The worst figures in American history

The Right Wing News polls the bloggers. John says: “While this is a fascinating list, this one is unusual in that I honestly don’t agree with a lot of the people on the list. Take a look at it and see if you feel the same way.”

Here were my nominees:

Alexander Hamilton
Abraham Lincoln
Woodrow Wilson
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Margaret Sanger
Susan B. Anthony
Alan Greenspan
Paul Warburg
David Rockefeller
Richard Nixon

I was frankly shocked to see that so many people agreed with me about Roosevelt and Wilson, but didn’t see fit to add “Honest Abe” to the list.

Morals aren’t evolving fast enough

At least, not fast enough to confer legitimacy on scientific fraud:

Dr. Hauser, whose field is the comparison of human and animal minds, is the author of “Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong.”

A Harvard press officer, Jeff Neal, at first refused to confirm that Dr. Hauser was on leave or that Harvard had conducted any investigation. But a message on Dr. Hauser’s laboratory phone says he will be on leave until the fall of 2011, and at least two scientific journals are acknowledging problems in Dr. Hauser’s articles that were brought to light by an internal Harvard inquiry.

The journal Cognition published an article by Dr. Hauser and others in 2002 saying that tamarin monkeys could learn certain rules much as human infants do. The journal is about to run a retraction saying that an internal examination by Harvard “found that the data do not support the reported findings. We therefore are retracting this article. MH accepts responsibility for the error.” The initials M.H. refer to Dr. Hauser.

Rah for the Orange… rah for the Orange… rah for the Orange and Blue! Now, I wouldn’t wish to judge my fellow Bucknellian overharshly, but if turns out that there has been any scientific malfeasance underlying Dr. Hauser’s inaccurate conclusions, it would be a strong indication that one should not take scientific theories about morality and moral development with a straight face. You have to seriously wonder about what is wrong someone who would actively deceive others in attempting to revise the traditional understanding of morality.

Dating down

This Daily Mail article helps demonstrate why women with casual sexual experience are prone to overrating themselves and underlines the sexual economics that underlies Game. The comparison between the virgin and the cougar-blimp is anecdotal and no doubt one could easily find an opposite pair to serve as a counterexample, but is there any doubt that a 31 year-old man with 50 lovers could not be as unattractive as the example shown here?

However, this is the part that I found the most indicative of Game theory:

I was rather prim when I was growing up – I didn’t have a sexual relationship until I was 17. That was a classic holiday romance – he was a Turkish student and I met him when I was on holiday in Turkey with my sister. He fished my shoe out of the sea, and we got chatting. We spent the entire week together and slept together after a few days. To me, sex meant commitment and I convinced myself I was madly in love. But like all holiday romances, it fizzled out.

Sending a young woman between the ages of 15 and 18 on a vacation without serious adult supervision is the close equivalent of buying a hooker for a young man of the same age. The difference is that there is a reasonable chance the hooker would be more acceptable as a long term partner. Send her to France and she’ll do a Frenchman, send her to the mountains of Peru and she’ll do a squatty Incan if the raffish tour guide isn’t available. For a variety of reasons, women are always much, much more prone to let their hair down and lift their skirts up whenever they have flown somewhere. Throw in curiosity and teenage hormones as well as the appeal of the exotic Other and it’s a virtual lock.

The most amusing part, however, are the famous last words uttered by the woman with 25 notches on her bedpost:

Jonny and I haven’t really talked about how many sexual partners we’ve had because we both take the same view that it’s the here and now that’s important, not the past. I don’t think he will be concerned when he reads my tally. He doesn’t judge me and I don’t judge him.

Of course he doesn’t… what a fortuitous coincidence that a man should happen to share an opinion with the woman he is casually banging! How often does that happen? It’s a shame there won’t be a follow-up piece explaining how Jonny, who no doubt finds it very hard to meet women in the music industry, read the article and eventually made use of it as an excuse to denounce Jodie as an incorrigible slut who is incapable of remaining faithful when he moved on to the next opportunity.

Slutty Jane is really not the category in which a woman wants to find herself when she’s ready to be done having fun and start settling down.