More Women Shirk Marriage

♠
For what experts say is probably the first time, more American women are living without a husband than with one, according to a New York Times analysis of census results.

In 2005, 51 percent of women said they were living without a spouse, up from 35 percent in 1950 and 49 percent in 2000.

...“This is yet another of the inexorable signs that there is no going back to a world where we can assume that marriage is the main institution that organizes people’s lives,” said Prof. Stephanie Coontz, director of public education for the Council on Contemporary Families, a nonprofit research group. “Most of these women will marry, or have married. But on average, Americans now spend half their adult lives outside marriage.”

-- Sam Roberts for The New York Times

Where is the love, people? Cats cannot be all that satisfying.

xXx

More Women Shirk Marriage

♠
For what experts say is probably the first time, more American women are living without a husband than with one, according to a New York Times analysis of census results.

In 2005, 51 percent of women said they were living without a spouse, up from 35 percent in 1950 and 49 percent in 2000.

...“This is yet another of the inexorable signs that there is no going back to a world where we can assume that marriage is the main institution that organizes people’s lives,” said Prof. Stephanie Coontz, director of public education for the Council on Contemporary Families, a nonprofit research group. “Most of these women will marry, or have married. But on average, Americans now spend half their adult lives outside marriage.”

-- Sam Roberts for The New York Times

Where is the love, people? Cats cannot be all that satisfying.

xXx

Hef: Octogenarian Playboy

♠
An LJer posted at the celebrity community some provocative material on Playboy Hugh Hefner that I have to get down on this record.

( WARNING: Porn-ish post )

xXx

Hef: Octogenarian Playboy

♠
An LJer posted at the celebrity community some provocative material on Playboy Hugh Hefner that I have to get down on this record.

( WARNING: Porn-ish post )

xXx

YouTube Elvis

♠
Listening to SIRIUS's All-Elvis radio station, I heard them promoting a special YouTube channel for Elvis: The official YouTube channel for Graceland and Elvis Presley Enterprises!

YouTube Elvis

♠
Listening to SIRIUS's All-Elvis radio station, I heard them promoting a special YouTube channel for Elvis: The official YouTube channel for Graceland and Elvis Presley Enterprises!

Do You Got g?

♠
Leave it to Charles Murray to raise the ugly truth that the problem with underachieving children may be that they are simply dumb. This is a long-term schtick of his. At least he is not focusing on the racial difference in intelligence now. However, it is easy to be unfair to the man since his position really is more nuanced than smug indifference. But I could not help chuckling when I came across his latest efforts at explaining the limits of education policy:

Today's simple truth: Half of all children are below average in intelligence. We do not live in Lake Wobegon.

Our ability to improve the academic accomplishment of students in the lower half of the distribution of intelligence is severely limited. It is a matter of ceilings. Suppose a girl in the 99th percentile of intelligence, corresponding to an IQ of 135, is getting a C in English. She is underachieving, and someone who sets out to raise her performance might be able to get a spectacular result. Now suppose the boy sitting behind her is getting a D, but his IQ is a bit below 100, at the 49th percentile.

We can hope to raise his grade. But teaching him more vocabulary words or drilling him on the parts of speech will not open up new vistas for him. It is not within his power to learn to follow an exposition written beyond a limited level of complexity, any more than it is within my power to follow a proof in the American Journal of Mathematics. In both cases, the problem is not that we have not been taught enough, but that we are not smart enough.

Mr. Murray is sensitive to more substantive issues of fairness, and he certainly is not saying that lesser minds should just eat cake, but one does wonder what is his approach to the suggested issues of fairness and opportunity in a competitive society in the post-industrial Information Age. Or is he saying (implicitly) that they have to just eat cake.


(Source: Charles Murray for The Wall Street Journal)

xXx

Do You Got g?

♠
Leave it to Charles Murray to raise the ugly truth that the problem with underachieving children may be that they are simply dumb. This is a long-term schtick of his. At least he is not focusing on the racial difference in intelligence now. However, it is easy to be unfair to the man since his position really is more nuanced than smug indifference. But I could not help chuckling when I came across his latest efforts at explaining the limits of education policy:

Today's simple truth: Half of all children are below average in intelligence. We do not live in Lake Wobegon.

Our ability to improve the academic accomplishment of students in the lower half of the distribution of intelligence is severely limited. It is a matter of ceilings. Suppose a girl in the 99th percentile of intelligence, corresponding to an IQ of 135, is getting a C in English. She is underachieving, and someone who sets out to raise her performance might be able to get a spectacular result. Now suppose the boy sitting behind her is getting a D, but his IQ is a bit below 100, at the 49th percentile.

We can hope to raise his grade. But teaching him more vocabulary words or drilling him on the parts of speech will not open up new vistas for him. It is not within his power to learn to follow an exposition written beyond a limited level of complexity, any more than it is within my power to follow a proof in the American Journal of Mathematics. In both cases, the problem is not that we have not been taught enough, but that we are not smart enough.

Mr. Murray is sensitive to more substantive issues of fairness, and he certainly is not saying that lesser minds should just eat cake, but one does wonder what is his approach to the suggested issues of fairness and opportunity in a competitive society in the post-industrial Information Age. Or is he saying (implicitly) that they have to just eat cake.


(Source: Charles Murray for The Wall Street Journal)

xXx

Another French Attempt to Surrender

♠
Ah, today is another great day for mocking the French and the Francophiles. Though, it is not like we have a shortage of such days.

In 1956, the French went to the Brits and sought to merge with them:

At the time of the proposal, France was in economic difficulties and faced the escalating Suez crisis. Britain had been a staunch French ally during the two world wars.

When Mr Mollet's request for a union failed, he quickly responded with another plan - that France be allowed to join the British commonwealth - which was said to have been met more warmly by Sir Anthony.

... However, this proposal was also eventually rejected and, a year later, France signed the Treaty of Rome with Germany and the other founding nations of the European common market.

Today, even the French are expressing surprise over this report, and this is not something in the history books. They are now studying how to respond to this report, heh.

xXx

Another French Attempt to Surrender

♠
Ah, today is another great day for mocking the French and the Francophiles. Though, it is not like we have a shortage of such days.

In 1956, the French went to the Brits and sought to merge with them:

At the time of the proposal, France was in economic difficulties and faced the escalating Suez crisis. Britain had been a staunch French ally during the two world wars.

When Mr Mollet's request for a union failed, he quickly responded with another plan - that France be allowed to join the British commonwealth - which was said to have been met more warmly by Sir Anthony.

... However, this proposal was also eventually rejected and, a year later, France signed the Treaty of Rome with Germany and the other founding nations of the European common market.

Today, even the French are expressing surprise over this report, and this is not something in the history books. They are now studying how to respond to this report, heh.

xXx