Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
When PuffHo sticks to animals, it can be tolerable, and it does have the story of Mr. Biggles, an Utter Bastard of a Cat:
Pet adoption agency Cats of Melbourne, located in Melbourne, Australia, posted a darkly hilarious memo about Mr. Biggles (also known as Lord Bigglesworth) on its website this week, practically daring a future owner to take him in.
Founder and group co-ordinator Gina Brett wrote the ad, describing the shiny black cat as “an utter utter utter bastard” who throws tantrums and does not like to be thwarted.
. . . “Mr. Biggles is currently sunning himself in my backyard and eyeballing the chickens with a view to murder,” Brett told HuffPost. “This morning he played with the dog (and didn’t draw blood, I’m impressed) and savaged my brother who tried to cuddle him (I warned him but he didn’t listen).”
While Mr. Biggles’ profile is the most shared one Brett has posted since founding the agency in October of last year, the dictatorial feline with a heart of gold has not yet been adopted.
“He’s had a lot of responses since I put his profile up on Sunday but sadly no human slaves have offered themselves up as sacrifices as yet,” Brett added.
Here’s the miscreant moggie. He looks like a bastard!
Here’s the full adoption memo:
If there are any readers in Melbourne, please adopt Mr. Biggles! I will send you both of my trade books, appropriately autographed, if you do. Even bastard cats need a loving home!
Be sure to watch the video attached to this photo at Mr. Biggles’s Plea Site:
Yes, Roger Ailes was “politically challenged” and a sexual harasser to boot, but one senses unsavory glee in HuffPo’s headline announcing his sudden death, probably from a fall in the bathroom combined with other medical ailments. Still, I can’t find it in me to celebrate Ailes’s death the way HuffPo did:
I’m not quite sure why we’re reluctant to speak ill of the just deceased, given that many of them, like Ailes, were vile people; perhaps readers can weigh in with their hypotheses. All I know is that when I hear someone say “I’m glad he’s dead,” I think less of the speaker. My one exception was Christopher Hitchens’s funny and splenetic take on the death of Jerry Falwell.
HuffPo has literally gone insane, and the headline above shows both its frenetic and kneejerk Leftism as well as its total absence of genuine humor
UPDATE: As two commenters said, this appears to be the work of a drunk driver. I can’t say I’m glad to hear that, as one is dead and 13 hurt, but at least it’s an isolated incident:
CNN reports something that just happened in New York City:
One person was killed and at least 13 others injured Thursday when a car struck pedestrians in Manhattan’s bustling Times Square, police and fire officials said.
Social media images show injured people, a car upended at an angle and crowds gathered in the heart of the tourist hub.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio are on their way to the scene. President Donald Trump, whose home at Trump Tower is one mile from the crash scene, is aware of the incident and will be updated, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer tweeted.
Let’s face it: gays, women, and transgender people shouldn’t be defending Islam, for that faith has an abysmal record of tolerating these groups. We all know about the oppression of women by Islam, and homosexuality can be punished by execution in Yemen, Mauritania, Nigeria, Qatar, Iran, Saudi Arabia (punishment there can be stoning!), Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan, and the United Arab Emirates. What do these countries have in common?
In Iran, as I’ve written before, transsexuality is legal only if you undergo a sex-change operation (and that means genital surgery), and many homosexuals become transsexual women simply to allow them to have sex with men without being killed or having to leave their country. As Wikipedia notes:
While Iran has outlawed homosexuality, Iranian Shi’a thinkers such as Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini have allowed for transsexuals to change their sex so that they can enter heterosexual relationships. This position has been confirmed by the current Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and is also supported by many other Iranian clerics. The state will pay a portion of the cost for a sex-change operation. Some lesbian Iranian women have cross-dressed to avoid sexual harassment and rape, opposition groups alleging that they do so to obtain “economic opportunities only available to men”, despite 60% of professionals in Iran being women, and Iran even having a female vice-president. It is illegal for a woman to dress as a man, or for a barber to cut the hair of a woman short (out of fear that doing so would facilitate cross-dressing). Likewise, men who cross-dress or are deemed too effeminate will also face harassment or criminal charges. Transsexuals are granted immunity from these regulations.
Since the mid-1980s, the Iranian government has legalized the practice of sex change operations (under medical approval) and the modification of pertinent legal documents to reflect the changed gender. In 1983, Khomeini passed a fatwa allowing sex-change operations as a cure for “diagnosed transsexuals”, allowing for the basis of this practice becoming legal. This religious decree was first issued for Maryam Khatoon Molkara, who has since become the leader of an Iranian transsexual organization. Hojatoleslam Kariminia, a mid-level Islamic cleric in Iran, is another advocate for transsexual rights, having called publicly for greater respect for the human rights of Iranian transsexuals.
Despite the government’s policy, transsexualism is still a taboo topic within Iranian society, and no laws exist to protect post-operative transsexuals from discrimination.
Here are some data from the 2013 Pew Survey showing how people in Muslim-majority lands regard homosexuality and other issues. Being gay is considered morally wrong by most Muslims in all Muslim-majority lands surveyed (these didn’t include Saudi Arabia or Iran, where asking such questions could get you killed):
Divided by country:
Why, then, would a gay or transsexual person (or even a woman) defend Islam as tolerant and enlightened on issues of their rights? They shouldn’t, but if they’re Regressive Leftists they’ll do it anyway, as they consider Muslims “People of Color” and thus exempt from normal expectations of progressive and tolerant behavior.
For a particularly ridiculous defense of Islam’s “tolerance” for gays and transsexuals, listen to this five-minute eructation of apologetics by Riley Dennis, a transsexual woman whose videos appear on the self-lacerating site Everyday Feminism:
Dennis asserts that criticism of Islam’s treatment of LBTQ people is motivated solely by Islamophobia, which is ridiculous. He argues that Muslims are portrayed as terrorists in movies and on television—an argument that, even if true, is completely irrelevant to her thesis. Further, since there are 1.6 billion Muslims, says Dennis, they can’t all hate gays. And that’s true, but we’re talking about the religion as a whole, and for that you can see the statistics above.
As for the anti-gay laws of Muslim lands like Saudi Arabia, well, Dennis says those laws are horrible, but “that doesn’t mean it’s a Muslim law. . . it’s a law put in place by the Saudi Arabian government, not the religion of Islam”. That’s risible: where did the law come from? Sharia, of course, and that’s Islamic law. She further says that “most Muslims disagree” with Wahhabi Islam, and that may be true, but most Muslims still see gays as immoral—and that includes 95% of those surveyed in Indonesia, which Dennis touts as a liberal country.
As for Iran, Dennis praises it “since the 1980s, the government has partially funded sex-change operations for transgender people”. Right! And those operations are performed in gays who would rather be snipped than executed. There’s not much of a choice there. So much for the enlightened government of Iran. If you can justify that, you can justify any oppression.
Dennis further argues that Leviticus shows that Christianity calls for the death of gays, and it does, but the difference is that Christians no longer kill gays or punish homosexuality by death.
She winds up by saying this:
“So why do I support Muslims? Because I can recognize that the laws of a few Middle Eastern countries [JAC: Africa, too!] do not represent the views of 1.6 billion Muslims. Because I know that being a Muslim automatically doesn’t mean being against queer people. Because there are queer Muslims and trans Muslims and gay Muslims. [JAC: Many of them live in fear.] And because Muslims face a huge amount of discrimination in the US and Western Europe because of the actions of a militant group in the Middle East that they have nothing to do with. When fighting for social justice, it’s important not to leave Muslims behind.”
The least sentence is correct: everyone should be treated the same under the law, and not be demonized or oppressed because of their faith. But the penultimate sentence is wrong: Muslims face opprobrium not just out of antireligious bigotry, but because by and large the religion hews to a medieval code that is oppressive and divisive. True, many Muslims like Maajid Nawaz are liberal, and abjure bigotry (note that Nawaz is demonized by Muslims!); but the data show that it’s not just the religion that dictates bigotry: the bigotry has been adopted by its adherents,
People like Dennis are in fact dangerous, for they are “normalizing” and excusing oppression of the worst kind. By giving Islam a pass, and refusing to indict both Islam and many of its adherents for their abysmal treatment of gays and transsexuals (and I’ll add women here), they are not only perpetuating that bigotry, but are embarrassing true progressives. We cannot allow these muddleheaded apologists to become the voice of the Left.
_________
UPDATE: I’ve found a refutation of this video by Blaire White, another transsexual woman, who simply rips Dennis to shreds, decrying his overweening ignorance. She makes many of the same points I do.
The BBC has a newish “privacy and cookies policy” that has some undesirable features. If you go to pp. 15-16 on the linked document, you’ll see the following diktat:
This is reprehensible. Now of course if the Beeb has reasonable evidence that you’ve really broken the law, then, yes, they should report crimes to the police. And they certainly have the right to remove any comment you make that they don’t like. Still, must they be Pecksniffs for defamation?
And what does “defamatory” really mean? Does that mean when a commenter insults somebody? Does the reporting-to-the-boss function include anything the Beeb deems “offensive, inappropriate, or objectionable content”?
And what is this business about informing your employer or school? It’s not enough, it seems, to report you to the cops, even if the cops determine that your behavior is in fact legal. Nope, the BBC will take it upon themselves to try to ruin your life by also ratting on you to your boss or school. What on earth is going on here?
Today’s Jesus and Mo strip, called “clue“, came with a note:
Today’s comic is a day late because I wanted to watch Tom Holland’s C4 documentary first – Isis: The Origins of Violence. UK residents can catch up with it here. [JAC: I can’t watch it from the US, and that’s too bad. It was put on YouTube several times, but Channel 4 got all the videos taken down. Report back if you’ve seen it.
The strip makes fun of those who claim that ISIS is not an example of “true Islam,” but one could claim that it’s truer to Islam’s roots than many more liberal versions of the faith.
Having stupidly left my fleece on a bus in New Zealand, I needed to replace it, and found a brand-new Timberland fleece, in my size, on a consignment site called “Poshmark“. It was less than half the retail price, so I ordered it. I didn’t notice until later that Poshmark has received many complaints about people getting the wrong stuff, or not getting anything at all.
But I did get my package two days ago. In it was this:
That’s not a fleece!
Well, they’re pretty spiffy shoes, size 7.5B, but they don’t fit me. After complaining, I was told that there had been a mixup, and was assured that my fleece would go out immediately. They also sent me a mailing label to return the shoes. If you’re a woman, would you wear these?