Definitely a brave kid. What guts!

Thanks for your support!

Looking at incidents such as this I am reminded of a simple fact. At any university the lowest SAT scores are found in the college of education.

I admit, I did a little dance when I saw her referencing our good Bill in her entry. I felt somewhat reassured that someone roughly my age is reading the dispatches from The Ministry of Truth.

Peter, I said that to someone just the other day and they told me it was true ten years ago but is no longer the case. They couldn't give me any stats to back them up; do you have any sources? I'm working on some essays concerning education (mostly my own experience as a student) and I'd like to fact-check this.

Just visited Cecile's site. Made my day.

Hey Swift, not so sure about SAT scores (many students don't declare their majors in their first two years, many others switch, etc and thus I'm not so sure how useful that data would be anyway), but I *can* direct you to some good stuff on GRE scores by intended major, at least in reference to July '99 to Jun '00 scores:

http://futureboy.homeip.net/temp/gretab.xls
(Nice of that person to do all that formatting work!)

The above was referenced from:
ftp://ftp.ets.org/pub/gre/guidtbl4.pdf

Now, there ARE a few significant issues which arise from utilizing (as that Excel sheet does) only addition of the mean from the three areas, but I guess it works overall. Something more reliable would probably account for the percentages within each 100 point data set, but I’m a philosophy/English double major who expects to not do all that well on the quantitative part when I take the GRE next year, not to mention the fact that I would like to teach ;-)

Swift, for leads on good sources go to www.city-journal.org. There are a couple of contributing writers to that magazine who write a great deal on education. Search on Education.

You can also read Thomas Sowell's on Education. He's written several books, and many essays, on the subject. Go to Amazon for a list of his books and you can read his essay archives (going back 6 years) on JWR:

Education: spending up, performance down.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/education.htm

BTW, for reasons to complicated to explain here, "no child left behind" is actually a complicated trap that won't fix the problem.

Didn't mean to hijack the thread there, but this is cool. Thanks, Peter, and I replied in LJ to you.

Mrs du Toit, I discovered Sowell after reading your site and even managed to get my mother through most of his _Inside American Education_! His archives are the greatest and I've got another couple of his books on hold at the library.

Thanks for pointing me to another great blog. I can barely keep up with all the great writers out there, including you.

This girl is so bright and her teacher is an idiot. But as I told her, stick to your guns and don't follow the crowd. Being popular rarely equates to being happy.

And worse still....

http://volokh.com/2004_02_01_volokh_archive.html#107601061601537372

Sometimes I think the beginning of real learning is that flash moment when a student looks around himself and thinks "Wait a second! Most of the people around me are full of shit! The guy who wrote the text could be full of shit too! I need a serious shit-content assessment here!"

Impressive, Cheney Crook guy, you can copy-paste and madly click the POST button as fast as you can. Care to actually formulate some sort of argument? (and in the process, illustrate what the hell this article has to do with anything Bill has written about?)

Duck is delicious, BTW.

mmmmmm.......
You know what I love that I haven't had for a while? Peking duck.
You know what cheneyisacrook loves that he hasn't had for a while?
Relevance.

TO: Bill
RE: Close Air 'Support'?

"And I need to get my butt in gear to help her." -- Bill W.

Going to do a bombing run? Or just a mere straffing?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Save the children. Destroy the schools. And teach them yourself.]

P.S. I prefer electronic terrorism. Back in the late 60s, I jammed every television in the wing during the annual week-long, Americanism vs. Communism television broadcast during home room period.

Then there was the experiment with ammonium nitrate....

(comment deleted from persona non grata)

Interesting post, "alphatroll"... IF that's your REAL name (what IS that "deceptiondollar" website that attempts to download when you click on your highlighted name anyway? My computer wouldn't load it up... it just said "waiting" forever, until I finally gave up). The "old" alpha never left an off-the-blog address before, so who knows.

Would that alpha's postings were always so calm and coherent as this one. Then I could say, "welcome back, alpha. Let's talk."

As for the quote from the "Columbine High School student," I'm not here to refute or contest its individual points (although some of its connections and conclusions seemed a tad "iffy" at times). I think it was a fairly poetic and creatively expressed perspective on our times, and should be treated as such... not dissected for its minor factual imperfections and occasional biases. All I would point out is that you could do the same thing for any time in history -- and probably anywhere in the world -- and be just as appalled. More than likely you'd be substantially MORE disgusted. And you wouldn't have to go back very far either.

Take the 1950s, for instance: "We can boast of the greatest education system in the world, but a black child still has to have an Army National Guard escort just to reach the front door of the school. A man can expect a good home-cooked meal at least twice a day; it only requires that a woman be shackled to the house and kitchen all day long while he's gone. Women may have joined the work force, but the glass ceiling is about two inches above their secretarial desktop. We can now throw a radio transmitter into low Earth orbit, but we still lose our AM signal when we drive under an overpass. Anybody can have their own house now, but installing a nuclear bomb shelter costs an arm and a leg. And neighbors get along like they're one big family... as long as nobody in the neighborhood is different."

Pick a decade -- any decade -- and we can play the same game, only with grimmer and grimmer counterpoints the further back you go.

Come to think of it, in re-reading "alphatroll's" posting, I find that most of those points apply to MOST of the latter decades of this last century. Take out the ones about space and splitting atoms, and they apply to decades long before that.

I guess what I'm saying here is, "Yeh... and...?"

In other words, "so what's your point?" If you're posting this just to show us how well our students of today can write, and how broad their perspectives are, then great. It was a pleasant read and an eye-opening diversion. Thanks. But if this is supposed to be some kind of graphic depiction of the chaotic decline the world is in, as viewed through the untainted eyes of a modern American youth (a more typical "alpha" message), then it falls far short.

Many of the points (like "we have taller buildings, but shorter tempers; wider freeways, but narrower viewpoints") make nonsensical connections, and come to unfair or downright untrue conclusions. Points like "we spend more, but have less; we buy more, but enjoy it less" are by no means universal. And they certainly don't apply to me. I spend more, but then I most definitely HAVE more, and I usually enjoy the hell out of it. So "speak for yourself." And other lines (like "We have bigger houses and smaller families; more conveniences, but less time"), while cleverly assembled, really come down to "so what?" I like my bigger house, don't want a bigger family, like my conveniences, and have plenty of time for what I need or want to do. But then, maybe that's just me.

And believe me, I'm not writing any of this in anger. I liked "the kid's" poetry, could appreciate the thought that went into it, and would have left it at at... had it not been posted by "alphatroll." That's the part that compels me to point out its flaws.

Sorry about that, Columbine Kid, whoever you are.

My point is, if... IF this posting was intended as an indictment of contemporary life in America, it doesn't work. It's the perspective (albeit a well-written one) of one person, a none-too-worldly adolescent at that, and one justifiably embittered by their experiences at that particular high school, I'd wager (then again, maybe not). Kudos on their creative expression of that viewpoint, but as a counter-cultural argument, that's as far as I'd go.

As for their final statement that this is "... a time when technology can bring this letter to you, and a time when you can choose either to forward this message and make a difference... or just hit delete...," I find it rather presumptuous that they think this letter will make any kind of a "difference," whether forwarded or not.

Now, was THAT what you thought I was going to say, alphatroll?

GHS

interesting...

The Hairy One is, indeed, Great. I admire his patience with the little ones -- instead of whacking them into the banana leaves, he calmly shows them again and again how to scoop the termites out of the ant hill.

Or perhaps I'm taking the metaphor too far. At any rate, at least my metaphor is my own writing, and not some repost of a whiny, gag-inducing e-mail from several years back.

I have always hated that annoying "life was so much better back then" sort of essay. Life was better for whom? By any quantifiable measurement life is better today. But that would require a person like alphatroll to admit that their failures are their own, and not someone else's fault. Alphatroll and his ilk would have to acknowledge that success is within their grasp, and all they have to do is get off their posterior and go get it.

Better to complain, for these types. And in alpha's case, re-post someone else's writing instead of bothering to come up with their own. Figures.

Amusingly, that essay was not written by a Columbine student. It was written by a Seattle pastor who molested a number of his parishioners.

Kind of puts a different quirk on the context, doesn't it.

(On a totally random note, my college entrance essay was a piece on how there are no "golden years". Heh.)

Cool. Thanks, LabRat. I checked out your link. That does explain the "Columbine student's" slanted "worldliness," doesn't it?

You know, I just wasn't sure about it... it was just amateurish enough to be believable as a high school student's effort, but just a little too broad in scope to be a typical high school student's perspective... in other words, just clever enough to be worthy of kudos, if it was actually from a high school student, pure drivel knowing its actual source... AND considering who posted it here.

If only you'd posted before me, LabRat.

Oh well. Goodbye again, alphatroll. Bill's delete-n-ban ray strikes again.

GHS

I don't see why, GHS. Regardless of its origin any piece of writing deserves to be evaluated on its own merits or lack of same- if you hadn't spared me the trouble, after noting its actual provenance I would have written essentially what you did.

[POINTLESS COMMENT FROM SERIAL LUNATIC DELETED]

Okay, alpha... oops, I mean "persona non grata" (gosh, I hope I didn't give anything away there)... I'll bite.

First of all, the concept of the "Ideal UN-American" series has already been suggested, by one of Bill's regular supporters, in the comment stream of one of his other recent postings. And with Bill's flair for the snappily coined phrase, I too think it would be an entertaining exercise in creative wordsmithing.

However, I think YOU would be disappointed with it. Because I believe, in keeping with the spirit of the "Ideal American" series -- and knowing Bill as I do -- that his idea of a typical "un-American" would have nothing to do with their politics, their support (or lack thereof) of the current administration, or their belief in the "intrusive" role of the U.S. on the world stage. The "Ideal American" would still be a full-on participant in the very American process of expressed dissent, and in the equally American process of voting an unwanted administration out in the next election. That's not what the "Ideal American" essay was about, so it also wouldn't be relevant to the "Ideal UN-American" theme either.

No, in keeping with the spirit of the "Ideal American" series (and that's an important distinction here), I believe its "un-American" antithesis would be more about the kind of people who just "don't get it." The kind of people who have no idea how unbelievably good they've got it here... who think that the RIGHT to express dissent means the OBLIGATION to constantly complain, resisting every change, fighting every initiative, while at the same time offering no better solutions... who see every inconvenience in life as an opportunity to get rich at someone else's expense... who accept no responsibility for anything, and expect the government to make everything wonderful in their lives... who would proclaim the sanctity of their own personal privacy, but demand that the government (which protects them and their inviolable rights) be allowed no secrets of its own -- and THEN would read conspiracy, collusion and corruption into every secret it DOES enforce... someone who would prefer being an intellectual shut-in and a perpetually dissatisfied "revolutionary" to getting out and playing a game, flying an airplane, dating the one creature that makes your heart sing (even if -- ESPECIALLY if -- every sign says they're untouchable), or just going for a ride with the proverbial top down.

In short, an "Ideal un-American" would be someone who just doesn't "get" America, NOT someone who just doesn't support a particular president's initiatives.

The whole point of the "Ideal American" premise was that Americans, "ideally," are creatures who are born -- and recognize that birthright -- into a land of unrivaled freedoms and opportunities, and, as a result of that recognition, actually ENJOY those freedoms, and TAKE ADVANTAGE OF those opportunities. They can live without constant fear, they can express their every opinion, secure in the certainty of their right to do so, and they can (and the "Ideal American" DOES) try his/her hand at anything they damned well want, be it crazy hobbies, risky business ventures, or wild flights of artistic fancy.

THAT'S what the "Ideal American" thing was about... that, and the idea (in my opinion at least) that the person who "just doesn't get it" is NOT an "Ideal American." Not that they're "not American" or that they're "UN-American," or that they're "anti-American"... just that the "IDEAL American" GET'S IT! They know what they've got, they sometimes can't even believe how lucky they are, and they consciously LIVE (note that word, "live") a fruitful LIFE, unfettered by a petty focus on the imperfections and occasional injustices, and instead, revel in what they HAVE. They don't IGNORE the "ugly truths," they just don't confine themselves to that ugliness.

And as for your comment that being branded "unAmerican" is "... a most shameful socio-political put down," I don't agree with that either, partly for a reason that YOU mentioned ("... it tells us more about the deliverer than the receiver"), but mostly because of what I just described above -- that, in my opinion, there's nothing "socio-political" about being either American or un-. It's a state of mind (a freer one), a lifestyle (a happier, more secure one), and it's an existence worthy of the person that is worthy of IT.

I think it's kinda' like living in a rich kid's house. An "Ideal American" child, despite having known only that degree of luxury and opulence all his life, would recognize what he had, try to share it with others, and be appreciative of his incredible good fortune. The spoiled rotten "un-American" child would be the type who takes it all for granted, grows bored easily as a result, and then makes an adolescent career out of finding fault in every little inconvenience, and complaining about everything, as if that shows that he's "above all this" and is "unspoiled by all the decadence" around him.

That's just my opinion, of course.

Oh, and that link that your highlighted name sent me to... that did nothing for your credibility either.

Get out, son! Take a breath!

GHS

I also received that e-mail some time back (we buy more, but enjoy less...). It reminded me of Ellen Goodman, a liberal columnist of the earnest hand-wringing variety. For anyone suffering from a bout of nostalgia, I prescribe All the World’s Troubles by PJ O’Rourke. On the topic of pollution, he cites how many thousands of tons of horse manure dropped onto the streets and stable floors of New York City each day at the turn of the century. He then asks the reader whether they’d rather die of cancer at the age of 60, or cholera at the age of 12.

That said, I think there’s two distinct types of “nostalgia”. First, there’s the pointless, put on the rose colored glasses nostalgia, in which all of the good things are remembered (cool cars with fins and lots of chrome, low teenage pregnancy rates) and forget all of the bad (polio, Jim Crow). As has been rightly pointed out by other posters, this is little different than the spoiled rich kid sitting in a room surrounded by toys, bored and completely oblivious to the blessings that surround him.
The second, more thoughtful “nostalgia” (perhaps there’s already a word for what I’m trying to describe) is fully appreciative of the many things that have gotten better, but wonders if in many cases the society/culture didn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am unbelievably grateful that I can afford things I didn’t even know I wanted twenty years ago. But I still feel some sense of loss that I can’t find (or afford) something that has fewer features, but is built with quality, built to last forever. I appreciate the power and speed of my laptop. I just wish that the toaster-oven wasn’t such a piece of crap. A single person can take full advantage of the so-called “sexual revolution” and still hate the rampant irresponsibility evidenced by the rate of “out of wedlock births”.
I jealously defend all of our country’s scientific, technological, and medical advances. But I still bemoan the erosion of our freedom, and the enlargement of sense of personal license and entitlement. I wish I had the tax rate my father did when he was my age. I wish my fellow citizens had the same sense of restraint, right and wrong, and personal honor they once did. When I was a sprout, a teen could walk into a hardware store, and buy a high-power rifle and a box of ammunition, but there were no Columbines. Life gets better and better, and the people seem less and less deserving.

Wow. Sorry for such a downer of a post. Bill needs to write something. When he’s good (and that’s most all of the time) he’s one of the few people able to restore some of my faith in my fellow man.

She has alot of support. It's an uphill battle for her, and seemingly for the rest of us.

Cheer up Jumper, we are all in this together :)

Crap, I'm on a double posting frenzy today.

Just wanted to comment on the thread-jack education topic: Money doesn't solve the education problem. Parents do. Teachers do. Kids do. Responsibility is the key ingredient here folks.

I swear this wasn't supposed to be this long when I first started it. But...

You know, Jumper, my first inclination when I read your last "downer" posting (and I don't think it was half the sinkhole of depression that you thought it was), was to agree with you. I was sure that my own outlook on contemporary American life was much like what you described -- glad for the good, but fully aware of all the ways we've slipped and stumbled along the way. But when I started to assemble some examples in my head, I found that, item for item, I COULDN'T come up with any examples where I really bemoaned the loss of a "better time." Almost across the board, I found, much to my OWN surprise, that I preferred the present to the past on almost every level.

Almost.

I mean, say what you will about the decline in quality (and longevity) of modern products, but I gotta' tell ya', I can't remember a time in MY life when things worked as consistently, efficiently, quietly, and continuously as they do now. And I'm including my car(s), my TV(s), my house, AND my crappy little K-Mart toaster oven. Mainstream movies, for example, may have gotten shallower, but GREAT films are still produced, and THOSE are greater than ever. Besides, when I watch "old movies," the classics aside, most of THEM were pretty cheesy, cheap and shallow too.

And the list of introspections went on and on. Stuff like that.

I wasn't quite sure what you were specifically referring to when you mentioned how you "... still bemoan the erosion of our freedom, and the enlargement of [our] sense of personal license and entitlement." But it made me think of our shrinking bubbles of personal privacy -- although, for me, that's balanced somewhat by the REVERSE access that WE (along with the same intrusive "government agencies") now have into the deviant doings and machinations of powerful corporate and political entities as well. It's not an even trade by any means, but it's more than what we used to have. Questionable activities by the power brokers of the world might have global ramifications, but these days, they are also under constant global scrutiny. And even knowing history as marginally as I do, I know from the world's experience that humans have plotted, schemed and connived since the first instant they were mentally capable of it, and in the past, got away with it a whole lot more.

And as for the decline in societal values, I'm inclined more to look on it as a SHIFT in societal values -- not, by definition, good or bad, but just different -- which has the natural corollary effect of making people who are inherently resistant to change (myself most definitely included), uncomfortable and yearning for "the good old days" -- those being "the days" that we are familiar, and therefore most comfortable, with.

I can remember reading about the social upheaval that came from the advent of writing -- cultural elders bemoaning the decline of the art of storytelling, and the social interaction and embellishment that went along with it. That was a legitimate worry, insofar as it went. Storytelling was a mainstay of family entertainment AND education in that time. But, IMO, it was not a change for the worse, just a change for the different -- and ultimately, for the better.

All that having been said, however, I did find one key thing about modern society that I found particularly unsettling, one evolutionary movement that I believe to be insidiously destructive and corrosive to this culture. And unfortunately, it's creeping into too many aspects of life to leave me much hope of seeing it stopped in time. And that is the "dumbing down" of this society, and of its citizenry.

It's the new "slacker standard." It's the willingness to offer, accept, and play for the lowest common denominator. It's the readiness to not just accept, but to IDOLIZE the lazy, the half-assed, and the marginal. And my list of examples is so sure to piss people off (since it no doubt includes so many things that so many enjoy), that I'm reluctant to include it here. But some, for me, just HAVE to be mentioned.

Like rap "music" (note the quotation marks). This is not an issue of taste. There are plenty of forms of music that I don't like, but which I can still appreciate for the skill, or the creativity, or the virtuosity, or even just the message that they convey. Rap offers none of these things. It is, TO ME, the "dumbing down" of music -- the ebonics of melodic expression. To produce it requires no ability whatsoever -- you don't have to be able to play a single instrument, your lyrical skills are irrelevant, you can be completely tonedeaf and have no sense of rhythm, and as long as you've got the chutzpah to shout at the world about what a badass you are, you can make rap.

And even that wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the absolute hero worship bestowed upon these talentless ego-bombs. Anyone should be able to make any form of "music" they want, and similarly enjoy anyone ELSE'S forms of music as well. I don't begrudge any of that. But the sheer unbridled idolatry consigned to these "artists" is what makes me fear for this nation's citizenry in general (and, as an Orlando chauffeur, I've driven enough of them to know that meeting them in person does nothing to improve this impression).

And that, to me, is just the stand-out example. This epidemic of "dumbing down" is really starting to pick up some wildfire speeds, with outbreaks coming in the form of shows like Jerry Springer, Maury and Rikki... "entertainment" like the WWF (gawd, ignoring the blatant fakery, doesn't it bother anyone that the only "virtues" depicted by this stuff are fury, vengeance, bald-faced cheating and extreme violence?)... "sports" like the X-Games... and all this before we even get into the outbreak in politics and the judicial system (all the stern laws designed specifically to protect us from ourselves, the policies intended to provide for those who will not provide for themselves, and the legal system that promotes a perpetually litigious population).

All symptoms of the general "dumbing down" of this society. Quantity over quality, contest over content. The constant sight of kids immersed in their isolated Walkman headphone worlds, drivers sitting through green lights while they gossip on their cellphones... less and less contact with the real world around them, more and more demand for sensory saturation, from loud music to insanely hyperactive video games. Nothing of depth, nothing with any meaning, nothing with any lasting affect.

It's not that, item for item, every individual thing sucks. That's not the case at all. As I mentioned at the start of this, I couldn't think of too much about this country that I didn't like better than I used to. Because, item for item, it all works for me.

What bothers me is watching the Population At Large (the "PAL") succumbing to more and more pap -- more neon, more sugar, more volume, more hype, more interconnected vapidness, more nothing -- and knowing that these people breed AND vote. This is NOT everyone, but it IS the vast herd. And in this country especially, the earth moves under their restless feet.

That's one of the main things I like about this blog and the regular commenters I've come to know here. Even the dissenters (notice I didn't include the trolls). It, and others like it, are like a refuge for me. I can listen to all the still-firing synapses out there, and feel like a cattle-driver, surrounded by a small clot of dependable wranglers, herdsmen and cowboys (sorry LabRat, Serenity and Bonnie... that should be "cow-persons")... looking down at the milling herd, then up at the approaching storm.

"Think they're gonna' stampede, Jeb?"

"Yep. I reckon so."

"Shit."

GHS

P.S.- as a fellow Orlando-ite, Jumper, I hope you're enjoying the cold weather.

GHS

You said a great deal that was right on target as to how I feel. The material stuff is not such a big deal. I’ll take my Pentium lap-top over kitchen appliances that last thirty years any day. The clock on the mantle over our fireplace was a wedding gift to my great grandparents. It still keeps excellent time, and for its day it was not even a particularly expensive model. None of our wedding presents will be a valued possession three generations from now - One of the reasons I told my wife we needed a few firearms on the wedding registry, but she didn’t buy that argument ;-) It’s a little sad that there is very little today that can be passed down generations like that clock, but materially, we are far, far better off with what we’ve got.

No, it bothers me much more that the “People At Large” (PAL) don’t even value quality. The school curricula are dumbed down. Standards of all sorts are being lowered. People are famous and idolized not for their achievements, or their work, but merely for their celebrity. There are individuals who are famous merely for being famous. Not art for art’s sake, but celebrity for celebrity’s sake. Standards of all sorts are being dumbed down. (My particular thoughts on rap: The initial ‘C’ is silent). All my friends and I loved pro wrestling. When we were in fifth grade! But we grew up. We moved on.

One has to admit to the morbid curiosity that makes one want to peek when driving past the traffic accident. But Jerry Springer and his producers televise trainwrecks every day. (Perhaps Springer has one redeeming quality. No matter how badly someone’s screwed up their life, they can turn on Springer and see people even more stupid, people who are even bigger losers than themselves)

It bothers me most that the PAL expect less of themselves, hold themselves to such low standards, whether those standards be simple courtesy, or morals, or simple personal responsibility. Unemployed people who won’t apply for a job at WalMart because “They’re not union. They don’t pay enough.” I just want to grab them and shake them and shout “They pay more than you’re making now!” No sense of shame that they’re sucking on the public teat; no drive to pay their own way through life because it’s the right thing to do. The PAL don’t seem to “get it” that just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should, and conversely just because you don’t have to doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. I oftentimes feel I’m the only person in the room who, given a choice, will do the ‘right thing’, if it’s easier, safer, or more monetarily rewarding not to. I don’t like that feeling.

Gotta wind up and get back to work. Current events, and a few more personal situations have just gotten me a little more pessimistic than usual about our fellow citizens.

J

PS; GHS, what gave you the idea I’m from Orlando? I’m in southwest Ohio. Back in the late 80’s, early 90’s I used to travel to Orlando once or twice a month. I suppose the Orange Blossom Trail is still there.

Hmmm. Since Bill shut off all the old comment streams, I haven't been able to re-read and recheck names vs. home towns, but I thought I remembered that you were from here.

Oops. My bad. Condolences on living in SW Ohio though (just kidding... my wife's from Dayton).

Anyhoo, amens all round on your last posting. It's easy to let the cultural cave-in get you down, I know. That's why I prefer to just pay attention to how the present world works FOR ME. That's what allows me to say the positive things I said in MY last posting. Spend too much time "watching the lights go out" all around you (so to speak), and it's enough to make you want to walk into ocean with lead weights in your pockets.

Chin up though, trooper. Just keep relighting the pilot lights when they go out, and pray this is all just another phase, like "free love," white guys with afros, and disco.

Cheers.

GHS

Hello

Jumper, GHS,

What bothers me is watching the Population At Large (the "PAL") succumbing to more and more pap -- more neon, more sugar, more volume, more hype, more interconnected vapidness, more nothing -- and knowing that these people breed AND vote. This is NOT everyone, but it IS the vast herd. And in this country especially, the earth moves under their restless feet.

It occurred to me as I read your observations about PAL, these people are with us always. They are malleable and their lives flow into the container that holds them - which may be the vessel of popular culture. And they existed in Lincoln’s time, and in Jefferson’s and Plato’s as well, one might guess.

So why are we seeing more of the dumbing down that you describe? The lowering of standards?

I don’t see the issue with toaster ovens or laptop computers - things. All that stuff – the technology – in an enabling agent. The technology provides us with something that has made huge impact on the way we live our lives –

Velocity.

We have more access to more...everything. Business cycles, news cycles, cycles of life get compressed – and more intense.

For example: Have you ever used microfilm fiches at the library? How long would it take to gather the research on, say, congressional voting records in 1975?
How long would a Google search of such records take today?

And how long would that information take to disseminate nationally then?
And now?

Some, the nimble ones, revel in the access to information and analysis and all it implies. Some look like dogs loose in the middle of a freeway. And some (PAL) conform to what is within easy reach. Because everyone has to screen this abundance, or perish of sensory overload. And some folks suck at it. And some won’t submit to the discipline of it. And if you try to get it all, what you get will be one viewgraph deep.

But why does it look so bad? The Jerry Springer stuff, the rap crap, all the drivel – I would assert has always been there. The difference? Now the two standard deviation off stuff is accessable, quickly and easily. And some people don’t have filters that work worth a damn. And some people rely on the filter of popular culture, ‘cause it’s easy. And the PALs never used to have widespread access to the two SD drivel before.

BUT, those that have and use their filters, and responsibly choose the velocity by which they live open a large gap between themselves and the PAL. That gap may be larger than ever before. And it is more evident, because of the immense access available.

I think that the community that has gathered around B. Whittle and his essays largely lives on one side of this gap. This group, it seems, has staked out a place, a position, a value set. And if you don’t like it - tough. Debate is valued, but rolling over is not respected here. And velocity is a choice lived large among this little group of cow punchers.

I wish the comments sections were back for the other essays…..

Sorry, above was my rant

Good morning, Skeeter.

That wasn't my definition of a rant, by the way. Seemed pretty cogent to me. And it sounds like, for the most part, you and I are in agreement.

I'll admit to being one of those that "... look[s] like [a] dog loose in the middle of a freeway" when it comes to using the Internet, or even a microfiche. Computers in general, actually. I usually have a sufficient grasp of the specific software I need and am accustomed to using, but beyond that, the whole thing is a foul-smelling mystery to me. And since the Internet excels at two things for which I have no skill or interest (research and shopping), I've made no effort to improve on my incompetence.

But your point is entirely correct about the vast universe of information that is now suddenly available to the "PAL." And I think you're also absolutely correct that this "restless herd" did indeed exist "... in Lincoln’s time, and in Jefferson’s and Plato’s as well."

My contention though, has more to do with what that broad demographic has chosen to DO with all that informational access -- with all that digital power, and all the new technological quanta that has opened up so many new entertainment options as well -- in addition to all the legal and political "opportunities" that our societal evolution has bred.

I mean, typically, everyone -- including the meaty, mindless center of the PAL herd -- wants to improve their lives, and theoretically, all these great technological advances offer them just that possibility. But what I'M seeing is just the opposite happening.

I'm seeing people using all these fabulous new tools to make their lives EASIER rather than better. And by "easier," I mean lazier, less involved, even less aware. I mean, why go OUT when you can now do just about anything you want in your computer room, from fishing to playing football to living vicariously as a digital thief in a fantasy world of elves and wizards? Why try and make your "life situation" BETTER, when you can just make yourself FEEL better by tuning in a show -- like Jerry, Maury or Rikki, or even "COPS" -- and seeing how much worse, and how much more stupid, OTHER people's lives and problems are? Why take the time and effort (and risk) of socially interacting with others, when you can tune out the entire world with a cheap set of Walkman headphones? Why strive toward personal excellence and professional achievement (what I would call "LEGITIMATE wealth") when you can make a quick six figures just by suing your neighbor for not shoveling the snow off his own driveway?

These are NOT the kinds of things that the people of Lincoln's, Jefferson's and Plato's times did. They worked their ASSES off (there wasn't much choice there, actually) just to make ends meet -- just to survive -- and on those rare occasions when that toil and sweat actually amounted to something, when it actually GOT them somewhere, they took advantage of that and put it towards making their lives better.

Of course, maybe the only difference between then and now is that NOW it's actually POSSIBLE for those at the low end of the societal and economic food chains to just plain ESCAPE reality when they want (by means other than hashish and grain alcohol). Maybe if PlayStations and Walkmen and Snoop Dog and personal liability lawyers had existed back then, then even Lincoln's and Jefferson's and Plato's people would have taken this same cultural backslide as well -- I'll grant you that the PALs of each of these eras probably AREN'T that much different in that regard -- but that only reinforces my initial contention... that the newfound availability of these kinds of powerful resources can be a socially dangerous thing if allowed to follow its own lead.

Minute by minute, event by event, there's nothing wrong with instant gratification, vicarious living, having ever-shortening attention spans satiated, or an inate human greed placated by sudden windfalls of "legal monetary rewards," but in the long run, it dumbs us down. It makes us lazy, petty, self-centered, whiny, and ultimately self-defeating. And in a nation GUIDED by such a vast, shuffling, dumb-and-getting-dumber herd, that's a frightening prospect indeed.

I think.

Again though, item for item, what's the problem? Who cares what kind of "music" someone listens to on occasion? What difference does it make that someone enjoys the clearly staged and over-dramatized antics of the "WWF?" It's all just fun, right? Why NOT push to have a union move in on the company you work for? You'll make more money, right? Why SHOULDN'T a basketball player make a hundred million dollars for playing a GAME for five years? Why SHOULDN'T a person just stop their car dead in the middle of the fast lane to wait for a chance to cross all three lanes to that exit they almost missed? I mean, having to drive all the way down to the next exit and make a 180 would be really inconvenient, wouldn't it?

To me, it's all part and parcel of the same epidemic -- laziness, self-centeredness, short-term gratification, looking out for number one AT THE EXPENSE OF numbers two on up. Maybe every generation of every epoch would have done the same thing, given the same technology and the same freedom to use it any way they saw fit -- maybe the PEOPLE aren't the problem here, but the situation IS -- whatever! It doesn't matter. Either way, the "dumbing down" IS occurring. And I'm not sure what can be done about it, other than to hope that its indiscriminate application doesn't last so long that we pass a point of no return, and cave in completely.

I've got my fingers crossed.

GHS

Well, speaking as someone who feels more like a shark in a shoal of fish than a dog on a freeway on the internet, rather enjoys wrestling from time to time (seriously folks, if you don't try to take it seriously it's freaking HILARIOUS!), and has an active Final Fantasy XI account...

As I type this, I've got three programs running simultaneously and I'm working in all of them. (And one of the programs, my browser window, has three open tabs that I'm switching back and forth between as the whim takes me.) Someone watching me now might conclude that my attention span has shrunk to less than fifteen seconds and bemoan the decay of American character. Someone watching me later this evening when I might spend three to five hours happily absorbed in a book might conclude that there's hope for the American character after all.

I honestly think the threat from self-absorbed PALs is self-limiting. After all, the more apathetic they get, the less chance there is that they're going to be able to stand in the way of people with the intelligence, motivation, and ambition to USE the resources at hand rather than abuse them.

Howdy LabRat.

I have to admit that the doom and despair comes over me MOST towards the end of a diatribe like my last one. 98% of the time, I never even think about these things (except when I'm driving, and I'm surrounded by the "rolling braindead"). And to tell you the truth, even when I do think about it, I tend to look on it like a fad or phase, another ten-year cycle of cultural backlash from the previous decade(s), one that'll be gone by 2010, forgotten by 2012, and laughed at by 2020. But still...

My biggest single pet peeve (sp?) is waste -- waste of money, waste of effort, waste of time, waste of life. It's my own thing, I know, and is not necessarily a universal truth. But lordy, wading through the mega-trends and waiting for them to die their natural deaths can be taxing. So like I said, I'll keep my fingers crossed, continue to gnaw through my constantly regenerating tongue, and think the good thought.

And again, I'll harken back to my first response to Jumper when I said, "... Almost across the board, I found, much to my OWN surprise, that I preferred the present to the past on almost every level." That was and is still true. It's just so easy to lose sight of it after a half hour of writing about all the negatives.

And by the way; I've got a friend down here in Florida like you -- intuitive with a computer, at home on the world wide web -- another one who can't even check his e-mailbox without running fifteen other programs simultaneously. You're sick puppies, I'm tellin' ya'!

I compare computers with horses -- both are capable of such beauty and power, speed and range... and both will stomp you into a greasy spot on a fickle whim. Even the cyberphiles I know have the same problems I do with the danged black magic boxes -- they just don't let it get to them like I do. They'll hit a wall over and over and over again, and see it as a challenge. I hit a wall once, and see stars. The next thing you know, the computer's in pieces in the street.

What can I say? Sputnik was all the rage when I was born.

Anyhoo, I'll continue to enjoy what the present offers over the past (which was the whole point of the first posting in this series of comments), and look forward to the next great cyclical swing of the social pendulum with optimism...

... or stunned disbelief.

GHS

At the risk of beating a dead horse…..

Change occurs on the margin. Freedom too.

I may have expressed myself badly concerning velocity. Certainly the Internet and computers enable it, but the impact reaches all kinds of people who do not necessarily dip into Internet or computers directly.

Innovative work on the margin gets quickly disseminated as best practice. That becomes the “Jacks or better to open” standard that defines productivity, and marks where the real competition lies. And the PALs get dragged along (or left behind) whether they like it or not.

Sometimes it seems that the only individuals who really like change are wet babies. But the most successful people, on the margin, accept and adapt to the rate of change, like it or not. Success as you (GHS and Jumper) seem to define it involves walking a finer and finer line between delay of gratification and acceptance of change/velocity. Said another way, a cornucopia of information, and choice is laid at our feet. But we must make our choices.

And choices have prices.

So the PAL have largely the same choices. They choose, by our lights, the path of least resistance. But freedom allows mediocrity as a choice. My discomfort, and I suspect yours as well, comes from the fact that PAL would like the price to be paid by someone, anyone, else.

And because of awareness of “lifestyles of the rich and famous,” expectations of the PAL outstrip their ability to pay the price. Ever.

But if you can’t compete, you either escape, or quit. Not their fault, maybe, but it is their problem.

And the folks on the margin continue to walk the finer line described above. Additionally, a characteristic of those on the margin is that, on balance, they act on their world rather than allow the world to dictate to them. And they sometimes come to a place where they pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor.

And they do it as the PAL looks on.

And they always have.

Hmmm. I must cogitate on that, Skeeter. And unfortunately, this busy morning will not be the time. But, on first glance, again it sounds like you and I are mostly in agreement, if not just "not-at-odds." It looks like the place where we mostly diverge (and not by much, considering my own weak and impressionable stance on this) is on the matter of long term ramifications.

It SOUNDS like you're saying, essentially, that (a) the world will keep on spinning like always, regardless of how "dumbed down" (my words) the PAL lets itself go, and (b) the "dumbing down" itself is purely a matter of opinion and/or personal definition. I'll re-read it again in a day or two when my work slows down again, but IF (a) and (b) ARE what you're saying, then (a2) I'll accept that and hope it proves to be true, and (b2) absolutely. No question. It is my definition and my perspective, and could be dead wrong.

And MAN, I hope it is.

It just doesn't look like it on TV, or through my car's front window.

But, must adieu for now. Keep up the good work.

GHS

Today is another day, more retrospect and less morose...
You're all right. A lot of good fodder for thought. The herd, the unthinking, the apathetic, those unwilling to expend the disciplined effort to think, and those simply not gifted by genetics & environment with the ability to truely think, have always been a part of mankind. They brought Athens to ruin, demonstrating that pure, direct democracy, with no limits on the majority's power was simply a novel flavor of tyranny. Rome had a better idea, Republic. It too withered and died from the apathy of its own citizens.
The French Revolution, a movement truely 'of the people', became the Jacobin Terror. Another misguided attempt to create 'democracry'. Their tyranny of the mob collapsed into a more traditional dictatorship under the command of a talented young Corsican officer of artillery. Game, Set, Match. Democracy to Imperialism in three eay steps... Liberty, Fraternity, Equality my hairy backside. Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, a small, elite group of rich white men had launched the most successful "democratic" enterprise in history.

I can accept that the world's always been full of the incompetent, the selfish, and the apathetic. And I realize that when I was a child, the adult population wasn't half as good and upright as I remember it to be; children tend to assume that all adults are like their parents, and I was blessed with a great family. Yet I stand by my example: Forty years ago, a teenager could walk into a hardware store and buy a high powered rifle and ammunition with no ID, no background checks... and there were no Columbines, no drive-by shootings.

There was apparently a sense of restraint that is lacking today: Just because I can do something doesn't mean it's a good idea. I believe there was also a sense of something like obligation, a sense that we're all in this together and let's make things as easy as possible for each other: Just because I don't have to do a thing doesn't mean I shouldn't. There's no law requiring me to hold the door open for the person behind me. But I do it anyway.
My fear is that as internal restraint evaporates, more and more external restraints will be imposed. My fear is that the "normal" people - good, upright, but not of a particularly libertarian bent - will decide that they can no longer rely on self-restraint and societal norms to keep themselves and their families safe, and will continue ceding more and more power to the government.

GHS - I grew up in Xenia, just east of your undoubtedly charming and beautiful wife's place of origin. I don't know when your wife moved south, but if she still lived in Dayton in April '74, or Sep '00, she can attest to my hometown's other claim to fame: F5 tornados. I stood outside my garage and watched the remnants of the 2000 tornado pass about 600-800 yards from our place. Nothing like looking up into the sky, seeing circling debris, and having your heart start skipping beats as you realize you have no idea how close, or how far away the beast really is.
As for feeling sorry for me being up here... At the moment I've got a "house in the county": 12 acres, almost all 2nd growth woods; and I sincerely hope I'm able to stay here 'til I let slip this mortal coil. It's whitetail deer heaven. If I discovered the Philosophers' Stone, or patented cold fusion, the only thing I'd do is buy up adjoining properties to enlarge my little piece of paradise. :-) Back when I was visiting Orlando once or twice a month on business, I felt sorry for you guys. In August, September, and October, I hated stepping out of the hotel or the rental car into a solid wall of suffocating humidity, and being instantly blinded as my glasses fogged over. Hated that humidity. If I ever have to relocate to another part of the country, I hope it'll be towards LabRat's corner of the world, the southwest. Long ago, I backpacked through northern New Mexico for a few summers, and I loved the dry heat. This was where the desert met the mountains, and I loved being able to change my ecosystem from desert to alpine meadow with one hard day's hike.
Of course, Orlando was about the only place in the world I could eat lunch on my host's patio, and watch a space shuttle ascend into the heavens.

J

"Yet I stand by my example: Forty years ago, a teenager could walk into a hardware store and buy a high powered rifle and ammunition with no ID, no background checks... and there were no Columbines, no drive-by shootings. There was apparently a sense of restraint that is lacking today: Just because I can do something doesn't mean it's a good idea."

I'm not so sure about that. We tend to think of small towns of the middle of this century as safe havens, but my father grew up in a small rural town in Texas, and I remember him telling me that for certain thuggish high school boys, it was considered weekend sport to whack blacks found walking down the road at night across the head with a crowbar, or go up to a bar known to be frequented by gays in the city and lie in wait to beat one of the patrons to a paste. I also know that until the feminist movement, however misguided it might have been in some ways, rape laws were essentially a joke in many places. It seems to me less that there was some sense of restraint as that there was a sense of acceptable and unacceptable victim and aggressor pools and places. I also vaguely recall- and forgive me if I can't find my source- that the first recorded incidence of a student walking into his classroom with a rifle and slaughtering people was actually in 1954. Of course, the culture of the time did have one other difference; when these things happened, there was no national media circus. Not only was the general public less aware of it and not forced into hyperawareness by a month-long media saturation, there was no encouragement for narcisisstic psychotics to copycat the acts.

Personally, I think human beings have an ugly violent streak that is quite simply bred into the bone, and I seriously doubt history has ever or will ever be free of it. After all, for millions of years that capacity for violence, brutality for brutality's sake, has been part of most social primates- and certainly the most successful ones. (Chimpanzees and baboons, both famous among primatologists for their tendency to do horrifying things to their fellowmonkey, are both hanging on far better than the relatively pacifistic gorilla.) All we can do is recognize and mitigate it as best we can.

And yes, northern New Mexico is a very satisfying place to live if you don't mind being outnumbered by wild animals and livestock. I personally consider it a selling point.

Fascinating stuff to read here. Having been born in 1979 myself, I wasn't around for the 1950's, so I can't personally speak to some of these issues. I do have some thoughts on one of them, though. In his February 17 post, Jumper said "A single person can take full advantage of the so-called “sexual revolution” and still hate the rampant irresponsibility evidenced by the rate of “out of wedlock births”." This puzzles me somewhat. It seems to me that these two are inextricably linked -- that human nature makes it pretty much inevitable for the one to lead to the other. Let me explain.

What, exactly, was the sexual revolution revolting against if not the previously-accepted standard of morality -- that you weren't supposed to have sex until you were married? Not that everyone followed that standard, of course, but it was still a standard generally accepted by society. Thus, teenagers who felt inclined to have sex would either: 1) not act on their inclinations because they were afraid of getting caught, or 2) try to make sure nobody, but *NOBODY*, knew what they were doing. And if a girl got pregnant out of wedlock, there was an incredible amount of societal pressure on her to reveal who the father was, and then the societal pressure was focused on him: he would *have* to marry her, nothing else would do.

Once the sexual revolution, with its battle-cry of "free love" (meaning sex unrestricted by such rules as marriage) became generally accepted as the norm in society, why would anyone be surprised that out-of-wedlock births are increasing? Society no longer demands that boys marry the girls they've gotten pregnant. (Even if she knows who the father is, which isn't always the case a sexually-permissive society). We may have laws regulating child-support payments or other forms of responsibility, but there is no societal pressure on the boy to actually *marry* the girl. And yes, I call them "boys", not "men". Biologically they may be men, since they were able to father a child, but if they can't take responsibility for their own actions in such an important matter as this, they are not men, whether their age be 15 or 35.

Heh. I didn't expect to get so vehement. But then, I'm one of those weird old-fashioned people who think that sex is much better when there's real, genuine love and commitment as well -- and I also wonder what went wrong with society that we forgot that there's a word for "genuine love and commitment", seven letters long, that starts with an M.

How embarrasing! I meant "eight letters long" at the end, there, not seven. All together boys and girls, let's teach Robin to count!

M - One!
A - Two!
R - Three!
R - Four!
I - Five!
A - Six!
G - Seven!
E - Eight!

*blush*

You’d think I could be a bit clearer. But, although it is very clear in my head, I am struggling somewhat to get it down on screen [paper].

a) Unwashed masses have always been with us, but the cultural dumbing and deviancy have not always been so obvious – the information about it stayed in little towns, as dirty little secrets, it was not broadcast on Jerry Springer and the like 24/7. PAL has always been there, we just didn’t have the unfiltered picture before. The whole “what will people think” that restrained people in the ‘50s to some extent was the PAL search for a cultural mold to be poured into. Those folks always have a huge need to be part of – and the examples they see today are a long way from Ozzie and Harriet. But whatever the mold, whenever the mold, many PAL will attempt to align with it – to be part of. When this reaches critical mass, the fall of Rome occurs, and we start over elsewhere.
b) Those individuals who live on the margin create the benchmarks and do the starting over. That meritocracy if you will, keeps stuff spinning. They often do this without giving a rat's ass about what other people think.
c) There is hope. Look at the shift toward patriotism occurring after 9/11 – and the amusing and ridiculous “issues” on TANG vs. Vietnam war decorations that have resulted from it. (There’s a comment that ought to get me excoriated, right?) My patriotism didn’t change much – maybe my neighbor’s didn’t either, but it was more visible. Or maybe that cultural shape, built on the margins, was filled by the PAL.

Jumper’s point regarding lack of internal restraint resulting in an increase of external restraints is also a concern of mine. My parents lived in Morton Grove, and I was maybe 13 when the gun ban occurred there. I remember vividly that my Dad and other neighbors who tried to have input into the hearings couldn’t even get close to the room in which the hearings took place. And the lot was filled with out of state tags. My dad became a part time Cook County Sheriff (bailiff) to keep his gun collection.

Innovation on the margin?

As I look back on this thread, it occurs to me that whole PAL/margins theme is amazingly arrogant. Yet I believe it to be true. It may also be that I can be more optimistic because I don’t watch any television. I’d rather spend the time doing other things (choices have prices). I may be mistaken, but I think that I get the cultural flavor and impact through books, Internet, and interactions with those who do watch TV. But without the depression.

On the other hand, it may be much worse than I think.

I’ll still bet on the margin.

LabRat -
One of my earlier posts on this thread, I mentioned recognizing and appreciating the improvements, and the good things, yet wondering if society hadn't tossed the baby out with the bath water. Your example of the lynchings is a case in point. Race relations have come so far in my lifetime it's almost staggering. But did we really have to destroy Federalism (as the founders understood that term) in order to get here? Wasn't there some other way?

Robin -
Obviously, from a mere statistical probability, the more people having sex, the more pregnancies, protected or not. I probably didn't pick the best example, but my point is that there are enjoyable activities with predictable risks and known consequences. People are foolish not to take precautions beforehand, and irresponsable not to fully accept the consequences afterward.
I personally know a couple who had a "mistake" in their Junior year of college. They "did the right thing" on their own, with no societal pressure (this was the 90's). They both graduated with honors (a year late because they got jobs and worked to support themselves and their child. No welfare). They've been married over 10 years now. Those are individuals of character, and people I'm proud to number among my family. These are the kind of people I want in my country: People who may make a mistake, but who will then 'do the right thing' even if it's hard, even if it hurts.
And you're right, "that sex is much better when there's real, genuine love and commitment as well". But don't assume that all out-of-wedlock sex is casual. Sometimes "there's real, genuine love and commitment" but no realistic prospect of a successful marriage. Love doesn't conquer all. It's an agonizing thing to know someone you truely love whom you know you could not possibly tolerate as a spouse: the love is there, but not the more mundane aspects like compatable personalities. I think in such a case one shouldn't dishonour the tradition and the vows by embarking on a marriage you know will not work. If you make a sworn oath "till death do us part", and you don't accept homocide as an option (which I don't think any of us do), then you better be damn sure you'll be able to enjoy, or at least tolerate someone's presence for a long time.

Skeeter -
I think anyone who cares about ideas agonizes with their own lack of eloquence at one time (or most times) or another. I know I do. It is frustrating beyond words to have an idea and be unable to express it. I wonder if that feeling is the actual genesis of the short story (and Metallica song) about the injured WWI soldier unable to see, hear, or speak, laying on the stretcher blinking "S.0.S. Kill me"

I can't really think of anything you've said with which I would disagree, and you have a novel way of presenting the ideas. I like your metaphor of mainstream, and the margins. It turns the conventional usage of "marginalized" on its head, and sometimes a jolt like that can get people thinking.
I guess my biggest fear is that I'll live long enough for the PAL to take us into some Euromediocrity swamp of cradle-to-grave welfare and stagnant low-growth economy, where the government bans anything remotely dangerous for our own protection. And not long enough to see the marginalized geniuses and builders and doers create the next great place.

And as to the sounding arrogant part... Here's my take on that. Many years ago, I took a test, and the results stated that gray-matter wise, I was somewhat above the mathmatical mean. Stating that is not arrogant. Assuming the everyone I meet is inferior because odds are I'm brighter than them... That's arrogance to me. Stating that a certain presidential candidate is either ignorant of freshman level economics or a liar is not arrogance, it's observation and judgement. Not listening to his ideas is arrogance. It's about giving everyone you meet a fair chance to prove themselves, their character, the merit of their ideas, etc.

Well, my eyes are glazing over (and I sincerly hope I haven't made yours do so) and I am getting out of this office for a computer-free weekend.

Best Regards all
J

Jumper,

YES!

The novel was "johnny got his gun" by Dalton Trumbo - Donald Sutherland was in the film adaptation.

Now I'll bet you wouldn't have made it another day without knowing that....

Jumper- you're absolutely right, and it doesn't hurt to say so, because that's not quite the point I was trying to make. :)

What I meant was not to point out how great it is to be free of things like racial violence and socially sanctioned sexual and domestic abuse of women, but to point out that I don't think there was ever a sense of "internal restraint" that led to less violence, I think people were just as brutal, they just had different targets. If you wanted to be very cynical you could say that the history of racial violence and equality has gone from primarily whites killing blacks to primarily blacks killing blacks.

And I'm with Jumper on the sex thing. Sex and its consequences is about responsibility- responsibility to yourself to do the right things with your body and your heart, responsibility to your partner, and responsibility to any children that may result, accidentally or on purpose. I've seen too many horrifying marriages in which both people were miserable, and/or horrible parents to push marriage as a solution. A boy that would abandon his child if given the chance isn't necessarily going to do his kid more good than harm if forced to stay.

I'm still very happily with the same man I first became intimate with. We're not married. We have no children and will not barring statistical anomaly. Aside from the lack of a religious blessing (which would be meaningless to us, since we're atheists) and official government approval, what's wrong with that?

Aaargh!! Where's the damn "Unpost" button!?

Re: Arrogance, Halfway between the office and my so-far internet-free home, it suddenly occured to me: "I don't think that sounded like what I meant to say." Ironic since in the very same post, I complained about the frustration when I find myself unable to clearly express an idea or feeling. Please give me another try.

Arrogance would be assuming a priori that you're smarter than a partcular individual just because the probability is high that you'd be smarter than someone selected at random from the general population.

That sentence is ugly to the ear, but I think/hope that it's more precise, and less easily misinterpretted.

LabRat -
Perhaps my opinion of the 60s-early 70s (when I was a child) is unduly influenced by having been surrounded by my family & neighbors at the time, almost without exception exemplary people. The human tendency is to generalize from ones own experience, and this is especially so with children, hence the world was never quite the way we saw it.
Still, I'm stuck with my gut feeling that the culture in general is going downhill on many critical fronts, despite our many improvements. Crime rates are way up (although most are going back down now), although there are claims that this simply represents under-reporting in the past. Who knows...
I suspect we both agree that mankind is, always has been wearing a very thin veneer of civilization over its base nature. I'm far more concerned with trends such as the willingness to accept personal responsibility than fluctuations in the level of criminality, because our liberty depends upon most of the people being responsible citizens.

J

Jumper -

I do not believe that all out-of-wedlock sex is casual. I don't doubt that there are many cohabiting couples who have genuine love for, and commitment towards, each other. And that is miles better than casual sex.

The point I completely failed to make in my original post, though, was simply this: if genuine love and commitment exist, why *not* marriage? Marriage has always been a public proclamation of a couple's love for and commitment to each other. If you're religious (as I am), you also believe that they are making this proclamation before God; but whether or not you believe in God, the public announcement of a couple's commitment to each other has always been the main reason for marriage. Therefore, if there is real love and commitment, I can't think of a good reason *not* to publicly proclaim it by getting married. (The expense of a wedding would be a good reason to avoid a huge, fancy wedding, but how much does it cost to hold a small civil ceremony with a few friends?)

Your counterexample, of a couple who truly love each other but have very incompatible personalities (to the point where a marriage wouldn't work) I find somewhat contrived, but I'll work with it anyway. In such a case, I'd advise the couple to continue seeing each other for another six months or a year, but *without* becoming sexually intimate. That's long enough for the first glow of infatuation (the feeling of "being in love") to fade down and be replaced by whatever feelings lie underneath it. And that's when you'll find out whether the love was strong enough to overcome personality conflicts or not. Personalities do change over time, and sometimes spending enough time together can smooth out the rough edges and make two people more compatible than they used to be. (Couples who've been married more than thirty years overwhelmingly report that that sort of thing has happened to them). If that's the case, then this marriage will probably work. The other possibility is that they will find that spending so much time together has increased, not decreased, their personality conflict. In that case, I would be very surprised if the feelings of love still persist -- thus, breaking up will cause little pain, as the real break-up happened over the prior several weeks or months as the two drifted apart.

So we have two possibilities: either this couple will drift closer together over time, or they will drift further apart over time. In the former case, I believe their marriage will be stronger for the knowledge that they can overcome their problems with patience and love. And in the latter case, I believe the pain of breaking up will be a lot less than it would have been if they had first become sexually intimate and *then* broken up.

This all derives from my belief that sex is a powerful force for bringing two people together, yet it is not enough all by itself. (If sexual intimacy was enough all by itself to create lasting emotional intimacy, there wouldn't be nearly as many divorces, for one thing). The best analogy I can find is that emotional intimacy is like a jet plane, while sexual intimacy is like the afterburners on said plane. Hitting the afterburners when the plane is pointed in the right direction will get you where you want to go a lot faster, but hitting the afterburners when the plane isn't pointed right is a fast way to crash hard.

LabRat -

You asked what's wrong with not being married to the man you're living with. Since you've already stated that religious arguments don't matter to you as you're an atheist, I'll skip over those, and simply ask you the same question I asked in the second paragraph of my response to Jumper: why *not* get married, if you intend to be together for the rest of your life? That's not a rhetorical question, by the way -- the only reason I can see not to get married is if you're not sure you want to stay together all your life. In which case I would agree that marriage is a bad idea, but I would also argue that sexual intimacy, in that situation, would also be a bad idea, because it would simply make the pain of the oncoming break-up that much worse.

Jumper- on the issue of personal responsibility, I agree with you. I think it's an inevitable consequence of how high human quality of life has gotten- so high that people are actually capable of bieng insulated from the consequences of their actions. It's the price of success.

Robin- Lots of reasons. For one, being cantankerous libertarian types at heart we don't really relish the idea of seeking the government's approval of our commitment to each other in the form of a marriage license, nor do we care particularly about society's opinion of our relationship. We know we're committed and we've proved it by staying faithful for four years of a long-distance relationship before moving in; at this point the ring seems redundant. For another, there's the tax penalty on married couples, which will be going away soon. But the biggest reason is that we don't want to do the ceremony and honeymoon until we can afford to do it right and pay for it ourselves; I don't want to get my father to pay for it, I'd feel like I were being sold off from one man to another- which is in essence what marriage WAS in most societies for centuries. So, we probably will, eventually. I'm just saying that the issue isn't really the ring and it's not really the legal status and for those who aren't religious (and unless you're talking about just the religious it's not germane to American society at large) it's not God's blessing of your union. It's responsibility.

In the rush of trying to get a few thoughts out quickly before returning to work, I made a serious omission. Though I strongly believe in what I call the “Lord of the Flies” principle, humans’ basic nature isn’t 100% brutish. Not all “good” is learned, imposed behavior. There is some altruism and cooperation hard-wired into our genes. One is free to decide for oneself whether these behaviors are evolved survival traits, the part of us that’s in the image of God, or some combination of the two.

Robin -
You're correct on many points. Physical intimacy is a turbocharger on the emotions. It can put one's brain in nuetral, exagerate perceived feelings, make one see things that aren't there, send one plummeting down the wrong path, and make any eventual break-up, if it happens, much more painful. And too many people use it as a substitute for love instead of an expression of love. Responsible adults can weigh the risks of a behavior and make their own decision, so long as they're honest and do not deprive anyone else of their health, life, and property. But just because you can doesn't mean you should.

LabRat -
I've always looked at "traditional" (as in pre-Romance) marriage not so much as about a woman being given to one man by another, but rather a means to ensure that men feed, clothe, and house the children they sire, to trace geneology, and facilitate the transfer of property to the next generation when somebody dies.
As a purely practical matter, if you're seriously comitted and plan to remain so the rest of your lives, I'd consider a Justice of the Peace or Mayor's Court marriage for legal reasons, but still have the big party when you can afford it. Despite the income tax penalty, there're a lot of legal advantages to making it official, & "having the piece of paper". By itself, it effectively implements a whole host of legal arrangements. If I'm killed, nobody could successfully challenge my wife's receiving all my assets. She knows my wishes regarding preserving life by extraordinary means, and being married makes it a lot more difficult for relatives to get a court order preventing her from pulling the plug. If one of us loses their job, that person won't be without insurance while looking for another.
I don't look at it as getting the state's permission, but rather declaring our intention to form a household, and making ourselves a single legal entity. We've been a successful corporation for 14 years now :-)

Jumper: I absolutely agree with you about human nature. We hold within us equal capability for cruelty and compassion- naturally. Just like good old Fido can lick a man's hand or bite it, and he's being a dog either way.

As to the marriage thing, on the issue of how you characterized it versus how I did, I think we're both right. (Though right to varying degrees depending on the time and the culture.) Remember, in a lot of cultures dowries are traditional, and there was real anxiety over "marrying off" young women as early as possible. As to your other suggestion, we're already actively considering it. ;) Bottom line, we're both the type to dig our heels in whenever we feel pressure at our backs.

*Sigh*. Looks like you've got comment spam, Bill. Time to update the IP-ban list, methinks.

(I am, of course, referring to the "online blackjack" post immediately above mine.)

I hate on-line gambling. No free drinks! :)