The Sam Brinton story is a delicious bit of schadenfraude for me. About three years ago, I worked for a company that partnered with The Trevor Project. Sam came to speak to us about the work at Trevor and afterward I approached Sam to ask them questions. The company had an adorable office cat, Henry, who I eventually adopted when we started working from home. Henry is the sweetest cat in the world and is narurally curious with people. Of course, Henry (who also liked to be around me) was walking around Sam and me as we talked, which annoyed Sam to the point that they said "This fucking cat won't leave me alone." As soon as this asshole showed their true colors, I picked up Henry and just walked away. Nothing gives me greater joy than to see this lying piece of human waste exposed as a fraud. One could say the cat is out of the bag about Sam Brinton's horrible ways.
Oh my! I am very honored that you would want to share the story. But I would prefer to keep it confined here. I have this irrational fear that Sam Brinton acolytes will find my identity, dox me, and I will be accosted by a gaggle of they/them activists thrusting tambourines in my face and shouting, "Repent, motherfucker!"
I was feeling a little sorry for this guy who has destroyed his life and is clearly not well. This story puts an end to that. What a dick. My Eartha Kitty and I will be having a champagne/tuna toast to his professional destruction and we hope he gets fleas! Hey Henry ;)
Same. I don’t love dogs (sorry dog people), and I’m somewhat allergic to them, and they can and do hurt people much worse than a cat. But if I come to someones’s office and there’s a dog there, I’m polite about any related needs I might have - to take the meeting elsewhere, etc. And if it comes to sniff me, well, I give it a chance.
And cats are far easier - I’ve had cats that bit or scratched, but you’d have to corner them and grab them. A cat’s impulse is to flee. If they come to you, they’re not in a defensive mode and you’re at no risk.
I’ve never been a cat person, but now I’m going to become one. Also, I think you’re very respectful to use they/them pronouns in this case. I’m so very old that I’ll never get used to this and plan to avoid any occasion where it will be necessary while I’m still alive. And I came of age in the sixties when it just LOOKED like life could never get crazier.
I'm insanely allergic to cats (as in, allergists say "wow" when I get tested). I might try to avoid a cat, but I wouldn't talk that way about the cat to another human being. No point in being a jerk about an animal who's just doing its feline thing.
Looking forward to hearing K&J’s breakdown; I’ve been reading about this Sam person's background and their behaviour and it seems like they have a lot of baggage.
I know I'm late but apparently he didn't even have checked in luggage when he swiped some bags from the carousel the second time. And then cameras saw him take the tags off and hide them.
Using they/them is ludicrous, just makes it very confusing and difficult to track the story. Also, Sam is not only a public servant, but an SES level - meaning military equivalent to a General. A salary not less than $175 per year and a Top Secret (Q for DOE) clearance. His personal life, behaviors, judgement, mental stability are absolutely material here; he has access to information that is critical to national security.
Whenever I read stories about this individual & the publication uses the plural pronoun I can’t help but picture a group of people stealing luggage... followed by, “oh, right... this BS again.”
It may be confirmation bias but my hypothesis that people who go the "they/them" route are usually in less-than-robust mental health seems to keep being born out.
Yep, the people I know with security clearances (much less senior than Brinton) would never jeopardize them by committing crimes, nor would they expect to keep their jobs if they did.
Really? Brinton hasn't been convicted yet. I'm expecting these charges to evaporate or otherwise be pled down to something that allows him to keep the necessary security clearance.
'Using they/them is ludicrous, just makes it very confusing and difficult to track the story'
Isn't this kind of the point? My generation had heavy metal, the ones before had the whole hippy movement, the ones after had multi-coloured hair and pierced faces. A significant number of people over 40 go into a moral panic and nobody's parents can make sense of it, the ones who try to follow along and act like the cool parents do the worst. Rinse, repeat.
I'd say this generation has upped the game a bit, but I guess to shock their Gen-X parents it was either something like this or join the religious right.
As a Gen-X parent, I think I'd just eye roll if my kids decided to choose a different pronoun. Or something like "better wear a name tag, I'm not going to remember that."
They've been giving themselves new names since they were 3 so, really, it'd sound about the same to me
"I've decided that today I'll be called Teena and my brother is now Travis."
"Sure, hon. You'll always be Sarah to me." /kiss on forehead.
But, as my parents did, I draw the line at permanent body modification. Gotta wait till you're 18 for that one, Tiger.
When you have a 17.5 year old who’s dead set on top surgery and testosterone and maybe a hysterectomy for funsies, you might feel different. Because I know a couple of parents who had exactly your attitude, but kids do eventually grow up, and you don’t stop caring about them at midnight the day of their 18th birthday.
Well, in this case, aside from the stealing, it's not like he's hiding anything about his lifestyle. Nobody can say "I'll tell your boss you wear ladies panties and liked to be led around like a dog unless you steal nuclear secrets for me". So the one thing he's not--and maybe the only thing--is a blackmail risk
Yeah, it's not his wacky "lifestyle" that opens him upon to blackmail, it's the kleptomania and his apparently shaky relationship with the truth that opens him to blackmail.
I'm not aware that any of those languages uses third person plural to refer to a specific individual (though I'm not familiar with Mandarin). That's the part that is confusing, especially when there's a group of people who are also being referenced, e.g.: "Sam's parents were there, and they asked them..." For gender neutrality, "it" seems like the obvious choice, unless the person contains multiple personalities.
And there’s the fact that pronouns are rarely used when speaking a person’s presence, since referring to someone in the third person when she’s right in front of you is unusual. So the use of pronouns is doubly stupid because we’re expected to do it even when the person isn’t around to appease?
Exactly. I posted on here before about the shop cashier who was wearing a "name" tag that just said "HE/HIM" on it. So is this information for when we leave a Yelp review? It's certainly not relevant here in the present for getting your attention.
I was in a store recently where there was a tag by the checkout with the guy’s name, “they/them” and then “Don’t sir, bro, or dude me”, which just seemed like looking for even more ways to be offended. This is someone you’re going to have a 30 second interaction with. I don’t even want to know their name let alone their inner gender feels and I certainly don’t want an innocent expression of gratitude and respect (“sir”) to be a cause for offense.
In what way is it useful, or otherwise informs future conversations where so-and-so is discussed but not present, to know their self-perception? (Other than knowing that you’ll need to walk on eggshells around said person, or avoid them entirely because they’re possible energy vampires.)
The bigoted Rutgers professor really got under my skin. Normally that kind of race bullshit doesn't bother me; maybe here it was the emphasis on spiritual deficiency.
Now, I'm an atheist and materialist, but I was raised Roman Catholic, and the RCC (for better or worse) is a global institution, so the idea of racism has always been foreign and, frankly, disgusting to me. I was raised to believe that, regardless of creed or birth, every human individual is created in the image of God, and, therefore, has immeasurable worth and dignity.
The idea that all "White people" are racist is abhorrent.
I'm glad you brought up being Catholic in regards to racism.
I come from an Irish Catholic family, and although my grandparents were all born at the turn of the century, none of them used racist language ever and were not racist people. They lived in a time and place where casual racism was common, so they were out of step with the culture at times. They believed exactly what you do.
I'm not a practicing Catholic anymore, but there are some things I really admire about the church.
We were raised to be racist against the neighboring town and every year we burned an effigy of their high school football team and then went there and fucked shit up. I mean I was home reading, but the collective we.
A kid burned our school down shortly after (or maybe before I’m old now and it jumbles) because he wanted to get rid of his permanent records so he lit the file on fire and put it back in the cabinet.
Basically. One year two kids lit themselves on fire accidentally while trying to burn “Johnny Hoquiam” and when they put themselves out in a mud puddle they were praises as heroes.
It’s also how I know prejudice doesn’t go away. You can only manage it. You wouldn’t know driving from one town to the next they were different. Everyone looks exactly the same. And yet we hate each other.
I’m an Aberdeen Bobcat for life so feel free. Also have you seen Charlie Choker? It’s the giant wooden mascot for the community college that looks like a serial strangler.
There are also distinctly American reasons Catholics are more anti racist than protestants. Irish Catholics were a distinct underclass.
My Catholic grandmother grew up in a very rural, very white place. I'm not sure if she ever met more than a handful of nonwhite people tbh. She was extremely sensitive to racial issues and would often express support for the plight of Black Americans because when she was growing up the KKK harassed her family for being Catholic, leaving her with a deep empathy for others experiencing that kind of hatred
What struck me is that she has the lines of "a politics of superior and inferior beings is not the way to go" and then immediately talks about how white people can't understand because they are "so corrupt, and their thinking is so morally and spiritually bankrupt about power" that they can't let go of power out of fear and a lack of vision.
And then how her reason for rejecting a project of violence is not because it ostensibly harms a victim, but because it causes the perpetrator's soul to suffer.
Yes, 'we shouldn't give ourselves over to thinking one race is inherently worse than an another like all white people do. They're so corrupt they're afraid to give us power because they're afraid of what we would do if we had it. We SHOULD kill them all, but that might sully our perfect souls and make it more like their horrible white ones'. WTF.
Yeah. Saying that white people cannot understand something AND saying you do not believe in inferior or superior beings - how is that not inconsistent?
That got under my skin, too. I wondered how recent that was. Still, I feel like we're moving away from the era when voices like that wielded more authority.
As our resident self appointed nuclear coorespondent, this infuriates me. He is making a mockery of an important and difficult policy area that needs serious attention. Program directors and appointees have a ton of clout over what gets funded.
Ya, struggled with this when they were appointed. On one hand I think people should have a private life and live and let live. Criminality aside though, I think a field and position with such gravity should be treated as such. It's the same reason Trump posed such a problem for me initially. Someone tasked with messaging as a representative for the nation requires respectability or to at least not look ridiculous. This is that compartmentalization, I was on about before.
I am so behind on all my podcast listening (even some back episodes of BARpod, for shame!!).....BUT, I knew I had to check the comments section for this episode to get The NB’s hot take on this week’s topic!
Did you not notice that second person singular in English is already abiding by subject verb agreement pattern for plural? Or dost thou not think it strange?
We have this woke-as-shit sex advice column in the local alt weekly and I once wrote a fake letter to it (never sent ) as a comedic writing exercise to amuse myself and my husband. It was from an imaginary Navajx "they" and even I got confused writing the letter. Which made it funnier in my opinion.
I've decided I will not use "they/them" because my brain is hard-wired to process "they/them" in a certain way and I see no reason to torture myself trying to apply it to one individual. I'll do she/her and he/him, and I'll do my best to get it right even if you change them every 30 minutes, but I won't beat myself up if I get it wrong occasionally.
This recent article in the NYT goes into contortions to avoid using any pronouns to refer to the latest Colorado shooter. I guess the writers only honor they/them pronouns for favored people...
Since we're all talking' Gender and Pronouns and such: I've never seen anyone really deconstruct a kinda fascinating word in the English Language: "Guys". Why fascinating? Because, even before the current Gender Wars, it was, possibly, unique, in certain settings: The singular "Guy" is (or was), clearly, masculine. It's in the plural that it gets interesting: If I see a group of boys, or men, I (a male) could and would call them "guys". I wouldn't use "guys" for what is clearly a group of females. But, if it were a "friendly" or familial setting, I could address than, collectively, as "Guys". ("Hey Guys".) If it's not a friendly setting, I would perhaps not be able to call them "Guys". On the other hand, a female can probably always call, or address, a group of females as "Guys". There are other ways in which "the gender" of "Guys" permutates. I'm not sure where that leaves us, but I find it interesting. And also interesting that I've never seen anyone try to break it down. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.
Before it was turned into the Worst Slur Evah I used “guys” to address groups of women at work pretty regularly. (At one point I worked immediately with 5 women and 1 man so it was common that I was speaking to an all-female group YES IN THE TECH INDUSTRY TOO, though that was unusual).
Now I wince when I say it at all, which pisses me off because it was a word I liked and found useful.
Survivor -- the best reality TV show of all time -- is known for Host Jeff Probst saying "C'mon in guys!" before a challenge takes place. He's literally said it every episode, multiple times an episode, for the past 20+ years that the show has been on. However, in Season 41 (or maybe it was 42?) last year, the show had skewed significantly more toward a social justice/wokeness angle, and Jeff told all the contestants that he wanted to be conscious of everyone's feelings. "Is saying 'guys' OK?" Jeff asked. "Does anyone mind?" Literally no one minded bc it didn't matter and it was his famous catchphrase that anyone who has tried for years to get on Survivor would love to hear him say in person. But then later in the episode one of the contestants did end up speaking out and saying they minded. (Pretty sure production prodded the contestant to do this, the show these days loves creating these "authentic" moments where gender/race/sex are brought up and the players can talk for an hour about them and also hopefully create some drama out of it, which might lead to better ratings.)
Anyway, so then Jeff immediately folds and he makes a big deal about equality and tolerance and says he won't says "guys" anymore and talks about how he's *learning*. BUT THEN even more hilariously, because Jeff doesn't actually give a shit and also because he's said "c'mon in guys" for decades, he just immediately goes back to calling everyone guys bc it's ingrained in his brain. Everyone just kinda looked at each other and was like... oh I thought you weren't gonna do that anymore. Shrug. At least he tried!
I think people in French and Spanish (probably others) have been arguing about similar things for some time. But the aspect that a woman can address a group of women as “guys” while a man cannot, is not present in the Romance languages. However I cannot confirm or deny the truth of your claim. ;-)
Of course! But it is NOT accepted usage for someone you DO know. That is a new edict, from on high. Language evolves, but this is not an evolution. This is a demand from a few to change the English language.
Right. "Non-Binary" = not in favor of the two things/ends. So, then does it mean the individual is in favor of all things/end; thus they/them OR in favor of one thing/end; thus "it"; not he/she, would be more proper?
Agreed, it's super awkward. I have a friend I've known for over a decade who now goes by "they." I try to get it right when talking to other friends, but it feels like I'm saying this person I've known most of my adult like is a complete mystery to me.
Sorry to hear that. Not sure any of us look at comments that consistently but if you see anything too negative please do report it and we'll be notified.
On the other hand if he asked you politely to call him Marty 90% of people would do that. And the other 10% would be the jackasses. Or not really jackasses just slightly rude. And Marty/Martin could choose to respond like an adult and be gracious when people slipped up. Or he could throw a tantrum about it.
If we all agree pronouns are analogous to Marty/Martin Katie's attitude in this episode makes perfect sense. Try to abide but don't make a big deal if you mess up
Yes, the acronym is a cultural designation referring to Western societies. One of the critiques of the acronym in the literature is actually that it neglects race/ethnicity (as well as other characteristics).
That's a pretty stupid criticism considering it's outside the scope of what the acronym was ment to accomplish. Like saying the definition of male neglects left handedness.
Indeed. The DEI mindset problematizes everything, regardless of context, and insists that more DEI is always the solution (if all you have is a hammer, and so on).
That is kind of stupid though. A black person born and raised in the, say, US,,is gonna have a lot more in common with a white person born and raised in France than with a black person born and raised in Ghana.
This baggage-stealing story is one of those "too good to be true" stories that's actually true.
I don't mean the things he told the LGBTQA+ community about conversion therapy. What's "too good" is that a kinky they-them Biden appointee turns out to be a wack-job. The Right-wing press is having a field day with it, as they should.
Something about the original psychology paper, the one arguing for greater diversity in the field, that seems suspiciously absent: did Roberts et al break down the “of color” category into Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc?
I would not be surprised to learn that Blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in psych and psych publications, relative to their shares of the US population, but that Asians are over-represented.
This is one of the problems with the very term “of color” - it obscures a huge amount of diversity.
I concur. It is utterly insane. Also. There are a lot more Hispanic or Latino people than Asian or black or indigenous. So what is underrepresentation for one group is over representation for another. But also. If say 10% of studies are authored by an Asian person, well, that is slightly over representing the Asian American community. But if 20% of psychologists are Asian, that is an under representation. But then if only 2% of journal submissions are made by Asian people, then that is also an over representation.
“The politics of that says there are superior and inferior beings just isn’t the way to go, and white people just don’t get that, they are so corrupt and morally and spiritually bankrupt” is the most rapid fire cognitive dissonance I have ever seen in one vocalized thought. She says believing certain races are inferior is bad, but here’s why white people are inferior. Just some great stuff
Also. So. Ok. The Arab slave trade - so brown people enslaving people of various races and religions - they were morally better than the Irish? The massacres that occurred in the Americas before Columbus ever set foot on the continent - so much better than the Polish people or Armenians? Or. I don't know Japanese treatment of the Chinese and Koreans, abd British and American people living there. Eye. Perfect.
And of course. In Africa everythinv was perfect until Europeans arrived.
This is old school racism - POC are magical perfect people, old school noble savages. And white people have the power to be evil. Give me a fucking break.
At the risk of sounding racist… it’s as if they lowered the intellectual standards so this person could become a token professor, on the basis of an ideology that says they are always right because of their inherited characteristics.
"Police were initially unable to identify the thief from the footage and closed the case. But on Nov. 29, when the Las Vegas investigator saw media reports of the Minneapolis accusation against Brinton, the officer “immediately recognized” the Energy Department employee “as the suspect pertaining to this case.”"
This Sam Brinton thing is creepy af, the only reason for someone of means to steal a woman's suitcase is because it is used clothing. He didn't want new. I'll leave that to percolate through your mind.
Or if that soMeone is just a Kleptomaniac who likes to steal expensive bags. I’m skeptical that a gay male person would be in in the used ladies panties market. That’s pretty much a straight guy sorta deal
Eh, really? He seems to be getting his rocks off fucking men dressed like dogs, that’s pretty far from the kind of shutin weirdo straight dudes that need to sniff ladies undies to get off.
And kleptomania is a thing - people get a thrill out of stealing. And It’s pretty common so I’ll still object to the idea “the only reason he’d steal” the bag is to sniff some 40 year old ladies undies.
sure! But the claim that "there's no reason he would steal luggage unless he wants to wank off into women's dirty undies" was what I found to be ridiculous
I don’t think 5 years is too harsh. Imagine you’ve planned a trip to attend an event. You arrive and you have no wardrobe to wear because some Biden bureaucrat with awkward-to-use pronouns is deriving sexual pleasure from fondling your garments. That will ruin your trip. Instead of relaxing you would be running around trying to replace your outfit instead of relaxing and enjoying yourself. I think he should get 30 years.
One of my ancestors came to America as a convict from London in 1757. He was sentenced to work for seven years on a Maryland plantation. His crime? He stole a trunk of clothes that fell off a wagon in front of St. Pauls.
That was the age before fast fashion, clothes were more durable and higher quality (even if flee and lice ridden), your ancestor richly deserved what he got. Imagine that poor sod who had to turn up at the coffeehouse without his dapper briches, tailcoat and powdered wig in front of the regular crowd. All the gin in London would not have been enough to take the edge of his utter humiliation
Oh I hadn’t even thought about that. My luggage got lost by the airline once on a trip to do a very important presentation for my job AND a psych interview for a promotion. They delivered my bag to the hotel the next afternoon - just in time for me to half-assed get dressed and be frazzled - but I had to do the interview that morning in my travel clothes and day old hair and makeup. I’m not sure 30 years is enough. He’s a monster!
My luggage got lost while traveling to a pretty harsh climate. Luckily I'd worn my best shoes and some outerwear but I still spent a couple hundred bucks in a foreign country buying warm clothes to get through until I got my bag 5 days later. It was pretty crappy and that was just airline error!
I usually try to cram a change of clothes into my carry-on backpack, having been thrown up on by my kids a few too many times. Not that I’ve flown in years. Probably won’t remember next time.
Yep, I learned after that horrible experience. I usually just have a carry on but this was one of those times that they ran out of space and had to check several bags after boarding. I’m sure that’s why it got lost in the first place. I’ll never board after everyone else again!!!
I don’t mean to sound mean and judgy, because you could certainly criticize my appearance but their head is the perfect egg. It’s a little disconcerting and in fact distracts me from everything else in this story.
https://rdrama.net/images/16708939215527542.webp
The Sam Brinton story is a delicious bit of schadenfraude for me. About three years ago, I worked for a company that partnered with The Trevor Project. Sam came to speak to us about the work at Trevor and afterward I approached Sam to ask them questions. The company had an adorable office cat, Henry, who I eventually adopted when we started working from home. Henry is the sweetest cat in the world and is narurally curious with people. Of course, Henry (who also liked to be around me) was walking around Sam and me as we talked, which annoyed Sam to the point that they said "This fucking cat won't leave me alone." As soon as this asshole showed their true colors, I picked up Henry and just walked away. Nothing gives me greater joy than to see this lying piece of human waste exposed as a fraud. One could say the cat is out of the bag about Sam Brinton's horrible ways.
Can I tweet this out without your name attached, or would you prefer it be kept here?
Oh my! I am very honored that you would want to share the story. But I would prefer to keep it confined here. I have this irrational fear that Sam Brinton acolytes will find my identity, dox me, and I will be accosted by a gaggle of they/them activists thrusting tambourines in my face and shouting, "Repent, motherfucker!"
This is a legitimate fear
I think we all have this fear 😂
Lol. I have my tambourine at the ready... Repent motherfuckers!
I'll allow it if it's the cute tambourine guy from that Youtube cover band: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QulDKSFRMVA
But I am a huge fan of the pod AND I bought your book!
I could never trust someone who shit talks a cat.
The cats have won.
The only reason they're always wrapping around your legs is in a nefarious hope that they can trip you and feast on your dead corpse...
This is what they sit around plotting while licking their paws in between bouts of torturing small animals.
I was feeling a little sorry for this guy who has destroyed his life and is clearly not well. This story puts an end to that. What a dick. My Eartha Kitty and I will be having a champagne/tuna toast to his professional destruction and we hope he gets fleas! Hey Henry ;)
Eartha Kitty! ❤️
Same. I don’t love dogs (sorry dog people), and I’m somewhat allergic to them, and they can and do hurt people much worse than a cat. But if I come to someones’s office and there’s a dog there, I’m polite about any related needs I might have - to take the meeting elsewhere, etc. And if it comes to sniff me, well, I give it a chance.
And cats are far easier - I’ve had cats that bit or scratched, but you’d have to corner them and grab them. A cat’s impulse is to flee. If they come to you, they’re not in a defensive mode and you’re at no risk.
Henry says hello to Eartha Kitty!
I’ll tell her :)
Him. He's a gay man.
That's taking being a "dog person" too far, IMO.
I’ve never been a cat person, but now I’m going to become one. Also, I think you’re very respectful to use they/them pronouns in this case. I’m so very old that I’ll never get used to this and plan to avoid any occasion where it will be necessary while I’m still alive. And I came of age in the sixties when it just LOOKED like life could never get crazier.
I only get it if Sam is allergic to cate
I'm insanely allergic to cats (as in, allergists say "wow" when I get tested). I might try to avoid a cat, but I wouldn't talk that way about the cat to another human being. No point in being a jerk about an animal who's just doing its feline thing.
Not to mention he was an invited guest and my employer was donating lots of money to their organization! Their whole demeanor was just off-putting.
I agree he was being a dick. Just that hating cats is understandable if you are allergic. Otherwise, I get not liking cats, but hating them?
Looking forward to hearing K&J’s breakdown; I’ve been reading about this Sam person's background and their behaviour and it seems like they have a lot of baggage.
There's definitely a lot to unpack in that case
Oh no it’s pun o’clock.
On the plus side, when this gets to court, it will be an open and shut case.
Right in front of a camera, too! Should've cased the joint first.
It may be, but this fella has problems. I have a feeling they'll carry-on.
Especially the roll on. https://www.walgreens.com/store/c/almay-roll-on-antiperspirant-%26-deodorant-fragrance-free/ID=prod6239309-product
I don't think we should entrust nuclear waste management to someone so flighty.
You know, to stealthem their argument, airports do make it incredibly valeasy to take the wrong bag. *runs and hides in the bushes*
>stealthem
Gotta admit it took me a minute, but it was worth it.
I assumed it was a typo initially , but bravo.
I know I'm late but apparently he didn't even have checked in luggage when he swiped some bags from the carousel the second time. And then cameras saw him take the tags off and hide them.
I suspect his career will now be trunkated.
Using they/them is ludicrous, just makes it very confusing and difficult to track the story. Also, Sam is not only a public servant, but an SES level - meaning military equivalent to a General. A salary not less than $175 per year and a Top Secret (Q for DOE) clearance. His personal life, behaviors, judgement, mental stability are absolutely material here; he has access to information that is critical to national security.
Whenever I read stories about this individual & the publication uses the plural pronoun I can’t help but picture a group of people stealing luggage... followed by, “oh, right... this BS again.”
It may be confirmation bias but my hypothesis that people who go the "they/them" route are usually in less-than-robust mental health seems to keep being born out.
Yep, the people I know with security clearances (much less senior than Brinton) would never jeopardize them by committing crimes, nor would they expect to keep their jobs if they did.
It seems extremely unlikely they will keep their job?
Really? Brinton hasn't been convicted yet. I'm expecting these charges to evaporate or otherwise be pled down to something that allows him to keep the necessary security clearance.
You're making up a story most aligning with your politics without any evidence to support it.
'Using they/them is ludicrous, just makes it very confusing and difficult to track the story'
Isn't this kind of the point? My generation had heavy metal, the ones before had the whole hippy movement, the ones after had multi-coloured hair and pierced faces. A significant number of people over 40 go into a moral panic and nobody's parents can make sense of it, the ones who try to follow along and act like the cool parents do the worst. Rinse, repeat.
I'd say this generation has upped the game a bit, but I guess to shock their Gen-X parents it was either something like this or join the religious right.
I think trying to go along highlights how ridiculous an idea it is, so I approve.
As a Gen-X parent, I think I'd just eye roll if my kids decided to choose a different pronoun. Or something like "better wear a name tag, I'm not going to remember that."
They've been giving themselves new names since they were 3 so, really, it'd sound about the same to me
"I've decided that today I'll be called Teena and my brother is now Travis."
"Sure, hon. You'll always be Sarah to me." /kiss on forehead.
But, as my parents did, I draw the line at permanent body modification. Gotta wait till you're 18 for that one, Tiger.
When you have a 17.5 year old who’s dead set on top surgery and testosterone and maybe a hysterectomy for funsies, you might feel different. Because I know a couple of parents who had exactly your attitude, but kids do eventually grow up, and you don’t stop caring about them at midnight the day of their 18th birthday.
Well. Never say never. I think if my adult child were truly f'd up in the head....I'd consider committing them for their own safety.
For added context, the DOE is partially responsible for our nuclear weapons program. It's not just about dealing with radioactive waste.
Classic BLACKMAIL scenario.
Well, in this case, aside from the stealing, it's not like he's hiding anything about his lifestyle. Nobody can say "I'll tell your boss you wear ladies panties and liked to be led around like a dog unless you steal nuclear secrets for me". So the one thing he's not--and maybe the only thing--is a blackmail risk
Yeah, it's not his wacky "lifestyle" that opens him upon to blackmail, it's the kleptomania and his apparently shaky relationship with the truth that opens him to blackmail.
My advice to you then is to not learn Mandarin, Spanish, or Turkish. You might get really confused.
I'm not aware that any of those languages uses third person plural to refer to a specific individual (though I'm not familiar with Mandarin). That's the part that is confusing, especially when there's a group of people who are also being referenced, e.g.: "Sam's parents were there, and they asked them..." For gender neutrality, "it" seems like the obvious choice, unless the person contains multiple personalities.
And there’s the fact that pronouns are rarely used when speaking a person’s presence, since referring to someone in the third person when she’s right in front of you is unusual. So the use of pronouns is doubly stupid because we’re expected to do it even when the person isn’t around to appease?
All of this. I can’t believe it has to be stated, but here we are.
Exactly. I posted on here before about the shop cashier who was wearing a "name" tag that just said "HE/HIM" on it. So is this information for when we leave a Yelp review? It's certainly not relevant here in the present for getting your attention.
I was in a store recently where there was a tag by the checkout with the guy’s name, “they/them” and then “Don’t sir, bro, or dude me”, which just seemed like looking for even more ways to be offended. This is someone you’re going to have a 30 second interaction with. I don’t even want to know their name let alone their inner gender feels and I certainly don’t want an innocent expression of gratitude and respect (“sir”) to be a cause for offense.
If you are at a store it is idiotic. You are speaking to the person. But knowing pronouns is useful if you are talking about someone else
In what way is it useful, or otherwise informs future conversations where so-and-so is discussed but not present, to know their self-perception? (Other than knowing that you’ll need to walk on eggshells around said person, or avoid them entirely because they’re possible energy vampires.)
Also, we are English speakers, complaining about a fad that mucks about with our language. It has fuck all to do with any other languages.
Yeah, I feel like it's like telling someone "they/them? Man. Don't go learning French....all the gendered pronouns will drive you nuts!"
Man, I knew government work didn't pay well...but no wonder they're stealing luggage at only a $175 salary.
The Classic Double-Reverse. Diabolical!@!!
Q is not that hard to get (they give to interns and visiting scientists) but I'd like to have been a flu on the wall on that interview
It really depends on type (dod vs doe) and foreign contacts.
I think that's overstated. Such a degree helps, but I wouid say it doesn't make it "easy", especially if there are real red flags.
The bigoted Rutgers professor really got under my skin. Normally that kind of race bullshit doesn't bother me; maybe here it was the emphasis on spiritual deficiency.
Now, I'm an atheist and materialist, but I was raised Roman Catholic, and the RCC (for better or worse) is a global institution, so the idea of racism has always been foreign and, frankly, disgusting to me. I was raised to believe that, regardless of creed or birth, every human individual is created in the image of God, and, therefore, has immeasurable worth and dignity.
The idea that all "White people" are racist is abhorrent.
I'm glad you brought up being Catholic in regards to racism.
I come from an Irish Catholic family, and although my grandparents were all born at the turn of the century, none of them used racist language ever and were not racist people. They lived in a time and place where casual racism was common, so they were out of step with the culture at times. They believed exactly what you do.
I'm not a practicing Catholic anymore, but there are some things I really admire about the church.
We were raised to be racist against the neighboring town and every year we burned an effigy of their high school football team and then went there and fucked shit up. I mean I was home reading, but the collective we.
https://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Bonfire-explosion-injures-students-1100540.php
Actual link just because we have had too many episodes about psychopaths lately.
A kid burned our school down shortly after (or maybe before I’m old now and it jumbles) because he wanted to get rid of his permanent records so he lit the file on fire and put it back in the cabinet.
Basically. One year two kids lit themselves on fire accidentally while trying to burn “Johnny Hoquiam” and when they put themselves out in a mud puddle they were praises as heroes.
It’s also how I know prejudice doesn’t go away. You can only manage it. You wouldn’t know driving from one town to the next they were different. Everyone looks exactly the same. And yet we hate each other.
I’m an Aberdeen Bobcat for life so feel free. Also have you seen Charlie Choker? It’s the giant wooden mascot for the community college that looks like a serial strangler.
There are also distinctly American reasons Catholics are more anti racist than protestants. Irish Catholics were a distinct underclass.
My Catholic grandmother grew up in a very rural, very white place. I'm not sure if she ever met more than a handful of nonwhite people tbh. She was extremely sensitive to racial issues and would often express support for the plight of Black Americans because when she was growing up the KKK harassed her family for being Catholic, leaving her with a deep empathy for others experiencing that kind of hatred
Wow- my grandpa had the same stuff with the KKK. They burned a cross in the front yard of his family's farmhouse.
For me its not the racism, for me, its the open call to violence (and perfunctory hedging) from an agent of a respected institution.
What struck me is that she has the lines of "a politics of superior and inferior beings is not the way to go" and then immediately talks about how white people can't understand because they are "so corrupt, and their thinking is so morally and spiritually bankrupt about power" that they can't let go of power out of fear and a lack of vision.
And then how her reason for rejecting a project of violence is not because it ostensibly harms a victim, but because it causes the perpetrator's soul to suffer.
Yes, 'we shouldn't give ourselves over to thinking one race is inherently worse than an another like all white people do. They're so corrupt they're afraid to give us power because they're afraid of what we would do if we had it. We SHOULD kill them all, but that might sully our perfect souls and make it more like their horrible white ones'. WTF.
I forgive grievances a lot more easily than I forgive logical inconsistency.
That immediate display of hypocrisy was unintentionally hilarious.
Yeah. Saying that white people cannot understand something AND saying you do not believe in inferior or superior beings - how is that not inconsistent?
For me, it was really Rutgers' silence about one of their professors' racism and open calls for violence.
It’s really unbelievable that the university has said nothing about this. She strongly insinuated genocide and...nothing.
This is fine, but everyone gets the vapors over a metaphor? Their European counterparts must find American academics deeply unserious.
That got under my skin, too. I wondered how recent that was. Still, I feel like we're moving away from the era when voices like that wielded more authority.
As our resident self appointed nuclear coorespondent, this infuriates me. He is making a mockery of an important and difficult policy area that needs serious attention. Program directors and appointees have a ton of clout over what gets funded.
Ya, struggled with this when they were appointed. On one hand I think people should have a private life and live and let live. Criminality aside though, I think a field and position with such gravity should be treated as such. It's the same reason Trump posed such a problem for me initially. Someone tasked with messaging as a representative for the nation requires respectability or to at least not look ridiculous. This is that compartmentalization, I was on about before.
I am so behind on all my podcast listening (even some back episodes of BARpod, for shame!!).....BUT, I knew I had to check the comments section for this episode to get The NB’s hot take on this week’s topic!
The NB makes me sound like an enby influencer lol.
Certainly been missing you round the comments section. Do. Better. Literal harm. Silence is violence. :)
Why do we have to use they/them? The whole preferred pronouns nonsense is bad enough, but they/them? It's so confusing.
I just wish they/them didn't also demolish subject verb agreement. For example, if it's singular, you should use "is" instead of "are."
"They is accused of stealing women's luggage on multiple occasions."
Did you not notice that second person singular in English is already abiding by subject verb agreement pattern for plural? Or dost thou not think it strange?
This might be because “you” was originally the second person plural/formal, like vous/vos/вы. “Thou” was singular.
Bingo.
Because we have to cater to the demands of 3 year olds. Every parent knows that.
We have this woke-as-shit sex advice column in the local alt weekly and I once wrote a fake letter to it (never sent ) as a comedic writing exercise to amuse myself and my husband. It was from an imaginary Navajx "they" and even I got confused writing the letter. Which made it funnier in my opinion.
I've decided I will not use "they/them" because my brain is hard-wired to process "they/them" in a certain way and I see no reason to torture myself trying to apply it to one individual. I'll do she/her and he/him, and I'll do my best to get it right even if you change them every 30 minutes, but I won't beat myself up if I get it wrong occasionally.
This recent article in the NYT goes into contortions to avoid using any pronouns to refer to the latest Colorado shooter. I guess the writers only honor they/them pronouns for favored people...
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/06/us/colorado-springs-aldrich-charges.html?searchResultPosition=1
I can picture the authors of this article literally grasping for straws:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/10/us/politics/anti-transgender-lgbtq-threats-attacks.html
We don’t. As soon as more people stop playing along the quicker this mass psychosis ends.
(I don’t think most people who use preferred pronouns do it out of psychosis, just to appease the true believers & get on with their day.)
Since we're all talking' Gender and Pronouns and such: I've never seen anyone really deconstruct a kinda fascinating word in the English Language: "Guys". Why fascinating? Because, even before the current Gender Wars, it was, possibly, unique, in certain settings: The singular "Guy" is (or was), clearly, masculine. It's in the plural that it gets interesting: If I see a group of boys, or men, I (a male) could and would call them "guys". I wouldn't use "guys" for what is clearly a group of females. But, if it were a "friendly" or familial setting, I could address than, collectively, as "Guys". ("Hey Guys".) If it's not a friendly setting, I would perhaps not be able to call them "Guys". On the other hand, a female can probably always call, or address, a group of females as "Guys". There are other ways in which "the gender" of "Guys" permutates. I'm not sure where that leaves us, but I find it interesting. And also interesting that I've never seen anyone try to break it down. Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.
Before it was turned into the Worst Slur Evah I used “guys” to address groups of women at work pretty regularly. (At one point I worked immediately with 5 women and 1 man so it was common that I was speaking to an all-female group YES IN THE TECH INDUSTRY TOO, though that was unusual).
Now I wince when I say it at all, which pisses me off because it was a word I liked and found useful.
I train people at work and I still say guys regardless. Though I try not to because I know some people find it offensive. I really do not get it.
Survivor -- the best reality TV show of all time -- is known for Host Jeff Probst saying "C'mon in guys!" before a challenge takes place. He's literally said it every episode, multiple times an episode, for the past 20+ years that the show has been on. However, in Season 41 (or maybe it was 42?) last year, the show had skewed significantly more toward a social justice/wokeness angle, and Jeff told all the contestants that he wanted to be conscious of everyone's feelings. "Is saying 'guys' OK?" Jeff asked. "Does anyone mind?" Literally no one minded bc it didn't matter and it was his famous catchphrase that anyone who has tried for years to get on Survivor would love to hear him say in person. But then later in the episode one of the contestants did end up speaking out and saying they minded. (Pretty sure production prodded the contestant to do this, the show these days loves creating these "authentic" moments where gender/race/sex are brought up and the players can talk for an hour about them and also hopefully create some drama out of it, which might lead to better ratings.)
Anyway, so then Jeff immediately folds and he makes a big deal about equality and tolerance and says he won't says "guys" anymore and talks about how he's *learning*. BUT THEN even more hilariously, because Jeff doesn't actually give a shit and also because he's said "c'mon in guys" for decades, he just immediately goes back to calling everyone guys bc it's ingrained in his brain. Everyone just kinda looked at each other and was like... oh I thought you weren't gonna do that anymore. Shrug. At least he tried!
I think people in French and Spanish (probably others) have been arguing about similar things for some time. But the aspect that a woman can address a group of women as “guys” while a man cannot, is not present in the Romance languages. However I cannot confirm or deny the truth of your claim. ;-)
It’s already established in English usage for ambiguous reference, e.g. “They flipped me the bird, they did, that roguish ruffian.” ;-)
Of course! But it is NOT accepted usage for someone you DO know. That is a new edict, from on high. Language evolves, but this is not an evolution. This is a demand from a few to change the English language.
Right. "Non-Binary" = not in favor of the two things/ends. So, then does it mean the individual is in favor of all things/end; thus they/them OR in favor of one thing/end; thus "it"; not he/she, would be more proper?
You don't find made up pronouns just a bit more bossy?
They/them can announce whatever pronouns they/them like, but I/me calls the shots.
Drats... CALL the shots.
Actually this is why “they/them” is better because it latches on to an established usage. Forcing new grammar into a language usually doesn’t work.
Agreed, it's super awkward. I have a friend I've known for over a decade who now goes by "they." I try to get it right when talking to other friends, but it feels like I'm saying this person I've known most of my adult like is a complete mystery to me.
The Maoist International Movement used "s/he" in the nineties. Good times!
Maoism was still a thing in the 90s??
I think you can make your point in a nicer way, couldn't you? I want people to associate nice emotions with our little corner of the internet.
Sorry to hear that. Not sure any of us look at comments that consistently but if you see anything too negative please do report it and we'll be notified.
On the other hand if he asked you politely to call him Marty 90% of people would do that. And the other 10% would be the jackasses. Or not really jackasses just slightly rude. And Marty/Martin could choose to respond like an adult and be gracious when people slipped up. Or he could throw a tantrum about it.
If we all agree pronouns are analogous to Marty/Martin Katie's attitude in this episode makes perfect sense. Try to abide but don't make a big deal if you mess up
I don't see it as analogous to a name preference.
1. It is an attempt to control how people refer to them when they aren't around.
2. It unilaterally demands a change to grammatical rules which everyone is used to.
3. The concept of non binary is silly. Literally everyone who is not a fictional character in a comic book is non binary.
Write an essay on your blog about it? Idk
Why does substack have an option to gift subscriptions after someone is removed? lol
I get wanting to respect people. But this was ridiculous.
Pretty sure the W in weird stands for "Western." Not white. I think it's that way explicitly because African Americans are still Amaricans.
Yes, the acronym is a cultural designation referring to Western societies. One of the critiques of the acronym in the literature is actually that it neglects race/ethnicity (as well as other characteristics).
There is an idea for an alternative caption competition: come up with the all-encompassing acronym that social science is crying out for.
Bonus points for something that hits all the DEI factors but is still problematic (WEIRD SCIENCE)
White
English-speaking
Industrial
Racist
DEI-hating
Sinful
Cisgender
Indigenous-land-stealing
Ethnocentric
Neuroatypical
Colonizer
Elon
Don't you mean Neurotypical?
Amend to “white–adjacent” and I’ll give you the two weeks myself.
That's a pretty stupid criticism considering it's outside the scope of what the acronym was ment to accomplish. Like saying the definition of male neglects left handedness.
Indeed. The DEI mindset problematizes everything, regardless of context, and insists that more DEI is always the solution (if all you have is a hammer, and so on).
That is kind of stupid though. A black person born and raised in the, say, US,,is gonna have a lot more in common with a white person born and raised in France than with a black person born and raised in Ghana.
Tsk tsk Jesse. Pretty racist to assume that "Western" = "white." Your reparations tab just got a little bit bigger.
cha ching
This baggage-stealing story is one of those "too good to be true" stories that's actually true.
I don't mean the things he told the LGBTQA+ community about conversion therapy. What's "too good" is that a kinky they-them Biden appointee turns out to be a wack-job. The Right-wing press is having a field day with it, as they should.
Something about the original psychology paper, the one arguing for greater diversity in the field, that seems suspiciously absent: did Roberts et al break down the “of color” category into Black, Hispanic, Asian, etc?
I would not be surprised to learn that Blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented in psych and psych publications, relative to their shares of the US population, but that Asians are over-represented.
This is one of the problems with the very term “of color” - it obscures a huge amount of diversity.
I concur. It is utterly insane. Also. There are a lot more Hispanic or Latino people than Asian or black or indigenous. So what is underrepresentation for one group is over representation for another. But also. If say 10% of studies are authored by an Asian person, well, that is slightly over representing the Asian American community. But if 20% of psychologists are Asian, that is an under representation. But then if only 2% of journal submissions are made by Asian people, then that is also an over representation.
“The politics of that says there are superior and inferior beings just isn’t the way to go, and white people just don’t get that, they are so corrupt and morally and spiritually bankrupt” is the most rapid fire cognitive dissonance I have ever seen in one vocalized thought. She says believing certain races are inferior is bad, but here’s why white people are inferior. Just some great stuff
Also. So. Ok. The Arab slave trade - so brown people enslaving people of various races and religions - they were morally better than the Irish? The massacres that occurred in the Americas before Columbus ever set foot on the continent - so much better than the Polish people or Armenians? Or. I don't know Japanese treatment of the Chinese and Koreans, abd British and American people living there. Eye. Perfect.
And of course. In Africa everythinv was perfect until Europeans arrived.
This is old school racism - POC are magical perfect people, old school noble savages. And white people have the power to be evil. Give me a fucking break.
The Ottoman Empire was perfection. T
At the risk of sounding racist… it’s as if they lowered the intellectual standards so this person could become a token professor, on the basis of an ideology that says they are always right because of their inherited characteristics.
Reading the NY Post story on Brinton:
"Police were initially unable to identify the thief from the footage and closed the case. But on Nov. 29, when the Las Vegas investigator saw media reports of the Minneapolis accusation against Brinton, the officer “immediately recognized” the Energy Department employee “as the suspect pertaining to this case.”"
https://nypost.com/2022/12/10/cameras-caught-non-binary-biden-officials-bag-theft/
I'm sure if Police were to investigate footage around every baggage carousel on flights that Britton was on, they'd find he's stolen hundreds of bags.
This Sam Brinton thing is creepy af, the only reason for someone of means to steal a woman's suitcase is because it is used clothing. He didn't want new. I'll leave that to percolate through your mind.
Turns out the puppy play kink workshop guy is a perv…
Or if that soMeone is just a Kleptomaniac who likes to steal expensive bags. I’m skeptical that a gay male person would be in in the used ladies panties market. That’s pretty much a straight guy sorta deal
I can only speculate that he likes to wear the clothes he steals. That's his kink. (Or one of many)
I'm sure he does wear them. I just think the idea that wants them to be dirty is a bit of a stretch.
he’s bi
Eh, really? He seems to be getting his rocks off fucking men dressed like dogs, that’s pretty far from the kind of shutin weirdo straight dudes that need to sniff ladies undies to get off.
And kleptomania is a thing - people get a thrill out of stealing. And It’s pretty common so I’ll still object to the idea “the only reason he’d steal” the bag is to sniff some 40 year old ladies undies.
He might be onto fucking men AND women dressed like dogs?? I dont know. He might be a klepto gay man who likes wearing womens clothing
sure! But the claim that "there's no reason he would steal luggage unless he wants to wank off into women's dirty undies" was what I found to be ridiculous
"Innocent kink situation" - oh Jesse, my sweet summer child.
(In other words, I don't believe in such a thing as an "innocent kink".)
I don’t think 5 years is too harsh. Imagine you’ve planned a trip to attend an event. You arrive and you have no wardrobe to wear because some Biden bureaucrat with awkward-to-use pronouns is deriving sexual pleasure from fondling your garments. That will ruin your trip. Instead of relaxing you would be running around trying to replace your outfit instead of relaxing and enjoying yourself. I think he should get 30 years.
One of my ancestors came to America as a convict from London in 1757. He was sentenced to work for seven years on a Maryland plantation. His crime? He stole a trunk of clothes that fell off a wagon in front of St. Pauls.
That was the age before fast fashion, clothes were more durable and higher quality (even if flee and lice ridden), your ancestor richly deserved what he got. Imagine that poor sod who had to turn up at the coffeehouse without his dapper briches, tailcoat and powdered wig in front of the regular crowd. All the gin in London would not have been enough to take the edge of his utter humiliation
I read the whole trial transcript from old Bailey; all the records are online. There were a lot of funny parts.
Oh I hadn’t even thought about that. My luggage got lost by the airline once on a trip to do a very important presentation for my job AND a psych interview for a promotion. They delivered my bag to the hotel the next afternoon - just in time for me to half-assed get dressed and be frazzled - but I had to do the interview that morning in my travel clothes and day old hair and makeup. I’m not sure 30 years is enough. He’s a monster!
My luggage got lost while traveling to a pretty harsh climate. Luckily I'd worn my best shoes and some outerwear but I still spent a couple hundred bucks in a foreign country buying warm clothes to get through until I got my bag 5 days later. It was pretty crappy and that was just airline error!
It’s no fun that’s for sure.
I usually try to cram a change of clothes into my carry-on backpack, having been thrown up on by my kids a few too many times. Not that I’ve flown in years. Probably won’t remember next time.
Yep, I learned after that horrible experience. I usually just have a carry on but this was one of those times that they ran out of space and had to check several bags after boarding. I’m sure that’s why it got lost in the first place. I’ll never board after everyone else again!!!
Just a nitpick, but he wasn't appointed. He's a career bureaucrat.
People get less than 30 years in prison for rape and manslaughter. I think it deserves prison time but 30 years is a little overzealous.
As others have gently pointed out in the past, I think your sarcasm and irony detector needs some fine tuning.
I don’t mean to sound mean and judgy, because you could certainly criticize my appearance but their head is the perfect egg. It’s a little disconcerting and in fact distracts me from everything else in this story.
It's like if Matt Damon cosplayed as Sasha Velour.
"Skinhead Matt Damon with lipstick" is my immediate reaction each time I see a picture of this individual.