&psig=AOvVaw2euHR3wvuyqE946e0BWgMk&ust=1568924611006749
From Google Translate, it looks as if the Telegraph story is almost word for word.
119: yes, totally fair. I was exasperated and not 100% sure who I was talking to, but sorry. I'll use person-first language in the future.
117: A little, but not much. A brief article focused on it, a medium-length article that mentions it in passing and glosses over it, an article about a slip of the tongue alluding to the couple. I'm focusing on more recent articles; there were several articles in 2009 about the lawsuit, likewise mostly bare bones.
There were a lot of details in those articles I didn't understand. I'm not sure how much of that is due to lacking cultural context (i.e. I don't follow French news) and how much is because my language is rusty. However, my French is good enough to say that some of the discussion on Wikipedia.fr about Piketty is hilariously bitchy. DocteurCosmos and some of the people he's arguing with, in particular.
I agree with 112-115, we shouldn't minimize this, but we shouldn't make more of it than the substance justifies either, and as far as I can tell, that isn't much.
I agree with 112-115, we shouldn't minimize this, but we shouldn't make more of it than the substance justifies either
People can reasonably debate whether we ought to watch Woody Allen or Kevin Spacey movies or whatever, but I'm sort of at a loss for how (or why) to think about this at all.
Leaving aside the uncertain evidence about the allegations, what should we think about this if it's true?
Obviously, it makes Piketty a bad person (or at least, a former bad person) but the world is full of those. It doesn't make g>r.
From the evidence, it seems to me that the situation got roughly the amount of news coverage it deserved.
Obviously, it makes Piketty a bad person
Not necessarily even that. It makes him someone who got arrested in connection with a fight with a partner. That is a very bad sign about his behavior, but not everyone who's been arrested in relation to an altercation with a partner is necessarily in the wrong or significantly a bad actor -- you'd really want some narrative about what the actual story of the events was before you had a strong opinion. (I don't mean to minimize -- there's a good change he acted importantly badly. But it's really hard to evaluate much without someone telling a story of what happened.)
Okay, this will probably be controversial, I'm thinking out loud, and I'm not sure how much time I have for in-depth arguments, but this is my first shot:
I guess my answer is that it's a question for institutions, not individuals: domestic abuse tends not to happen in a vacuum, but to co-occur with lots of other non-criminal activities like deception, character assassination, patterns of misogynous behavior, sociopathy -- whatever -- which usually involve amassing allies and blacklisting enemies. That has a wider effect than the individuals directly involved in the abuse, and for bystanders who are interested in helping to build better institutions, it's worth using stories like these as a spur to further questions and discussions. If there's literally not a shred of evidence, however incredible, for any untoward behavior beyond this one news story when you talk to his colleagues and students and so on, then you can probably blow it off. If a "hey, did you ever have a bad experience with this guy?" turns up multiple other stories, then you can think twice about the effects on other people of offering him a visiting professorship or such.
I don't think the response is simple, and it's frustrating to me when people just decide "oh, well, no-platform that guy for sure, NEXT PLEASE" because it's too hard to think about the complexities. But, say, if I were on a hiring committee in economics and I had multiple sources saying that this guy was abusive in his personal life, I might put an asterisk next to his letters of recommendation and push myself to be more skeptical. That's something you should do anyway with "rock stars," quite obviously, but a situation like this might put a little more pressure on people who are reflexive fawners.
tl;dr: the problem is an excess of idolatry and individual power, not a lack of mob justice.
Right-wing man quotes vague account in dubious right-wing paper as an attack on non-right-wing economist.