September 23, 2008
The effect of aggregating by decade
Compare the effect of pooling data by year vs. averaging across the decade (year beginning in 0 to year ending in 9), using feminism as an example. Without the data from 2000 - 2002, the yearly graph still shows a clear downward turn, while the graph by decade would suggest purely exponential increase.
September 22, 2008
September 21, 2008
Revised graphs
I'm temporarily placing these graphs here, and will later put them up on GNXP.com. I've moved the date back here so it doesn't clutter up the top of my page.
September 16, 2008
The two minute hate against sexual harassment
Returning to the topic of rational and irrational hysteria about rape, what happens if we look at a milder charge like sexual harassment? Here's how much attention the NYT paid over time (I ignored news summaries and counted only the real article referred to):
The phrase first shows up a bit after the start of women's lib, in 1975, makes a jump into the tens from 1979 to 1989, spikes in the early '90s and again in the late '90s, and plummets and remains stable by 2000 (though still at an order of magnitude higher than before 1990). As with "date rape," the panic is mostly phony, as sex crimes steadily declined after 1992. Also like date rape, sexual harassment is vague enough that believing is seeing, especially when it has the force of a spreading rumor behind it.
By the way, these moral panics are not caused by a high-profile event -- why was such an event so high-profile in the first place? It's a circular argument, requiring that we already be whipped up into a panic before the event in order to be so attentive to it. The dynamic of the hysteria plays out, and some events are given lots of attention if they touch on themes of the hysteria, since the audience will be hungry for information about it.
Really, were there no Anita Hills, Paula Joneses, and Monica Lewinskys before 1990? Given that we've become more civilized over the past 250 years, it must be that previous presidents made unwanted passes -- or worse -- to strange women, held mistresses, and so on, but that opinion-makers didn't think it was interesting enough to make a big stink about.
The more I look into these things, the more it seems like there's a coherent period beginning in the late '80s, peaking in the early-mid '90s, and abruptly ending just after 2000. Political correctness, postmodernism, the culture wars, Third Wave feminism, etc. -- they're all pieces of it, and everyone's noticed them before. The point in making these graphs is to flesh out their trajectories more finely, to do away with lazy periodizations like The Eighties *, and most importantly to see if they have in fact died -- fortunately, they have!
So here's yet another reason to make friends with, flirt with, and date girls who were born in 1987 or later ('85 to '86 is a gray area) -- the oldest ones in this cohort started puberty in 2000, when the sexual harassment hysteria had already wound down, so they weren't brainwashed during their formative years like those born between 1965 and 1978 (particularly those born around 1972). While all females view unwanted romantic advances as annoying, young girls today don't see healthy male sexuality as a threat to society, so you can be yourself around them.
* Usually the period isn't contained entirely within such a decade, and that lack of precision keeps us from seeing the big picture. Like, what if something cycles with a period of 13 or 26 years -- one-half or a full human generation? We wouldn't see that. Also, "the '80s" are not homogenous enough to deserve a name -- for example, if you go to a good '80s night at a dance club, about 90% of the songs will be from 1982 to 1984, before arena rock and whiny college radio music took over. The same goes for "the '90s" -- grunge died by 1994, and the late '90s were plagued by boy bands, girl bands, and techno.
The phrase first shows up a bit after the start of women's lib, in 1975, makes a jump into the tens from 1979 to 1989, spikes in the early '90s and again in the late '90s, and plummets and remains stable by 2000 (though still at an order of magnitude higher than before 1990). As with "date rape," the panic is mostly phony, as sex crimes steadily declined after 1992. Also like date rape, sexual harassment is vague enough that believing is seeing, especially when it has the force of a spreading rumor behind it.
By the way, these moral panics are not caused by a high-profile event -- why was such an event so high-profile in the first place? It's a circular argument, requiring that we already be whipped up into a panic before the event in order to be so attentive to it. The dynamic of the hysteria plays out, and some events are given lots of attention if they touch on themes of the hysteria, since the audience will be hungry for information about it.
Really, were there no Anita Hills, Paula Joneses, and Monica Lewinskys before 1990? Given that we've become more civilized over the past 250 years, it must be that previous presidents made unwanted passes -- or worse -- to strange women, held mistresses, and so on, but that opinion-makers didn't think it was interesting enough to make a big stink about.
The more I look into these things, the more it seems like there's a coherent period beginning in the late '80s, peaking in the early-mid '90s, and abruptly ending just after 2000. Political correctness, postmodernism, the culture wars, Third Wave feminism, etc. -- they're all pieces of it, and everyone's noticed them before. The point in making these graphs is to flesh out their trajectories more finely, to do away with lazy periodizations like The Eighties *, and most importantly to see if they have in fact died -- fortunately, they have!
So here's yet another reason to make friends with, flirt with, and date girls who were born in 1987 or later ('85 to '86 is a gray area) -- the oldest ones in this cohort started puberty in 2000, when the sexual harassment hysteria had already wound down, so they weren't brainwashed during their formative years like those born between 1965 and 1978 (particularly those born around 1972). While all females view unwanted romantic advances as annoying, young girls today don't see healthy male sexuality as a threat to society, so you can be yourself around them.
* Usually the period isn't contained entirely within such a decade, and that lack of precision keeps us from seeing the big picture. Like, what if something cycles with a period of 13 or 26 years -- one-half or a full human generation? We wouldn't see that. Also, "the '80s" are not homogenous enough to deserve a name -- for example, if you go to a good '80s night at a dance club, about 90% of the songs will be from 1982 to 1984, before arena rock and whiny college radio music took over. The same goes for "the '90s" -- grunge died by 1994, and the late '90s were plagued by boy bands, girl bands, and techno.
September 11, 2008
Older women lying to younger girls about the best hair length
Since youth is the single most important factor for a female's physical attractiveness, it's no surprise that the over-30s try to cripple the invincible 15 to 24 year-olds, well intentioned as they claim their motives are. * Indeed, any free and unsolicited advice from them to youngsters about beauty matters should be assumed to be a Trojan Horse until proven otherwise. Lamentably, these more subtle methods are the only way to get the job done now -- not like back in the good ol' days when that jealous old crone lopped off Rapunzel's hair. Case-in-point: some propaganda on hair length from an About.com beauty expert.
Notice how the middle-aged writer's advice to 30-somethings through 50-somethings says that longer hair is sexier, and to at least aim for a medium length, short hair being the style that you're only forced into when you can no longer hope to look sexy. It seems rather clear-cut, then: longer hair is more attractive. (Ask any guy, and he'll agree.)
But when counseling the 20-somethings, in every one of the four paragraphs she tries to bully them into cutting off their hair:
- "This is the best time of your life to try out all types of haircuts and styles. Short hairstyles, done right, can make you look more mature (or like a kid)..."
Note the appeal to the desire to experiment -- and so much for the clear-cut conclusion, no experimentation needed, that longer hair is sexier.
- "Trying to make your way in a man's world? Chop off that long hair and try a shorter cut. Check out this photo gallery of super-short looks."
Notice how no career path calls for longer hair -- perhaps "professional" or "funky" hair. And why not give the same advice to 30+ women trying to make it in a man's world, unless they're already a CEO or senior partner at a law firm I suppose?
- "Experiment with length and color. Now is the time to see how you look with super long hair, then cut it off and see if you take to short hair. At your age, your hair will grow faster and thicker than at any time in your life. So enjoy it while you have it."
Hey, while you're at it, why not try being slim one season, and then pig the fuck out for a year and see if you take to being a lardass. At your age, your metabolism is faster than at any time in your life. So enjoy it while you have it, you bitch.
- "Beware the wrong short cut. What you don't want to look like is a stock 'Mom' character. Choose a short look that fits your age and the latest trends. For some ideas, check out these photo galleries of short cuts."
This entire tip just assumes that she's getting her hair cut short -- because you are chopping off your hair, aren't you? By the way, here is the gallery of short cuts. Most of them are tragic. Only the super-feminine can wear boyish hairstyles and not be confused with men -- jesus christ, look at Pink with short sleek hair. She looks like a man in prison. Here's a good example of a short cut on babyfaced Selena Gomez:
She still looks better with long hair, though, as does Audrey Hepburn and any other woman who could look good with short hair. Unfortunately, women are too gullible and conformist to beat back the unrelenting mob of hair-cutters, but like that aging advice columnist said, at least it'll grow back pretty fast. Let's just hope they don't screw it up a second time.
* It's the same reason that a girl sabotages her female friends' looks when they huddle together to plan what they're going to wear. The shrewd girl will persuade her friends to dress like borderline sluts -- not so bad that she couldn't be seen with them, but enough to make sure that she looks the most respectable. It's not to prevent guys from advancing on her friends -- it will probably invite that -- but to set the poor saps up for gossip, rumors, and dirty looks from their female peers, whose esteem they value more than that of their male peers:
"Omigod, why were all those girls back there looking at me so weird???" I don't know... I mean, you don't think it could be what you're wearing, could it? Like, could they be that shallow? "Omigod, what's wrong with what I'm wearing???!!!" Nothing, nothing, you look fine. I'm just saying, maybe they think it looks, like, just a little slutty -- I mean, it totally doesn't, but maybe that's what they were thinking. "Omigod, now they're gonna freakin' tell everyone I'm a slut!!!"
Notice how the middle-aged writer's advice to 30-somethings through 50-somethings says that longer hair is sexier, and to at least aim for a medium length, short hair being the style that you're only forced into when you can no longer hope to look sexy. It seems rather clear-cut, then: longer hair is more attractive. (Ask any guy, and he'll agree.)
But when counseling the 20-somethings, in every one of the four paragraphs she tries to bully them into cutting off their hair:
- "This is the best time of your life to try out all types of haircuts and styles. Short hairstyles, done right, can make you look more mature (or like a kid)..."
Note the appeal to the desire to experiment -- and so much for the clear-cut conclusion, no experimentation needed, that longer hair is sexier.
- "Trying to make your way in a man's world? Chop off that long hair and try a shorter cut. Check out this photo gallery of super-short looks."
Notice how no career path calls for longer hair -- perhaps "professional" or "funky" hair. And why not give the same advice to 30+ women trying to make it in a man's world, unless they're already a CEO or senior partner at a law firm I suppose?
- "Experiment with length and color. Now is the time to see how you look with super long hair, then cut it off and see if you take to short hair. At your age, your hair will grow faster and thicker than at any time in your life. So enjoy it while you have it."
Hey, while you're at it, why not try being slim one season, and then pig the fuck out for a year and see if you take to being a lardass. At your age, your metabolism is faster than at any time in your life. So enjoy it while you have it, you bitch.
- "Beware the wrong short cut. What you don't want to look like is a stock 'Mom' character. Choose a short look that fits your age and the latest trends. For some ideas, check out these photo galleries of short cuts."
This entire tip just assumes that she's getting her hair cut short -- because you are chopping off your hair, aren't you? By the way, here is the gallery of short cuts. Most of them are tragic. Only the super-feminine can wear boyish hairstyles and not be confused with men -- jesus christ, look at Pink with short sleek hair. She looks like a man in prison. Here's a good example of a short cut on babyfaced Selena Gomez:
She still looks better with long hair, though, as does Audrey Hepburn and any other woman who could look good with short hair. Unfortunately, women are too gullible and conformist to beat back the unrelenting mob of hair-cutters, but like that aging advice columnist said, at least it'll grow back pretty fast. Let's just hope they don't screw it up a second time.
* It's the same reason that a girl sabotages her female friends' looks when they huddle together to plan what they're going to wear. The shrewd girl will persuade her friends to dress like borderline sluts -- not so bad that she couldn't be seen with them, but enough to make sure that she looks the most respectable. It's not to prevent guys from advancing on her friends -- it will probably invite that -- but to set the poor saps up for gossip, rumors, and dirty looks from their female peers, whose esteem they value more than that of their male peers:
"Omigod, why were all those girls back there looking at me so weird???" I don't know... I mean, you don't think it could be what you're wearing, could it? Like, could they be that shallow? "Omigod, what's wrong with what I'm wearing???!!!" Nothing, nothing, you look fine. I'm just saying, maybe they think it looks, like, just a little slutty -- I mean, it totally doesn't, but maybe that's what they were thinking. "Omigod, now they're gonna freakin' tell everyone I'm a slut!!!"
September 9, 2008
When were the best songs written?
Rolling Stone came up with a list of the 500 Greatest Songs of All Time. We can ignore the ranking of songs for the most part, although appearing at all on the list is an OK way to measure how good a song is. I checked the year each song was released in to figure out how many songs on the list came out in a given year. Here is the result, where 3-year moving averages are used to smooth out the data:
According to Rolling Stone, the two best periods -- when the trend is upward toward a local maximum -- are 1953 - 1957 and 1963 - 1965.
Obviously, this graph reflects the tastes of the people who wrote the list. Since it was drawn up in 2004, it doesn't reflect the surge of, er, what did they call it at the time -- post-punk revival? They've probably stopped calling it that anyway, like how the term "hipster" has gone out of fashion for referring to hipsters. At any rate, from about 2003 to 2006, a lot of cool "back to basics" stuff came out, but things have seemed dead for the past two years. Also, the list gives little weight to the late '70s and early '80s, when a bunch of great punk and disco music came out.
It's no surprise that a list composed by nerds shows such a disdain for music that you can dance to -- we're supposed to pretend that pop musicians are serious artists, and therefore that the audience should face and worship the band while standing still. Dance music stars weren't taken seriously, as is correct for pop musicians -- they were only to play music that would allow listeners to cut loose and mingle amongst themselves. And anything preferred by extraverts, especially the extreme ones like gay males, is universally tarred as uncool by snobs, who were largely friendless in high school.
According to Rolling Stone, the two best periods -- when the trend is upward toward a local maximum -- are 1953 - 1957 and 1963 - 1965.
Obviously, this graph reflects the tastes of the people who wrote the list. Since it was drawn up in 2004, it doesn't reflect the surge of, er, what did they call it at the time -- post-punk revival? They've probably stopped calling it that anyway, like how the term "hipster" has gone out of fashion for referring to hipsters. At any rate, from about 2003 to 2006, a lot of cool "back to basics" stuff came out, but things have seemed dead for the past two years. Also, the list gives little weight to the late '70s and early '80s, when a bunch of great punk and disco music came out.
It's no surprise that a list composed by nerds shows such a disdain for music that you can dance to -- we're supposed to pretend that pop musicians are serious artists, and therefore that the audience should face and worship the band while standing still. Dance music stars weren't taken seriously, as is correct for pop musicians -- they were only to play music that would allow listeners to cut loose and mingle amongst themselves. And anything preferred by extraverts, especially the extreme ones like gay males, is universally tarred as uncool by snobs, who were largely friendless in high school.
September 3, 2008
Myths and hysteria about rapists and sexual predators
Over at GNXP, I've put up two posts on recent irrational hysterias, one about "campus rape" and "date rape", and another about "sexual predators". Full of data and free PDF references.
Comments closed here; yak there.
Comments closed here; yak there.
September 1, 2008
Obama is a Martian
That's what lots of people are saying, anyway. I mean, it could go either way -- maybe he is. There's got to be some simple test that will put the rumors to rest. Like, is it so much to ask for him to flay the skin from one of his arms, y'know, just so we can see that he's really human? Just show us and we'll believe you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)