The nearly five-minute production is another well-produced and comprehensive year-end 'In Memoriam' video from Turner Classic Movies‚ celebrating and bidding farewell to notable creative talents who passed away in 2023.

More women are watching porn than ever before‚ according to a recent report from Pornhub Insights. Since 2015‚ the percentage of female viewers of Pornhub worldwide has increased 12 percent‚ rising from 24 percent to 36 percent in eight years. READ MORE: The Fighting Irish Fight for Freedom From Porn Depending on the country‚ women make up between 25 percent and 60 percent of Pornhub viewers. While the Philippines was the only country that saw a majority of female porn viewers‚ in Colombia‚ they made up exactly half of Pornhub visitors‚ and Argentina‚ Mexico‚ China‚ and Ukraine saw 47‚ 45‚ 41‚ and 40 percent‚ respectively. In the United States‚ women made up 29 percent of viewers. This increase is not just an anomaly; the percentage of women viewing porn has been consistently trending upward since Pornhub Insights began releasing its report. “Since Google Analytics began tracking demographics data in 2015‚ we have seen our proportion of female visitors steadily increase over time‚” reported the site. “Overall‚ there was a proportional growth of +1% female viewers in the year 2023‚ bringing the total proportion of female visitors worldwide to 36%.” Women viewed a number of LGBTQ categories at much higher percentages than men‚ with lesbian content being their “favorite‚” according to Pornhub Insights. Media Pushes Porn for Women In 2010‚ only 2 percent of women aged 18–39 surveyed by the Pew Research Center admitted to watching porn. By 2013‚ this number had already increased to 8 percent. This cultural shift has been pushed by the mainstream media and Hollywood‚ with sites like Glamour posting such stories like “Porn for Women: 21 Feminist Porn Sites You’ll Really‚ Really Enjoy.” In promoting this content‚ the media ignores the reality that pornography is a dire problem for both men and women‚ and it’s only getting worse. According to Psychology Today‚ the porn industry is thriving. “[In] April 2020‚ the world’s top 100 [porn] sites garnered 14.5 billion views from 3.3 billion unique visitors‚” the site reports. But as the industry booms‚ relationships suffer. Even if a woman herself doesn’t view pornography‚ there’s a high probability that a woman will have to deal with the consequences of pornography in her relationship. One in five couples report “conflict related to pornography‚” and‚ among married men‚ only a quarter claimed “no current pornography use‚” according to a 2021 report from Brigham Young University. In addition‚ pornography has been shown to have significant negative impacts on the mental and emotional wellbeing of those who view it‚ leading to an increase of suicidal thoughts‚ a lack of self-esteem‚ and issues with sexual function.The post More Women Are Watching Porn Than Ever Before first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post More Women Are Watching Porn Than Ever Before appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

As diversity equity and inclusion reaches its apotheosis‚ some erstwhile protected classes are chafing at their recent exclusion. Being diverse only matters if power and privilege are associated with the moniker. What happens when the loathed white majority views itself as excluded and as a persecuted class? America is about to find out. The problem with this gussied up tribalism is that people start identifying with their tribe‚ especially if their tribe is at the bottom rung of the power structure. White men are no longer being judged based on the content of their character or the merit of what they produce. They’re judged based on their skin color and gonads and they are de facto being deprived of college placement and job promotions. They’re being pushed out of polite society and have become the butt of every joke. (READ MORE from Melissa Mackenzie: On Becoming Catholic) Many say‚ “well‚ it’s about damn time” as they perceive white men as privileged people — people‚ who through no qualifications other than being white and male‚ sat at the top of the power structure. If white men endure a couple of generations of persecution‚ it’s no more than they deserve for all the colonization‚ destruction‚ and unearned benefits they’ve enjoyed. The younger generations … believe in protected classes and power and they view Jewish people as white and powerful. The only problem with this equation is that these people being shoved‚ forcefully‚ to the bottom rung still make up the majority. That is‚ if they choose to fight back‚ numbers are on their side. To this point‚ white men and white women haven’t viewed themselves through a critical theory lens. They’ve been inculcated with the idea of a color-blind society‚ a melting pot. Fairness meant seeing people as individuals and to not judge a whole group based on one person. That idea was called racism. It was considered racist to demonize a whole racial group. Racism was anathema to most white people‚ save a few racist stragglers. The worst epithet that could be hurled at a white person was “racist!” Further‚ in critical theory‚ “people of color” (not colored people‚ mind you) could not be considered racist because to be racist‚ one has to have power. The question now: Who has the power? Judging by the recent Congressional hearings interviewing the women heading the various ivory towers‚ it’s not white men. Racism against white people is now the norm. From government Christmas parties excluding white employees to “safe spaces” on campus‚ discrimination against white people isn’t just allowed‚ it’s encouraged. What happens when systemic suppression happens to the majority? America is about to find out. White kids have been drinking in the critical theory while simultaneously de-Christianizing‚ and since they‚ too‚ now view the world through this lens‚ they’re coming to the obvious conclusion: Being white is bad (some‚ mostly daft girls‚ think being bad is good) and white people are at the bottom. Being at the bottom is no fun especially when previously one didn’t believe in a top or bottom at all. (READ MORE: After Turning a Generation Into Illiterate Morons‚ Columbia Fires Teaching Hack) The woke didn’t reckon that a white majority might also seek victim status once the boot to the face jammed the whites down the ladder of status‚ simply for being white. They thought their racism would have no consequences; they still seem to think that. Left out of these leftist will to power calculations is that the white majority is increasingly secular. Previously‚ their Christianity served as a limit to behavior. Christians submit to God‚ have faith in Him‚ and God‚ in the Christian worldview‚ views each person as an individual‚ “Neither Jew nor Greek‚ male nor female‚ slave nor free.” God‚ in the Christian worldview‚ sees each soul and Christians are told to view people that way‚ too. Christians are told‚ “Judge not‚ lest you be judged.” Jesus is the ultimate judge and jury and so on an individual level‚ vengeance is God’s‚ not the Christian’s. Christianity isn’t tribal. It’s universal. It’s the whole body of Christ — each person has a role in the body and none of it has to do with one’s skin color or intersectional status. What is made clear is‚ “the last shall be made first.” The Bible is filled with warnings about persecuting the poor and abusing those deemed as lesser in society. Jesus was also clear about loving one’s enemies and blessing those who persecute you. America’s unifying themes were Christian. The Founders had this understanding as a foundation for the nation they were creating. As the United States secularizes‚ a reality that makes the woke rejoice‚ the majority‚ once governed by limiting principles in the use of power due to Christian ideals‚ will no longer be limited. Some historically marginalized groups‚ primarily Asians and Jews‚ are chafing at the label of “white.” The same leftist Jewish professors and university funders who taught or believed in this intersectional clap-trap are alarmed to see the virulent anti-semitism that sat beneath the surface‚ and worse‚ that no one is fighting against it because Jewish people have been lumped in with white people as “colonizers.” Jews‚ in this critical analysis‚ deserve abuse because they are white‚ have positions of power‚ and are oppressors against the brown people. It doesn’t matter that Hamas attacked Israel. It doesn’t matter what is just or right. What matters is that in the critical theory hierarchy‚ Jews are perceived as white. While some Jewish liberals such as Bill Ackman and Alan Dershowitz have recently spoken out against campus DEI efforts‚ it is interesting that Jewish leftists are not scrambling‚ as they should be‚ to dismantle the critical theory concepts that led to this evil place. Rather‚ they’re desirous of being viewed as a victimized class deserving of special considerations. Jewish leaders opposed California’s adoption of a new Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum‚ according to David Bernstein‚ author of Woke Antisemitism‚ because of “its implicit omission of Jews as an oppressed group.” Critical theory and intersectionality inevitably lead to a fractured society where all members identify with a group based on superficial characteristics so that they can have power. Or‚ when things go really badly‚ protection. Unfortunately‚ Jewish people in America and the world are a small group of people‚ proportionally. They’re always at the mercy of the majority. In this case‚ the majority is white and nominally Christian. Up to this point‚ Jewish people self-identified as a persecuted class. They’ve been overruled by other persecuted classes who have decided to label them white and privileged. White identitarianism may be the only recompense the hated majority have to achieve respect and fair-play. To the chagrin of many leftist Jewish people‚ America is standing alone as the major power defending Israel. Why is that? What is it about the older generations of American people that defends Israel and the Jewish people? Well‚ they remember the Holocaust‚ for one. For two‚ a Protestant nation believes that Jews are God’s blessed people and to receive blessings‚ Israel and the Jewish people should be blessed. The younger generations‚ the ones soaked in critical theory‚ do not believe this. They believe in protected classes and power and they view Jewish people as white and powerful. Marry this trend with white people secularizing and starting to see themselves not as Americans but as white Americans‚ well … This new belief system is catastrophic for social cohesion. It ends in violence. The solution to this cultural disaster is not placing the Jewish people back into a protected class. The solution is to demolish the pernicious ideas of critical theory completely. DEI needs to be obliterated from every institution. It’s an evil. What should replace this nonsense? Merit. Objective standards level the playing field and remove this garbage. In addition‚ America needs a Christian revival. Love‚ not revenge‚ is the solution to this bleak cultural nonsense. Tearing down statues‚ creating “safe spaces‚” and excluding people based on skin color will not right the wrongs of the past. It’s only more evil that foments more anger and that’s especially dangerous when those being made angry are the majority. (WATCH: The Spectacle Ep. 40: Victimhood‚ Religious Bigotry‚ and Max Miller)  In the critical theory calculation‚ one that is entirely tribal‚ might makes right. Have those pushing these ideas considered what that means for them? White identitarianism may be the only recompense the hated majority have to achieve respect and fair-play‚ but it will come at great cost. The woke haven’t considered the price they might pay. READ MORE from Melissa Mackenzie: Kari Lake’s Bid to Raise Arizona Stumbling Into World War III  The post When White People Start Believing Critical Race Theory first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post When White People Start Believing Critical Race Theory appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

This spring‚ when the Biden administration unveiled its long-delayed national strategy to counter anti-Semitism‚ there was — for a brief moment — cause for hope. Jewish leaders praised the plan. So‚ too‚ did prominent voices in the Black community. READ MORE from Paul Packer: I Was There on October 7 The affirmations of support seemed more than routine platitudes. They appeared to reflect a reinvigorated bond between the Black and Jewish communities‚ two groups that historically locked arms in the struggle for freedom and equality. But in the wake of the Oct. 7 terrorist attack against Israel‚ a different picture has emerged — one of selective outrage and glaring double standards that does grave injustice to the cause of civil rights. In the last month‚ as synagogues and kosher shops have once again become targets of anti-Semitic vandalism and violent attacks‚ condemnation from our Black allies has been conspicuously absent. The same leaders who were so eager to stand with Jewish groups in May now respond to these acts with deafening silence. Michelle Obama refuses to use her massive platform to condemn Hamas’ rape and murder of Israeli women. And when asked if Hamas is a terrorist organization‚ the Southern Poverty Law Center responded with stony indifference: “It is outside of our purview and expertise to comment on international events.” This betrayal of solidarity is morally obtuse and strategically self-defeating. The struggle for civil rights has never been a zero-sum game. Its power derives from unity‚ not division. In 1963‚ five years before an assassin’s bullet stilled his mighty voice‚ Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. famously declared‚ “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Those prophetic words have echoed through the decades as a clarion call against moral indifference. Yet‚ too often‚ the call to conscience that followed goes unquoted: “Injustice to any people is a threat to justice for all people‚” King insisted‚ “and even though I live in the United States‚ and even though I happen to be an American Negro‚ I cannot stand idly by and fail to be concerned about the fate of my brothers and sisters who happen to be Jews in Soviet Russia. What happens to them‚ happens to me and to you and we must all be concerned.” In that piercing elaboration‚ King underscored a basic truth now widely ignored: The struggle for human dignity recognizes no ethnic boundaries. From Sderot to Selma‚ bigotry stains the soul wherever it spills innocent blood. Civil rights leaders once grasped this. No longer‚ it seems. As anti-Semitism again surges‚ yesterday’s fiery allies respond with silence. Or‚ worse‚ tacit justification and contemptible equivocation. This moral abdication dishonors sacred memory. When Jewish students joined sit-ins at lunch counters in 1960‚ they did not pause first to scrutinize the NAACP’s policy platform. They acted on the basic conviction that denying service on the basis of identity is unconscionable. Likewise‚ when Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner — both viciously murdered by the Ku Klux Klan in 1964 — traveled to Mississippi to register Black voters‚ they didn’t first demand that King endorse Israel or Zionism. Their solidarity derived from a shared quest to redeem America’s founding promise. And‚ for that‚ they paid the ultimate price. This principled solidarity has evaporated today‚ revealing a disheartening moral timidity. Faced with unambiguous attacks on Jewish people and Jewish institutions‚ too many remain silent or equivocate. Even prominent Black leaders trip over themselves to offer mealy-mouthed justifications that they would instantly repudiate if the targets were mosques or Black churches. It is blind tribalism masquerading as progressive politics. We have seen this movie before. Division and despair breed more darkness‚ fueling a downward spiral that ultimately consumes us all. If we abandon solidarity as a core civil rights principle‚ the forces of racism and anti-Semitism will be the sole winners. That is why partnerships that build trust across communities remain essential. Black and Jewish communities still have so much to gain from reviving the coalition of conscience. These efforts should focus not on stoking grievances but on affirming shared hopes. Anti-Semitism and racism are twin poisons‚ flowing from the same basic impulse to scapegoat vulnerable minorities. They must be fought collectively‚ not selectively. The work of reconciliation and healing starts with overcoming the current impasse. As a first step‚ prominent civil rights organizations — including and especially those who lent their support to the national strategy to combat antisemitism — should host joint viewings of video evidence recently recovered from Hamas terrorists in Gaza revealing the orchestrated campaign of violence against Israel. Seeing the facts firsthand and discussing them openly may begin easing tensions. From there‚ rebuilding broken bridges will be the harder but essential next phase. With anti-Semitism surging at home and abroad‚ the time for fair weather friends has passed. In moments of crisis‚ real allies are conspicuous in their support and solidarity. America’s Black and Jewish communities cannot afford the luxury of isolation and separation‚ which will only produce more fear and violence. Common struggle made America better once before — and common struggle can make it better once more. But only if we stand united.The post Silence That Can Kill: Where Are the Black Friends Jews Need? first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post Silence That Can Kill: Where Are the Black Friends Jews Need? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Former Secretary of State and White House national security administrator Henry Kissinger’s last service for his country was to warn his fellow Americans that substituting artificial intelligence for real human intelligence was “simply a mad race” toward “catastrophe.”  READ MORE: Henry Kissinger: Eight Decades of Service to American National Security Kissinger joined former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and MIT Dean Daniel Huttenlocher to write a formal critique of artificial intelligence by comparing it to the 1455 Gutenberg Bible. “Whereas the printing press caused a profusion of modern human thought‚” they argued‚ AI would frustrate it by “creat[ing] a gap between human knowledge and human understanding.” According to Kissinger‚ Schmidt‚ and Huttenlocher‚ the latest technology is called “generative pre-trained transformer” (GPT) artificial intelligence. OpenAI’s ChatGPT version “is now able to converse with humans“; its goal is to “redefine human knowledge‚ accelerate changes in the fabric of our reality‚ and reorganize politics and society.” What is that new reality? Here is how the Kissinger team explained AI’s “change”: Sophisticated AI methods produce results without explaining why or how their process works. The GPT computer is prompted by a query from a human. The learning machine answers in literate text within seconds. It is able to do so because it has pregenerated representations of the vast data on which it was trained. Because the process by which it created those representations was developed by machine learning that reflects patterns and connections across vast amounts of text‚ the precise sources and reasons for any one representation’s particular features remain unknown.  They reported that AI “complexity … doubl[es] every few months” with “capabilities that remain undisclosed even to their inventors.” Inventors proceed “without understanding their origin or destination.” As far as results: ChatGPT’s answers‚ statements and observations appear without an explanation of where they came from and without an identifiable author. On its face‚ ChatGPT has no discernible motive or bias. Its outputs are complex‚ but its work is astonishingly rapid: In a matter of seconds‚ it can produce answers that coherently explain a high-level topic. They are not simply copied from the text in the computer’s memory. They are generated anew by a process that humans are unable to replicate.  The team presented questions to the machine that were answered wrongly‚ distorted‚ or even changed over time. Yet‚ answers come in seconds and seem so authoritative. Students already use ChatGPT to cheat on exams. It can be used to distort advertising to look as though it is from friends. It can be used to distort material from public officials and candidates for political office. How about deciding whether to go to war based on such information? (RELATED: Biden Administration Meddles in Technology It Doesn’t Understand) Over the long run‚ the analysts cautioned: Leadership [of artificial intelligence] is likely to concentrate in the hands of the fewer people and institutions who control access to the limited number of machines capable of high-quality synthesis of reality. Because of the enormous cost of their processing power‚ the most effective machines within society may stay in the hands of a small subgroup domestically and in the control of a few superpowers internationally. But to this former director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management‚ this conclusion merely gets to the surface of the real problem‚ which is our own superpower government. Its increasingly bureaucratic dominance of American domestic social life is only exceeded by popular dissatisfaction with the results. With the natural bias of government data toward the past‚ AI would make national government more and more outdated even if it worked as intended‚ since AI itself looks to past data. Even if the direct defects of AI itself can be minimized‚ the fundamental problem comes from government itself‚ which is the only institution that can force the results to be implemented. Government bureaucracy developed historically by measuring crops as a way to bring the wealth of agricultural Mesopotamia under state control. That primitive version first created symbols to count grain‚ and similar but evolving information-like tools have been essential to its power ever since. And since such tools can only measure the past‚ the past has generally controlled the future. That is why it took so long to develop efficient markets‚ and why the rise of general prosperity did not take place until 10‚000 years later in decentralized Europe rather than in the bureaucratic empires. Artificial intelligence vastly exaggerates today’s more centralized‚ cumbersome‚ bureaucratic national governments’ dependence on the past. Modern AI is the past on steroids. But social progress comes from new knowledge challenging past solutions. The container ship-box was not a consequence of data or even of a theory but of a revolutionary change in thinking that dramatically increased world trade and wealth. Newton’s law of gravity was replaced by Einstein’s law of relativity‚ “not as a logically implied or predictable next step but as a shocking revolt against the most firmly established propositions of physics‚” as one analyst put it. (READ MORE: Elon Musk’s AI Bot Is Funny?) Future growth and progress require freedom from regressive rules. Growth could survive private development of AI since that still allows choice and competition from alternatives and probably some means to avoid or contain its effects. The private sector lacks real power to enforce the results produced by AI. But national government has the power and has proved easily tempted to force the results of its backward-looking solutions upon its dependent populations. So‚ my modest proposal would be a law to forbid the national government from using AI as a determinate for its own policies.  Indeed‚ the U.S. Governmental Accountability Office has just released a report finding that 20 national government agencies are proposing 1‚200 artificial intelligence use-cases‚ asking Congress to approve $1.8 billion to fund them. And those agency processes would be overseen by multiple government-wide management offices to spread AI to the rest of government. The GAO report is a wake-up call for the need to place at least a temporary congressional hold on adopting these and other government AI agency plans. Or it might even take another 10‚000 years to free society from this backward-looking AI bureaucracy trap.The post Confronting the ‘Artificial Intelligence’ Backward-Looking Bureaucracy Trap first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post Confronting the ‘Artificial Intelligence’ Backward-Looking Bureaucracy Trap appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

For some reason‚ a lot of conservatives have a knee-jerk negative reaction to lab-created meat. I checked the writings of the likes of Edmund Burke and John Locke and found nothing on this. Likewise with P.J. O’Rourke — though doubtless‚ he would have said something quite funny. I admit‚ I just don’t get it. Nevertheless‚ Marjorie Taylor Greene took to Facebook Live on Memorial Day to denounce either meat grown in a Petri dish‚ or a peach tree dish‚ depending on whom you ask. (READ MORE: Biden’s Approach to China Is Illogical) “They want to know if you’re eating a cheeseburger‚ which is very bad because Bill Gates wants you to eat his fake meat‚ which grows in a peach tree [Petri?] dish‚” Greene said. “So you’ll probably get a little zap inside your body that’s saying‚ ‘No no don’t eat a real cheeseburger; you need to eat the fake burger.’ The fake meat from Bill Gates. They probably also want to know when you go to the bathroom and if your bowel movements are on time or consistent.” Okay‚ that’s a bit strange. But she’s right about the Gates connection. He is an investor in a lab meat company‚ Upside Foods‚ that received FDA approval earlier this year and he has used his considerable bully pulpit to press (for) the flesh for years. I use Almighty Facebook to keep my fingers on the pulse of conservative America‚ and it does seem a lot of right-wingers oppose the technology for some reason. “Frankenflesh” Meat Like Beer Lab-grown meat is sometimes called slaughter-free‚ in vitro‚ vat-grown‚ cell-based‚ and synthetic‚ among other names. I avoid “cultured meat‚” because to me it invokes flesh inclined to watching Brideshead Revisited. (It appears I’m the first to use the term “Frankenflesh‚” for which I expect I’ll probably go to Hell or at least serve a long time in Purgatory.) Whatever the name‚ making it requires taking a few cells from high-quality livestock‚ and then figuring out which of them can grow and form meat products. Those cells are then fermented in a stainless steel vat and provided with essential nutrients to be fruitful and multiply. The technique isn’t too different from brewing beer‚ which certainly inclines me to it. Ultimately the meat is processed like conventional meat products and packaged and prepared just like the ma nature variety. (READ MORE: Rockefeller’s Dream: Global Governance Through ‘Climate Change’) It must not be confused with “plant-based” or vegan meat‚ which has proved to be disappointing in the taste category‚ but perhaps confusion has made conservatives wary of lab-based flesh. Lab-based meat is meat. Perhaps a partial analogy is synthetic diamonds. Natural and lab-grown diamonds don’t differ in terms of composition‚ hardness‚ or other physical and optical properties. But synthetic diamonds are much cheaper than the natural variety — and they also don’t fund wars. For now‚ lab-grown meat is simply too expensive except for people like‚ well‚ Gates and another well-known lab meat investor‚ Richard Branson. A few U.S. and Singaporean restaurants have served it‚ but don’t bother checking Walmart or ordering it up at Golden Arches. That being said‚ prices have dropped dramatically. The first lab-produced beef burger cost an amazing $325‚000 back in 2013. Producers have since chopped production costs by 99 percent to roughly $17 per pound‚ which is still too high. For most of us‚ the meat needs to reach approximate price parity or we won’t bite. I wouldn’t trust any predictions as to when that will happen; but since it should be as easy to produce a good cut as a bad cut‚ we will probably see lamb achieve parity before hot dogs. (Then no more nightmares for Clarice Starling.) The Benefits of Lab-Grown Flesh But let’s presume it does reach price parity or even becomes less expensive than the real stuff. (After all‚ the artificial intelligence that we’re currently seeing was sci-fi just a few years ago and according to Hollywood‚ we were supposed to have a moon colony by 1999). If that happens‚ it could have many advantages. Switching to lab-grown meat could reduce animal suffering. While the actual slaughtering seems fairly humane in Western countries‚ more intelligent animals such as pigs and cows do know that something very bad awaits them even if they lack a comprehension of death. YouTube is filled with videos showing as much. Poultry are less aware; they’re pretty stupid. We killed chickens and bunnies in Army Special Forces training and they were oblivious to meeting oblivion. Further‚ the process of raising the animals often remains cruel. In general‚ I’m no PETA fan but they make good points about both factory farming and so-called “humane farming.” Being a chicken isn’t fun no matter what. It’s no longer the nasty business documented in Upton Sinclair’s 1905 classic The Jungle‚ but life is still not great for them. (READ MORE: VIDEO: Kerry Promises to Get Rid of Coal Faster. That’s Not Good.) That said‚ while individual animals like Babe can be cute‚ in vast numbers they can be a nightmare. The wholesomely named Smithfield Foods is owned by China (smart that they kept the name instead of going with People’s Pork) and raises and slaughters about 18 million swine a year. This year‚ China announced the completion of a single pig farm meant to kill 1.2 million animals annually. These facilities create massive amounts of manure‚ that can carry pathogens and heavy metals. These mountains of manure can be difficult to keep out of the groundwater we drink and bathe in. It’s long been suspected that pigs‚ especially Chinese ones‚ are a sort of mixing bowl for viruses. The process combines human‚ swine‚ and avian DNA and then transfers that to waterfowl‚ who then transfer it to us. In that sense‚ both “swine flu” and “avian flu” may be redundancies. Beyond health considerations‚ even a decade ago 26 percent of the planet’s ice-free land was used for livestock grazing and 33 percent of croplands are used for livestock feed production‚ according to the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO). That’s a huge contributor to deforestation. Cultivated meat could cut land use by 94 percent to 99 percent compared with traditional livestock production‚ and reduce water consumption by 82 percent to 96 percent‚ says Rosalyn Abbott‚ an assistant professor in biomedical engineering and materials science and engineering who is working on what he calls “3D printed meat” at Carnegie Mellon University. Meanwhile‚ per capita meat consumption has doubled since 1960‚ and over the last half-century worldwide consumption has tripled. Both figures are steadily rising because people like protein and about a billion of them are lacking it worldwide according to FAO. What about fish? One-third of fish stocks are over-exploited. That’s a threefold increase since 1974‚ according to the FAO. Fish farming has grown six-fold since 1990‚ but just can’t keep up. It Could Be Safer A huge advantage of lab-grown meat is that it’s produced in a highly controlled environment that protects the meat from microbial contamination such as the intestinal germs E. coli‚ Salmonella‚ and Campylobacter. I’ve had at least two out of the three and they’re no fun. Unfortunately‚ meat is susceptible to contamination beyond the slaughterhouse or the lab so lab-created meat is not a panacea. Lab meat would also prevent the spread of diseases between animals (zoonotic) such as the current African swine fever pandemic which has wreaked economic havoc. It has a mortality rate approaching 100%. Antibiotic resistance is one of those rare “scares” that is very real. The evidence suggests that using drugs to fatten animals faster with less feed has contributed to the problem‚ and a few years ago many countries including the U.S. banned the practice. But other countries haven’t. Meat can also be designed to contribute to healthier diets. The fat content can be controlled by adjusting the growth medium‚ as can the amount of saturated fatty acids and polyunsaturated fatty acids. The problem is that people tend to prefer fattier cuts as reflected in the USDA grading system in which the top level‚ “prime‚” means the most fat marbling. But you’ll still have a choice‚ as we do with dairy products. For drinking milk‚ I prefer higher fat; for cereal‚ skim. There will be issues to iron out‚ including various religious beliefs. For example‚ would bio-meat be Kosher‚ or the Muslim equivalent‚ halal? Kosher rules? Oy vey! They vary and can be mind-boggling. Jewish holy scriptures only present a basic outline. But part of those rules concerns human health and humane slaughter‚ so lab meat has the advantage there. The same is true of halal‚ and indeed some Jewish and Muslim authorities have announced that lab meat per se can be acceptable.  For conservatives who care about such things‚ it would appear lab meat production can reduce greenhouse gas emissions‚ depending on your source. Livestock‚ essentially cows‚ produce about 14 percent of what are called greenhouse gas emissions. (For shame‚ Bessie!) But a University of California-Davis pre-print (not yet accepted by a journal) indicates the number could be much worse‚ depending on how you do the calculations.  That said‚ you never know when politics are involved‚ and some insist more advanced and richer countries need to reduce meat consumption by three-fourths to save world resources. In his book The Uninhabitable Earth‚ journalist David Wallace-Wells wrote that “there is something of a moral crime in how much you and I and everyone we know consume‚ given how little is available to consume for so many other people on the planet.” Lab-Grown Meat Isn’t a Life v. Right Debate Doubtless‚ some feel that anything the left likes‚ we on the right should oppose. But there’s no solid liberal position on lab-based meat. PETA is ambivalent. In an official statement last June the group said: “Years ago‚ PETA funded the very first foray into cultured meat research at two U.S. universities‚ offered a $1 million prize for the first laboratory that could create commercially viable lab-grown chicken meat.” It says it further helped with the patent process to ensure it would be sold cheaply. But it then added that “everyone can and should go vegan now.” Geez‚ not even just vegetarian. So you can oppose PETA on this — even as you agree with PETA on this. Taylor Greene specifically cited the Gates connection. It would not logically follow that if Gates is a lefty‚ we should oppose anything he’s for. I presume he’s against the death penalty for shoplifters (By publication date‚ calls to his office on this vital issue were not returned.) I find Gates somewhat enigmatic. Conservatives identify him with liberal causes‚ but among his major concerns is affordable power‚ which‚ to him means nuclear. Indeed‚ he’s funded next-generation nuclear projects. He’s very concerned with sanitation‚ especially the disposal of human waste‚ which is hardly a political issue‚ any more than malaria. Yes‚ Gates buys the basic tenets of global warming‚ but he strongly opposes those who would use it to try to throttle industrialization and reverse population growth‚ such as Michael Moore. He favors technological solutions‚ including perhaps geo-engineering‚ as I have written. That comprises methods for combatting global warming without reducing gas emissions. Indeed‚ even as PETA demands we become vegans‚ Gates replies “We can’t ask everyone to become vegetarians.” Bill and Melinda Gates did give half a billion to the Biden Inaugural Committee‚ but the nifty thing about donating to inaugural committees is you already know who’s going to be president. In other words‚ it’s a very efficient way of buying influence. Wink‚ wink. I would figure Gates as left of center‚ but hardly a member of the commie pinko cabal. I guess the best explanation is that we’re not supposed to buy into “If it’s new‚ it has to be good.” Tried and true has a value all its own. But so far‚ lab meat has been passing the test.  I just can’t see any conservative argument against lab-grown meat. I do see a left-wing argument against it‚ the fairness aspect expressed above by David Wallace-Well‚ that technology is bad and it’s not enough to bring up the developing world we must bring down the developed world. Conservatives don’t need to be strange bedfellows with the likes of those. Michael Fumento (mfumento@outlook.com) is an attorney and author and has been a science journalist for over 35 years. His work has appeared in TNR‚ the New York Times‚ the Washington Post‚ the Wall Street Journal‚ the Sunday Times‚ the Atlantic‚ and many other fora. He currently lives in the Philippines‚ known for barely edible beef that comes from poor cows that look like they have TB.The post Why Do Conservatives Fear ‘Frankenflesh’? first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post Why Do Conservatives Fear ‘Frankenflesh’? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

I wrote about Bates College’s first two major leaguers‚ the first man to score a touchdown on historic Garcelon Field‚ and the first to blast a home run on that field (the ball rolled into a ditch). But all four were White. And I am White. So it was easy. Then I‚ an enthusiastic alum‚ wanted to write about Thomas Seth Bruce‚ class of 1898‚ a football star from Virginia who led Bates to its first undefeated season. But I couldn’t. (READ MORE: Harvard Students Question Presidential Selection Process Amid Claudine Gay Plagiarism Scandal) He was Black. And I am White. So it was impossible. “When it comes to stories on race‚ racism‚ and white supremacy‚ I have to keep them in house‚” the Bates Communications Director replied. “They can be deceptively complex‚ so I tend to work with faculty members who have expertise in the area. Who else ya got?” Back in 1985-86‚ I had no problems writing about Black boxers Marvelous Marvin Hagler and Robbie Sims for a national magazine. I then profiled Nicaraguan world champion Alexis Arguello. No one complained. This past year‚ I’ve written a dozen stories on murdered Waterbury sex workers — Black‚ Latina‚ and White — for the Waterbury Observer‚ in Connecticut. I’ve interviewed daughters‚ sons‚ siblings. Families have been moved by our sensitivity. The editor wants me to dig deeper. And I will. (READ MORE: Thomas Sowell: Still Going Strong at 93) But now I can’t write about T.S. Bruce‚ who died in 1913‚ for my alumni magazine — even though I’ve written six other pieces‚ and the director lauds my deeply-researched historical profiles as the “Muldoon treatment.” Just what is going on here? Tyler Austin Harper‚ a Bates professor‚ wrote a recent Boston Globe piece about “being the wrong kind of Black professor.” Harper is an expert on 19th and 20th century British Literature — “the infamous ‘dead white men’ of European arts and letters.” He gets lots of pushback on what he chooses to write about. Bates showed no concerns when I profiled Harry Lord‚ class of 1908‚ who became Captain of the Boston Red Sox and Chicago White Sox. Next‚ I profiled Nathan Pulsifer‚ class of 1899‚ who belted the first Garcelon homer (into the ditch) and became Jack Kerouac’s doctor. I also profiled Frank Keaney‚ a rare Catholic in the class of 1912‚ inducted into the Basketball Hall of Fame after coaching at the University of Rhode Island‚ where as a chemistry professor he invented “Keaney Blue‚” the school’s colors. But now as I read the director’s email response‚ and see his pronouns (he‚ him‚ his) beside his signature‚ I suddenly feel defeated. At age 64‚ without pronouns‚ from the class of 1981‚ I am not trusted anymore. Despite all Bates’ crowing about the value of a liberal arts education‚ and all the hoopla about grads being lifetime learners‚ Bates thinks writing about T.S. Bruce is too “deceptively complex” for me. Is Bates afraid I’ll say something racist and bring shame to the college? Does my age‚ race or both make me liable to DEI blundering and insensitivity? Is writing for an elitist institution any different than writing for RING Magazine‚ the Bible of Boxing‚ as I once did? My heart pushes me to write about T.S. Bruce. An elite debater‚ he suffered racism in Kennebunkport as a Bates undergrad‚ when he was refused service in the Parker House dining room after a southern guest protested. As a senior‚ he wrote a letter to the Boston Transcript decrying the incident. The letter went viral 1897-style — republished in newspapers as far away as Hawaii. (READ MORE: The Anti-Woke Collegiate Counterrevolution Is Just Beginning) As a Newton Seminary student in 1901‚ Bruce won a lawsuit after a Harvard Square barber refused to shave him. The barber‚ claiming he was too busy‚ was fined $20. Bates‚ it seems‚ had prepared him to challenge injustice. A nationally recognized minister‚ Bruce lectured across the continent — appearing with Booker T. Washington in the gritty‚ mill city of his alma mater. Oh‚ how Bruce loved tiny Bates in Lewiston‚ Maine‚ founded in 1855 by Freewill Baptists and open to women and men of any race. After graduating in a class of 79‚ he returned almost every year. Bruce’s name appeared often in the Alumni Notes of the Bates Student. The love ran in his family. His older brother N.C. Bruce‚ class of 1894‚ named his first-born son Bates Shaw Bruce‚ after his alma mater and the college he then taught at. A battering ram right guard (6’1”‚ 178 lbs)‚ he carried the ball on pummeling runs against rivals Bowdoin‚ Colby and Maine. With left guard William Allen Saunders (5’10”‚ 173 lbs)‚ who became a professor at historically Black Storer College in Harpers Ferry‚ he plowed holes for Pulsifer‚ the future doctor‚ and quarterback Royce Purinton‚ the future Bates AD who died after volunteering in World War I. The foursome led Bates to an undefeated 1897 season — defeating Bowdoin for the first time. In my mind’s eye‚ I dreamt that Bates might one day erect a statue of the four teammates‚ two Blacks‚ and two Whites — modeled after one at Fenway Park with Ted Williams‚ Dom DiMaggio‚ Johnny Pesky‚ and Bobby Doerr. Bruce died in 1913‚ at age 42. His flame‚ which burned so bright‚ extinguished suddenly — weeks after his final reunion. Time‚ alas‚ has forgotten him. So has Bates‚ despite his lifetime of ardor and devotion‚ embodying the school motto Amore ac Studio. No matter his travels‚ he always returned (“But there’s Bruce‚ just as big a bunch of oratory as ever. I suppose! Say but I wish we had a phonograph record of some of his old literary society declamations and debates!”) He once scored 30 points in a track meet with 3 firsts‚ 3 seconds and a third‚ breaking the college record in the hammer throw. “Who else ya got?” I doubled down on Bruce. I’d work with faculty and students. I’d write with no guarantees — even though I had a solid track record of publication using the “Muldoon treatment.” In a spirit of sympathy‚ the director (who is White) shared that he had wanted to profile Saunders. He reached out to a Black history professor to “help tell the story.” He hoped “to have a partner to tell the story but never heard back‚ which was discouraging.” Bruce’s obituary reads: “His work among the colored people was recognized as being second only to Booker T. Washington.” Maybe I do need help with that historical context. Maybe I don’t have a nuanced understanding of what that means. I never walked in Bruce’s shoes. I never led Bates to victories in football‚ never scored a point in track — let alone 30. Nor was I ever denied service in a restaurant or barber shop. But we share at least one bond: Bates. Tyler Austin Harper‚ the Black Bates professor‚ writes: “When I was in graduate school‚ I was advised to study the Black French poet Aimé Césaire rather than Lord Byron‚ the Black science fiction writer Samuel R. Delany rather than H.G. Wells‚ and the Black psychiatrist Frantz Fanon rather than Freud… These Black authors are all fascinating‚ but they had nothing to do with my chosen specialization.”  Like Professor Harper‚ I needed to follow my own heart. “Who else ya got?” To be honest‚ I got Thomas Seth Bruce‚ class of 1898. Bruce is my guy. The world needs to hear his story. And I want to tell it. Even if I need help. Robert Muldoon is a 1981 Bates graduate. He has been published in Newsweek‚ the Boston Globe‚ the Hartford Courant‚ Waterbury Observer‚ and Birdwatcher’s Digest. He would like to dedicate this article in memory of Bates classmates Jim Robertson ’82 and Kate Hickson ’81. Contact him at muldoonra@gmail.com.The post Can a White Alum Write About a Black Alum at a Liberal Arts College? first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post Can a White Alum Write About a Black Alum at a Liberal Arts College? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

I should be congratulated on my courage. I’ve managed to finish watching Jill Biden’s Christmas video without throwing up‚ and that’s much more than can be said for the average viewer. “Magic‚ wonder‚ and joy” is her motto. Perfect for an amusement park.  READ MORE from Itxu Díaz: The Biden Case: Who Is the Thief and Who Is the Liar? I have some objections. Christmas is not magic. In fact‚ it is the opposite of magic. Magic is incompatible with faith. Christmas is salvation through faith‚ the birth of the Savior. Every child raised in the Christian West has been aware of as much for many centuries‚ except for those who have grown up in the Biden household‚ where they are too busy promoting abortionist policies to go to Mass‚ read Holy Scripture‚ and engage in other practices discouraged by the Catechism of Good Wokism‚ where they might have learned that Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem and not in a woke circus. As far as wonder goes‚ there are only two wonderous things about Christmas: that almighty God was incarnated in a little Child‚ and that the Biden White House Christmas video manages to be so creepy without including explicit images of murder. A bit of magic‚ wonder‚ and joy brought to you by the talented tappers of Dorrance Dance‚ performing their playful interpretation of The Nutcracker Suite. Enjoy! pic.twitter.com/qXtCm4t37o — Jill Biden (@FLOTUS) December 13‚ 2023 Joy‚ the third concept in her motto‚ is fine. But why? I’m joyful‚ too‚ after three bottles of wine‚ and that doesn’t necessarily mean “Christmas.” Joy for joy’s sake is as effective as a Christmas concept as Lennon’s Imagine is in achieving world peace. For the rest of it‚ you can always tell when the Bidens have set out to do a version of The Nutcracker because there’s no doubt you’re watching a version‚ but there’s no way of knowing it’s of The Nutcracker. By the way: Does anyone know why there’s a guy with a giant pink cabbage on his head? It’s useless to wonder; the whole anti-Christmas spot is just another crude attempt to divide society on the eve of the great Christian celebration of family‚ love‚ and charity. The whole idea of the video‚ of course‚ is not Christmas‚ or congratulating Americans on Christmas‚ or anything like that. The idea of the video is to attack Christmas and tradition‚ omit America’s Christian tradition (and mock it)‚ and‚ in the process‚ impart woke doctrine. Of course‚ it stars a black woman (was there any other choice?) who seems to have had a fight with her dentist‚ and the video exudes multiculturalism‚ but it’s funny that the first two white people to appear are the guy with the cabbage on his head and another one who wanders around dressed as a chicken — I think — or maybe something more ridiculous‚ maybe a pig or a cow. (READ MORE: ’Tis the Season for Streaming Christmas Movies) It is true that they are not to blame for being there — because no one in the White House should have called them for this in the first place — but all dancers display unhealthy levels of insanity‚ something that is incompatible with the childlike spirit of children to which Jill Biden claims to want to appeal. Children are the sanest beings in the world‚ and what scares them most‚ by far‚ are crazy people; this is one of the reasons why‚ no matter how much Biden’s wife insists‚ most minors will continue to forgo visiting the White House as long as Joe is on the loose.  There is a dancer who seems to want to connect with children by putting on a wonder face‚ and the truth is that she lacks only a straitjacket. There is a girl dressed in an obviously masculine suit‚ while there is a male dancer dressed as if he were Celia Cruz in the music video of La negra tiene tumbao. If it weren’t for the distant little bell that tinkles every so often‚ the music would be perfect for a fairy tale‚ an episode of Daffy Duck‚ or a commercial for sanitary towels‚ but there’s nothing Christmasy about it. Also‚ with beautiful traditional old American carols heard around the world‚ it’s amazing that the Bidens need to butcher The Nutcracker when poor Tchaikovsky can’t even defend himself. Fortunately‚ the final bars of the spot show the big White House Christmas tree lit up with pretty lights in the background‚ and they have not given into the temptation of hanging skeletons‚ skulls‚ severed hands‚ or portraits of Herod on it‚ so we should probably even be grateful for the Bidens’ Christian sensibility. But‚ if you ask me‚ the absence of Hunter Biden dancing with a cabbage on his head is an unforgivable oversight. Translated by Joel Dalmau.The post White House Anti-Christmas Video Has Side Effects first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post White House Anti-Christmas Video Has Side Effects appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. joined Brian Kilmeade on the Brian Kilmeade Show last week for a lively discussion about the trajectory of Republican conservatism past and present.  The two discuss Tyrrell’s recent memoir: How Do We Get Out of Here?: Half a Century of Laughter and Mayhem at The American Spectator―From Bobby Kennedy to Donald J. Trump‚ and comment on the past and present of conservative Republicanism. They consider past presidents‚ including Ronald Reagan‚ Richard Nixon‚ and Donald Trump‚ and the diverse legacies they left behind. Finally‚ they discuss Trump’s surprisingly good poll numbers and his prospects in the 2024 presidential election. (READ MORE: The Happy and Thoughtful Memoirs of R. Emmett Tyrrell‚ Jr.) To listen to the interview‚ jump to 1:15:00. The post INTERVIEW: Are Trump’s Poll Numbers Really So Surprising? first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post INTERVIEW: Are Trump’s Poll Numbers Really So Surprising? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

You’ve probably heard of the war on Christmas — you know‚ the decades-long attempt by our secular overlords to make Christmas about all the shiny toys under the tree that will inevitably break by the end of the week. Having achieved a fair amount of success in that department‚ the same secular liberals are now seeking to force Chick-fil-A‚ America’s favorite Christian fast-food joint‚ to comply with their desire for waffle fries and fried chicken on Sundays. This week‚ New York state Rep. Tony Simone introduced Bill A08336‚ which would require any restaurant serving travelers at transportation facilities and state-run rest areas to remain open all seven days of the week. Why? Convenience. (READ MORE: Shane Dawson and Ryland Adams’ Use of Surrogacy Showcases the Practice’s Grotesqueness) “When it comes to travel areas‚ like rest stops‚ bus stations‚ and airports‚ people are often traveling on Sundays‚ and so it doesn’t make any sense for one of the few restaurants available at these locations to be closed on one of the busiest travel days of the week‚” a spokesperson for Simone told Business Insider. The argument seems to be that as New York state has been gracious enough to grant nine Chick-fil-A restaurants a presence in the state’s Thruway rest stops; therefore‚ they should return the favor by remaining open on Sundays — something the restaurant’s founder‚ S. Truett Cathy‚ decided to stop doing back in the late 1940s. “To serve New Yorkers and travelers‚ things should be open seven days a week‚ including Chick-fil-A‚ and if they can’t they shouldn’t be in our rest stops. There should be options for people to eat and drink and not just one spot‚” Simone told the New York Post. “It simply makes no sense for any provider of food services in these busy travel plazas to be closed on Sundays.” (READ MORE: China’s Cultural Revolution: Has Its Violence Come to America?) If the bill is passed and Chick-fil-A sues New York for religious discrimination‚ a court case should be a walk in the park. A statement on the company’s website reads: “Having worked seven days a week in restaurants open 24 hours‚ Truett saw the importance of closing on Sundays so that he and his employees could set aside one day to rest or worship if they choose‚ a practice we uphold today.” The company’s decision to abide by the divine order to refrain from servile labor on the Sabbath is clearly at issue here — and‚ according to the New York Post‚ it may not be the only Christian practice that annoys Simone about the restaurant. The Left attacked the company back in 2012 for donating millions of dollars to anti-LGBTQ organizations‚ including the Fellowship of Christian Athletes — and its response was to ignore them (something the Left never likes). When the Post asked Simone if the company’s history of supporting anti-woke organizations was a motivation‚ the assemblyman replied: “Chick-fil-A has had a terrible record on LGBT rights. I’m not going to not say that clearly.” (READ MORE: Indi Gregory: Third Infant to Die at Hands of UK Government) In one sense‚ a single bill being introduced (not yet passed) to force a fast-food chain to keep nine of its thousands of restaurants open on Sunday might be a petty thing to get riled up about. But the problem is that the bill attacks a principle: the Christian principle that Christian business owners should be able to close their stores on Sundays whether or not it’s convenient for potential customers. Simone’s petty bill may be another skirmish in the Left’s war to de-Christianize the U.S.‚ but that doesn’t mean it’s not important. To claim victory in a war‚ you have to win both the major battles and the skirmishes.The post New York Launches War on Chick-fil-A first appeared on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.The post New York Launches War on Chick-fil-A appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.