The Market Ticker
Commentary on The Capital Markets- Category [Social Issues]

Oh boy...

Rachel Dolezal, the former head of the Spokane chapter of the NAACP, sued Howard University after she received her graduate degree there, claiming the historically black college had discriminated against her because she was white.

But I thought she said she was black?

Ah, I see: She's whatever gives her advantage at any given point in time!

Here's my question: Where are the charges for filing what facially appear to be false "hate crime" reports with the authorities?

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

This ought to get good....

Imgur, a San Francisco based image hosting service, recently got embroiled in a spat with the subreddit /r/fatpeoplehate/. The subreddit mocks and dissects America’s obesity epidemic through user posted content. The spat involved /r/fatpeoplehate/’s images being taken down by the image service. In response, FPH ridiculed the amount of obese individuals staffed by Imgur. After a day of this spat, FPH was taken down by Reddit staff.

So running a lampoon on the ridiculous level of obesity in America is, well, politically incorrect to the degree that it draws enough fire to get shut down.

Let's not forget that "fat shaming" is the new "N" word, never mind that I've never met a fat person that didn't shove every bit of what made them fat down their pie hole voluntarily.  Oh sure, we can argue over obsessions, whether it's a disease, or whatever -- but the fact remains that since forced-gorging in the literal sense doesn't happen in America you still passed every bit of that material through your lips of your own volition.

And let's also not forget that Pao, the new CEO of Reddit, tried to play the SJW extortion game at her former employer through claiming that they practiced "discrimination" against her based on gender, lost her case, and now is trying to play the game again with threats related to her decision (or not) to appeal -- despite the fact that the court found that she intentionally drove up the cost of litigation for the defendant and awarded them fees and costs related to that act, something that almost-never happens in civil litigation.

Reddit ought to pay attention to the fact that their users tend to be a fickle bunch and that the firm has nothing of value at all without them.  If Reddit is turning into a "social justice warrior" warfighting machine, and it sure looks like it might be, they could find themselves without any warriors in short order.

It couldn't happen to a nicer CEO.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Give me a break.

DENVER –  Under pressure from a congressman, the Colorado school that stopped a valedictorian from delivering a commencement speech in which he planned to come out as gay has asked outside lawyers to review what happened.

Denver lawyer Barry Arrington, who is representing Twin Peaks Charter Academy board in Longmont, said in a letter to Democratic U.S. Rep. Jared Polis that the school is hiring a law firm to look into the case. Polis had called for an independent investigation after school officials initially announced their probe would be internal and bristled at suggestions they had violated the rights of 18-year-old Evan Young because of his sexual orientation.

If you're tapped to speak as valedictorian the purpose of your speech is about achievement and forward thinking for your class.  It's not about you.

Oh sure, anecdotes of various sorts that are related to you certainly become part of the material.  That's what a motivational speech is, and that's the general tone of such an address.

But to take such an event and turn it into a "ceremony" about your sexual orientation is an outrage.

This only makes the news because this guy is gay.  If someone who was valedictorian spent his (or her!) address making it all about his or her boy/girlfriend as a heterosexual individual that person would have also had their speech quashed and nobody would have thought a thing about it.

I don't care whether you're gay, straight or can't figure it out.  That's between you and whoever you choose to sleep with.  But this garbage about turning one's sexuality into a public parade is an outrageous display of hedonism at other people's expense and were the person doing it not "transgendered", "gay" or whatever the favored thing of the day was everyone would turn up their nose and erect the middle finger.

Well folks, the test of whether you're a bigot or not is whether you will erect that finger equally toward all who wish to pervert an event that is supposed to be about everyone in attendance and a celebration of their achievement as a group into a hedonistic and self-congratulatory exercise in passing themselves around the crowd for a social reach-around.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Vanity Fair has now published "risque" photos of Bruce -cum- Caitlyn Jenner in their online version, and soon in print, magazine.

There have been myriad claims in the media that this somehow is heroic and brave.


Every adult has the right to decide that they disagree with how God (or Darwin, if you prefer) made them; specifically, whether they should have been made with male bits or female bits.  But as arithmetic "just is", your genetic make-up "just is" and no amount of cosmetic surgery can or will change it.

I do not care one bit how much of your own money you wish to expend making yourself look appealing to you.

But you have no right to force me, directly or through some sort of insane "insurance" scam that is nothing more than socialist cost-spreading, to spend a plugged nickel on such an endeavor just as you don't have the right to force me to pay for your haircut or pedicure.  All of these are fundamentally about appearance, not fact, and are none of anyone else's damn business (or responsibility.)

In short there is nothing whatsoever that is heroic or brave about cosmetic changes one applies to their body to make it more-beautiful or more-suitable as they define it irrespective of what it is.


If you want to talk heroism or bravery I'll give you a few examples. How about the guy who gets posted for a tour in Afghanistan and while there his unit is assigned to go rout out some Taliban dudes at a location they're given by an informant.  There's a problem though; the informant is a double agent and when they go the location has been booby-trapped.  He watches several of the soldiers with him die right there; there are no Taliban at that location.  That's bravery; he went into harm's way knowing damn well that this might happen, he went anyway risking his life, and several others with him paid that price.

You want to know what counts as heroic?  The guy who has that sort of thing happen and then drags one of his buddies out of the ensuing line of fire despite being shot at, whether he succeeds in saving his friend's life or not.  That is heroic.

There are literally thousands of men and women who have risked their life in this fashion right here, right now, today in this country.  Some of them are missing arms, legs, or have suffered grievous wounds from which they will never fully recover.  Some of them tried to pull their buddy to safety and failed, watching him die in front of them at the hands of an enemy that hates us.  Some have severe, permanent psychological damage done to them by this experience and more than a few can't handle being the guy who lived while their friends died and kill themselves in the ensuing years.

I know there are plenty of people out there who want to argue over whether the wars we've been in are moral, ethical, or just flat-out wrong.  That's a good debate to have but we have a civilian-controlled military, not a junta.  That means we are responsible for the wars that our nation engages in, each and every one of us of voting age.  If you judge those wars to be unethical, immoral or just flat-out wrong on some other basis you are the coward because you would not put your life on the line to stop what you perceive as an unjust war.

Heroism doesn't stop with our military men and women, although it's quite easy to find real heroes among them.  They're found in the civilian world too.  The person who runs into a burning building to save a child may be stupid, but he's also a hero -- especially if he or she succeeds.  The guy who pulls the man who slipped and fell onto the subway tracks out of the way of an oncoming train earns both hero and brave at the same time, especially if he has to get in front of the train to do it.  The man who sees an unknown woman being assaulted by a couple of thugs and runs them off, with or without a weapon in her defense, is also among those who are entitled to be called brave.  Even the "mundane" act of smashing out a car window to save a baby buckled into a carseat, or a dog trapped in the blazing summertime sun in a parking lot counts far more than someone playing "cut my pecker off and plaster on some fake***** so I'll be happy."  These events happen all the time and they have in common the fact that they're undertaken in service of others and at risk to oneself.

Where did we lose our collective minds in this country to a degree sufficient to call someone who is unhappy a hero because they took their quite-considerable wealth and spent it on trying to be happier?  For that matter, how about all of those who are similarly unhappy and force other people to spend their money on the same thing (Manning anyone?)

When the history books are finally closed on this nation I suspect one of the low points cited will be exactly this -- the conflation of real heroism and bravery in the service of others, whether found in rescuing the dog in the car or the dude who just stepped on a landmine and had his legs blown off, with hedonism in the service of self.

View this entry with comments (registration required to post)

Main Navigation
MUST-READ Selection:
If You're Older Than 40 And Reading This...

Full-Text Search & Archives
Archive Access
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.


The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.