It all began when some dork wrote a letter to the Herald claiming that he thought rapists should pay the price for their crimes but then started accusing “immodestly” dressed women for courting disaster. My Mary wrote in and discussed reality with the jerk, to which he replied with an even more bizarre letter. So I wrote. I didn’t think they would publish it since it was a bit mischevious, so I posted it here, but eventually they contacted me about publishing it. They wanted one sentence at the very end excised and added that it made the letter too long anyway. I agreed to that but they snipped more. Bastards.

So here is the  abridged results, with the usual Dr. Jim’s illustrated meta-commentary and the snipped bits restored in red.

In his letter of March 31, Michael Breukelman responds to Mary Fredborg’s comments of March 23. He makes even less sense here than in his original letter (March 13) that claimed that modest dress may save some women from rape.

He writes that, contra Fredborg, he was “focusing on the eyes, not lustful thoughts.” It is the mind that interprets what the eyes see and Breukelman’s expression, “struggle with the eyes,” can only be a metaphor for a struggle with inappropriate thoughts. That he can’t “see” this suggests that he has lost a round in the struggle with his own unclear thoughts. See also his comment … Continue reading

Certainly, it is wise for parents to teach their own children how to dress appropriately, and even more importantly, how to treat the opposite sex with respect. It is quite another thing to say that just dressing modestly enough will protect you from being raped. If only that were so! Women in full body coverings, such as the burqa, can still be and have been raped.

Secondly, studies have shown that male rapists of women are likely to think little of women, to believe they caused their own rape, and to have little preference between forced and unforced sex. Motives for rape vary among perpetrators, and there are usually multiple motives involved, and can include desire for power over another individual, wishing to humiliate the person, and so on.

Horray for Mary!

Well the bozo wrote back a few days ago. Here it is.

Re: Mary Fredborg’s March 23 letter, “Modest dress won’t protect women from assault.”
First of all, I was focusing on the eyes, not lustful thoughts. What does a man see? It’s what a man sees that can start causing problems. Men struggle with their eyes. Don’t ever underestimate the power of little things (in Fredborg’s words, involuntary lustful thoughts). They can go a long way in causing problems. I’m talking visual foreplay which may ignite passions and … Continue reading

A convicted rapist will not go to jail because a Manitoba judge says the victim sent signals that “sex was in the air” through her suggestive attire and flirtatious conduct on the night of the attack.

Kenneth Rhodes was given a two-year conditional sentence last week which allows him to remain free in the community, in a decision likely to trigger strong debate. The Crown wanted at least three years behind bars.

Queen’s Bench Justice Robert Dewar called Rhodes a “clumsy Don Juan” who may have misunderstood what the victim wanted when he forced intercourse along a darkened highway outside Thompson in 2006.

…

“This is a different case than one where there is no perceived invitation,” said Dewar. “This is a case of misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour.”

Dewar said he didn’t want to be seen as blaming the victim but that all of the factors surrounding the case must be viewed to assess “moral blameworthiness.”

“I’m sure whatever signals were sent that sex was in the air … Continue reading

Today the debate which had been running in the readers’ letters page for the past little while and to which my friend Dan added a “Public Professor” column last Saturday, continued.

First, a rather sensible Stephen McGlenn went after Big Oil and defended the IPCC’s integrity from attacks by two previous letter writers. An excerpt:

The disappointingly inadequate and unsupported arguments they proclaim seem to be more informed by an anti-intellectual bias and ingrained distrust of climate scientists. Where does that stem from, may I ask? How do they explain the support of the IPCC from institutions like NASA, the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, the Canadian Geophysical Union, the Canadian Association of Physicists, the Canadian Society of Soil Science, the Canadian Society of Zoologists; need I go on? Please don’t disappoint me with wild and worn-out conspiracy theories of research funding schemes and world government grabs for power. Need I remind them the IPCC is a voluntary organization with only 10 paid staff persons?

But on the same page, this bit of pure GENIUS! (printed in its entirety)

Even if CO2 can be linked to climate change as Mr. Sandilands wants us to believe (Letter to the Editor, Herald, Feb. 2), worldwide temperature records don’t go back to the last ice age. Many scientists actually believe that the Earth was warmer then than now.
OK, let’s assume the connection is proven. How many … Continue reading

Reading it is a guilty pleasure,  but as I was telling my lovely Mary (Dr. Jim’s current Better Brain and future Mrs. Dr. Jim) just this morning, it is reassuring to discover just how many dweebs there are in the world. Makes one feel better about oneself, and on a Monday morning, that’s a good thing.

Anyway, it is a perfectly anonymous collection of newpapery tweet-like submissions by readers saying what or who they like or dislike. Most of the “Toasts” go to people who have returned wallets, shovelled neighbour’s sidewalks and the like. Roasts go to bad drivers, lousy restaurants, and various anonymous persons with disgusting habits. Almost all of the roasts feature a shocking lack of detail which makes the complaint pointless. The writer’s name is also withheld, so really, its sort of stupid, just a lot of venting without any accountability or even direction to the spew. But I suppose it makes some people feel good, not to mention empowered behind their wall of anonymity.

Here is a roast from this morning … Continue reading

I have never understood why those who don’t believe in God make such a fuss about those who do. I think it is better to believe there is a God, and when I die, find out there isn’t, than it is to die and find out there is.

The absurdity of Pascal’s wager aside, let’s see if we can enlighten the writer. I might be wrong but let’s suppose the writer is Christian.

First of all, I would ask why do Christian make such a big deal of those who aren’t? Millions upon millions of dollars are spent annually on “missions” to convert us to one denomination or another (and Christians from one denomination to another). Why is there is obsession and why should non-believers be expected to NOT talk and be concerned about it? Countless societies around the world have been raped by European expansion and colonialism, but in the wake of the money-land-power grubbers came the church to complete the “civilizing” process (and to make the Natives like it) by turning them into obedient Christians.

Could it be that many atheists are deeply concerned with what believers believe and do because a darn good number of believers are just plain annoying? How often are people are roused from their dinner tables, couches, beds, or bathrooms to go open their doors to have their beliefs corrected? Yes, the … Continue reading

The Calgary Herald published the solution this morning in the letters, nay, epistles, to the editor section. With a little work, it could work. Or not. The author, a guy with the intials W. E., writes:

Re: “Health crisis enrages Tory MD,” Nov. 18.

The dedicated men and women working in the medical field are doing their best amid a crisis. What needs to be said is that it’s not the government’s mandate to look after the sick. It is the church of Jesus Christ. Jesus charged the 12 disciples to “heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. You received without pay, give without pay.” (Matthew 10:8).

This is not to say that we do not need hospitals, doctors, nurses, specialists and emergency facilities. But there is much available through believers who understand what Christianity has to offer. Christianity is not a passive religion.

Christianity is a way to give it the name by which it was first called. God is the source of all supply. Christian Science, for example, shows us there is a way by which the great facts of God’s nature can be demonstrated to man, and that this is the way pointed out by Jesus Christ. The way can do much to relieve the stresses in the health-care system.

So, get the government out of health care. We can’t have them taking jobs away from Christians!  What … Continue reading

A certain Pat Bethelot complained in the Herald that the Family Guy episode in which Brian the dog was the object of Meg Griffin’s raging hormones was aired as his/her family was sitting down to dinner.

Shaw Cable wouldn’t do anything about it and so the  Canadian Radio-television Telecommunication Commission (Canuck equivalent to the US FCC) is receiving a formal complaint. Bethelot blames the move from a late night slot for the show to dinner time to apathy and is promising changes. He is running for mayor and says:

“Just for references, it’s the same as the do-nothing attitude that has allowed all or most governments to behave the way they do. I am totally disgusted and can assure you that politics are about to change.

I can assure you our municipal election coming up in 2010 will be one of the most interesting elections this city or province has ever seen.”

To which I replied in a letter published yesterday:

It was was a disheartening start to a glorious morning to realize that there were people in this fair town who need an introduction to the Theory of Cartoons. Alas, Pat Bethelot’s letter (Aug. 21) condemning the outrageous animated TV series, The Family Guy, and announcing his plan to run for mayor was there in black and white.

Cartoons and puppetry often rely on characters that fuse animal and human traits which results in strange interrelationships. TV audiences have long been accustomed to these, including some with … Continue reading

Some guy doing something macho. Apparently.

Although in general I agree with the bleeding heart liberals about a lot of things, I do belong to P.E.T.A. Yes, I am one of those People who Eat Tasty Animals and I like to go fishing. Still, I think the Stampede is pretty awful. OK, so I’m a hypocrite. But I do think there is a difference between torturing intelligent, sentient animals, and those that a little further down on the brain scale. How many of us won’t swat a fly?

Every year at the Stampede animals die needlessly (four this year). Others are flipped on their back by some big brutes and tied up, while some other guys who think Hummers and Axe body spray are sexy™ torment poor horses, bulls, or large goats by seeing who can sit on them the longest. And they play the worst god awful country music ever. I will, however, listen to justifications for it all and I respect that there are frequent reviews of safety for the critters. But I did read of one justification yesterday morning that BENT ME THE HELL OUT OF SHAPE. You guessed it, it was religious.

This is NOT Dr. Jim

I will admit a … Continue reading

 

Bill 44 and the evil homosexual agenda were the topics of an incredibly STUPID letter by Geoffrey Capp almost a month ago in the Lethbridge Herald. The bill revises Alberta’s human rights code to include parents pulling their kids from school classes dealing with topic contrary to parent’s religious sensibilities, like anything to do with sex, sexuality, or religion. Needless to say, the Conservative bill pleased Capp to no end. I fired off a response and forgot to post it here, so here it is a little late with some relevant new epistolary and commentarial developments. Capp was the local candidate for the Christian Heritage Party in the last election. He didn’t win.
Y’know, I’m starting to think that all the shit raised by the Religious Right about sex is kind of a surrogate pornography for them. They get to study and denounce all this smut and debauchery and get their jollies. Anyway, just a theory…

First, Capp’s original letter from June 11.

Parents deserve right to shield kids from liberal curriculum

So long as our schools are going to teach on moral issues and do so using only what is considered “politically correct,” parents must have the right to exclude their children from segments of the school curriculum.

I don’t mind the schools teaching the children how to do mathematics, spell, write, read, understand geography, know the basic history of the world, learn physics, chemistry and biology, learn about nutrition and the vital body functions, etc. But if the schools … Continue reading