Quoting brucds: This is an awful lot of "Jane Galt" for one week. I pass.

By the way, how about bringing Spencer Ackerman back for an Iraq bakeoff with, say, the dreaded Eli ? Or maybe the egregious Frum would be more fun, since Eli and Spencer genuinely like each other.

The last I heard Spackerman and Eli weren't exactly pals anymore. If it could be somehow arranged, however, I'd be pretty pleased, as well.

What's that count now, ohcomeon?

when did this website turn into meganmcardle.tv ?

Quoting nikkibong: when did this website turn into meganmcardle.tv ?

LOL...

I really enjoyed this discussion, but doesn't there seem to be a disproportionate number of libertarians on bloggingheads? It'd be great to see Megan or Kerry or Will Wilkinson debate libertarianism on it's merits. Maybe someone can convince an economist in the ilk of Krugman to come on for it. It's easy enough to agree with a libertarian on the amazing utility of free markets in most cases, but as soon as the discussion turns to universal child care or health care, you start to see the ideology trump reality.

I love how Megan dismisses the men's rights complaint that only woman get reproductive rights.
Life is unfair and men should shut up because pregnancy has negative effects on a woman's body and makes them fat. I'll remember that the next time she brings up any perceived injustice .

Two resons for the libertarians on BH.tv: 1) The libertarian portion of the blogosphere has a consistency/tenor that fits well with the BloggingHeads culture. Blogging-tarianism isn't as much of a "movement" (or a "gang") as the right-wing/left-wing blogging worlds are. While everyone carries water for their ideas, internet "cosmotarians" (as opposed to "get your hands off my guns and beans") are less likely to be carrying water for a social group--which is where discourse gets compromised most powerfully. BloggingHeads goes against the grain of standard political discourse... most people much prefer to group together and agree on how much they hate the other side. Differences get turned into hatreds and vendettas, etc. If you think about the number of people who are actually of the type to sit face to face (hah!) and hold an hour-length discussion without it degenerating into mortal insults, libertarians might be a greater portion than they are of the population at large. Again mostly because they don't have much of a "group" to be a part of, and are on the sidelines of the endless and ageless right-left battle. 2) A lot of Bloggingheads contributors have spread

Believe me, I've had enough of Megan, too. This just goes to my point. Who ever does the booking here seems to know a limited number of females.

Quoting ohcomeon: Who ever does the booking here seems to know a limited number of females.

Good point. Let's see some new faces and hear some different perspectives.

Quoting jmoe: Megan or Kerry or Will Wilkinson debate libertarianism on it's merits.

Yeah, maybe, but not this year. For a female, Megan is not a bad blogger, but I need a time out from Wilkinson-Howley shoving their abhorrent lifestyle down my throat.

Quoting JoeK: Yeah, maybe, but not this year. For a female, Megan is not a bad blogger, but I need a time out from Wilkinson-Howley shoving their abhorrent lifestyle down my throat.

Um, abhorrent lifestyle? What the heck are you talking about?

For a female, Megan is not a bad blogger... Yes, what the hell are you talking about.

I agree. Mcardle seems to be a Libertarian who confuses different consequences with different choices. Whatever asymmetry exists between the experience of men and women in reproduction, the point is that women have unilateral post-coital rights of choice in whether they endure those life changes and obligations that accompany reporduction, and men do not.

Have you seen that Drudge is touting a story about John Edwards, Rielle Hunter, and a hotel room?

No, you wanted women, you complained about a lack of women, and you got women. Now you're unhappy 'cause there's too much of a particular TYPE of woman? Don't libertarian-Atlantic types count? Ain't she a woman?!

Quoting TwinSwords: Um, abhorrent lifestyle? What the heck are you talking about?

Well, I think Yuppie-DINKS lifestyle is immoral. I have a five year old daughter and would be more devastated if she decided to live in a childless, um, domestic partnership than if for example, teenage-pregnancy happened to her.
Admittedly, Kerry’s case is somewhat different because she and her, um, domestic partner, have made a family business out of their abnormal lifestyle.
But still, I am curious; we know what Kerry's, socialist-catholic parents think of beauty pageants, but what does her mother think of Kerry’s intention to stay barren, while pursuing happiness in the company of her, um, domestic partner? Apropos of Simon de Beauvoir, I’ve heard there is a great new book by some British author which paints a bleak picture of de Beauvoir’s partnership with Sartre. It would be interesting to have the author on bloggingheads.tv to learn how well that story went.

Quoting ohcomeon: For a female, Megan is not a bad blogger...

Yes, what the hell are you talking about.

That was tongue in cheek, but I don't think it is wise to ask for gender or ethnic parity at the cost of quality.

Joel, Are you suggesting that some of the people who appear on BHTV have engaged in premarital sex? That's outrageous! Such licentiousness has no place on the Internet. Robert Wright, have you no decency?

Quoting JoeK: Well, I think Yuppie-DINKS lifestyle is immoral.

This is the part I'd like to hear you elaborate on. What's immoral about not having kids and living together?

Quoting JoeK: I have a five year old daughter and would be more devastated if she decided to live in a childless, um, domestic partnership than if for example, teenage-pregnancy happened to her.

I can't imagine why.

Quoting JoeK: Admittedly, Kerry’s case is somewhat different because she and her, um, domestic partner, have made a family business out of their abnormal lifestyle.

You're entitled to your opinion, but make no mistake: Their lifestyle is completely and totally normal.

Quoting JoeK: But still, I am curious; we know what Kerry's, socialist-catholic parents think of beauty pageants, but what does her mother think of Kerry’s intention to stay barren, while pursuing happiness in the company of her, um, domestic partner?

Has she really said she intends to stay childless?

Quoting JoeK: Apropos of Simon de Beauvoir, I’ve heard there is a great new book by some British author which paints a bleak picture of de Beauvoir’s partnership with Sartre. It would be interesting to have the author on bloggingheads.tv to learn how well that story went.

So, you're suggesting that the author might be able to shed some

Oh, bigotry. There you are again.

Quoting JoeK: Admittedly, Kerry’s case is somewhat different because she and her, um, domestic partner, have made a family business out of their abnormal lifestyle.

Abnormal? Do you actually contend that any norms are violated by the cohabitation of two adults in 2008? Really?

That was tongue in cheek, but I don't think it is wise to ask for gender or ethnic parity at the cost of quality. I have never asked for ethnic or gender parity. As I have stated previously - I am not asking for quotas, I am asking for variety. I don't remember the exact figures and am too lazy to research them now but something like 12 divalogs in a row featured no women and only one person of color. And, if you don't believe that it is possible to have good quality divalogs while having more than one in ten include females, you really are a sexist. BTW - While I really enjoy both Will and Kerry, I think that Libertarians are over represented here.

12 or 13 in a row over your sample, yes, but since then, how have the numbers done? Isn't that the point?

Quoting ohcomeon: That was tongue in cheek, but I don't think it is wise to ask for gender or ethnic parity at the cost of quality.

I have never asked for ethnic or gender parity. As I have stated previously - I am not asking for quotas, I am asking for variety. I don't remember the exact figures and am too lazy to research them now but something like 12 divalogs in a row featured no women and only one person of color.

I am of two minds here. In theory, having bloggers of different backgrounds makes things more dynamic, but once a diavlog starts I care only about the quality of ideas and their presentation. In general, I do get annoyed when certain ideas, not demographics, are under represented.

Quoting ohcomeon: And, if you don't believe that it is possible to have good quality divalogs while having more than one in ten include females, you really are a sexist.

I do remember Heather MacDonald kicking Glenn Loury's ass as one of my favorite diavlogs. But how often they come, I wouldn’t know. Proof would be in the pudding, I guess.

Quoting ohcomeon: BTW - While I really enjoy both Will and Kerry, I think that Libertarians are over represented here.

Group of young Libertarians that appear on

Quoting AemJeff: Abnormal? Do you actually contend that any norms are violated by the cohabitation of two adults in 2008? Really?

AemJef et al: My emphasis is on permanent, deliberate childlessness not on unmarried nature of their relationship.

Over the last 12 divalogs 6 have included women - BUT 3 of those have been women have been Megan, that is not variety.

But you wanted women, right? XX-types? Any woman vs. nothing but men is greater variety, right? If what you wanted was variety of some non-just-more-women kind, I don't think you called for it in your tabulation. Now that you've received more women your dissatisfaction seems like buyer's regret. You called for more women, and got them!

Quoting JoeK: AemJef et al:

My emphasis is on permanent, deliberate childlessness not on unmarried nature of their relationship.

Really, the appropriate response to this is "what business is it of yours how they choose to live?" Speaking strictly for myself, I think you have a hell of a lot of nerve insulting them because they don't have kids.

Quoting Exeus99: But you wanted women, right? XX-types? Any woman vs. nothing but men is greater variety, right? If what you wanted was variety of some non-just-more-women kind, I don't think you called for it in your tabulation. Now that you've received more women your dissatisfaction seems like buyer's regret. You called for more women, and got them!

I guess the idea you're advancing is that ohcomeon is allowed to have one, and no more than one, preference. Is that about right? Ohc can have a preference for more women, but then having expressed that preferences, is not allowed to express any other preferences? Does that seem logical to you? Does that seem like how the real world works?

Quoting JoeK: Well, I think Yuppie-DINKS lifestyle is immoral. I have a five year old daughter and would be more devastated if she decided to live in a childless, um, domestic partnership than if for example, teenage-pregnancy happened to her.

Look on the bright side, from my experience she will marry someone like you, a man who doesn't see themselves as a woman hater or a gay basher, who's conscious self image is that of an indignant victim of societal moral decay, and her marriage will turn out to be as glorious and harmonious as I suspect yours is.... or was.

No, I specifically asked for variety. I don't want 10 divalogs in a row with nothing but white men. I also don't want 10 in a row with women, Mexicans, or Jews. I want VARIETY. Using one woman to represent women is tokenism. It's like that one "liberal" on FOX. I will concede that the variety has improved since the stretch about which I was complaining. But just having the same white, upper class, libertarian woman over and over is NOT variety.

i find the term "lipstick" an excessive concession to white male heteronormative expectations of what a "woman" should be; i.e., "lipstick" = normative and "non-lipstick" = many unmentionable terms of opprobrium.

Pretty hard to agree that men have no post coital choice, given the number that chose to walk away and leave the woman to deal with any result.

Quoting razib: i find the term "lipstick" an excessive concession to white male heteronormative expectations of what a "woman" should be; i.e., "lipstick" = normative and "non-lipstick" = many unmentionable terms of opprobrium.

I'm not falling for it again razib.

Quoting razib: i find the term "lipstick" an excessive concession to white male heteronormative expectations of what a "woman" should be; i.e., "lipstick" = normative and "non-lipstick" = many unmentionable terms of opprobrium.

The use of the phrase "lipstick libertarian" is an ironic reference to this article. Also: I'm not sure how you conclude that the implication is that lipstick = normal and non-lipstick = unmentionable terms of opprobrium. Where are those ideas expressed? If anything, the use of the term in The Village Voice is a play on the term "lipstick lesbian."

I feel that way, too. But fighting the more obvious battle has worn me out. I know I will bring horrible wrath down upon myself by saying this, but sometimes arguing with men over just having a seat a the table gets really old. Bob, if you are out there in commentor world, it would do me a lot of good if you would even acknowledge that you are listening and thinking about what I am saying. You don't have to agree - just weigh in.

Ohcomeon can have as many preferences as they like; they expressed a desire for more women 'vloggers by counting (and keeping current with an early post updating the number in each comment section) the number of 'vlogs in a row without any women. I thought that this was a poor way to measure variety--a sentiment with which ohcomeon now seems to agree. "# of 'vlogs in a row without a woman" isn't a very good metric for "variety on the site," as demonstrated with ohcomeon's displeasure with the level of variety despite the large number of recent 'vlogs with women! That Ohcomeon's choice of preference metric was poor is shown by their lack of satisfaction despite that metric's having greatly improved.

Quoting ohcomeon: But just having the same white, upper class, libertarian woman over and over is NOT variety.

Familiarity breeds contempt... Enough Megan for a day or so.
The problem seems to be that we (the viewers and commenters have no perspective on the booking process. If I recall correctly, there have been dozens of threads requesting certain potential vloggers or subject matters for discussion. As grateful as I am for bhtv, I wouldn't mind acknowledgement that our requests might be addressed. Even if that would include a clear statement by bhtv that the process is "take it as it comes." I know that Bob cares about our input, but it might be self-flattery or just unlikely that we can exert much influence. That fact that participants are unpaid (directly), seems to limit the talent pool in my mind.

OK. Here is my first post on this subject. ohcomeon wrote on 07/09/2008 at 05:57 PM
Re: Whose Patriotism?
I just want to point out that in the last 10 episodes there have been 0 female participants. And, with the exception of Mr. Loury, they have all been remarkably pale. But don't worry, I am certain this reflects the demographics of the viewers - or at least explains them. Notice I don't just mention gender, but also skin hue. As I stated during that round of this debate, being a female, I am most naturally concerned that by not having my gender represented questions are being framed in a way that excludes my segment of the population. But I am not just concerned about seeing my world view reflected back at me. I want variety of color, religion, education, social class, political party, nationality, subject matter, and so much more.

You're on solid ground. Is anybody listening in the bhtv inner sanctum?
Which isn't to say that you should cease.

I've got some questions for Megan and Kerry: 1) How do you account for the gender imbalance in college (and education in general) - now rising to 65% female? 2) Does biology play NO role? Surely there are behavioral differences between men & women. 3) Don't men lead more desperate, competitive lives? Aren't they the ones who have to compete for a woman's heart? Doesn't this make the rules of the game different for them than for women - and raise the stakes in, say, writing op-ed pieces, much higher than for women?

I think I met JoeK in bar once. Moved to another stool.

Well, there was that quip Will made in the Joke DV that there was absolutely nothing he wouldn't do. Kids aren't so much of a problem for a traditional libertine, but if you try to mix them with romantic happily ever after goals, things can go off the rails. Just look at Billy-Bob Thornton and Angelina Jolie. I really thought those two would make it

Some people are capable of making constant, repetitive autobiographical references without being unbearably tiresome. Such people should consider taking Megan under their wing.

Quoting Exeus99: No, you wanted women [...]

That's definitely on the short list for Asinine Comment of the Week.

That's definitely on the short list for Asinine Comment of the Week.

Uh, sorry. (Crinkle, crinkle, opening envelope) And the winner is.....

I need a time out from Wilkinson-Howley shoving their abhorrent lifestyle down my throat.

Quoting ohcomeon: I feel that way, too. But fighting the more obvious battle has worn me out. I know I will bring horrible wrath down upon myself by saying this, but sometimes arguing with men over just having a seat a the table gets really old. Bob, if you are out there in commentor world, it would do me a lot of good if you would even acknowledge that you are listening and thinking about what I am saying. You don't have to agree - just weigh in.

ohc: Everything you have said on this topic is entirely correct. You were right, and remain so, to ask for a more diverse range of voices. You are right to say that an endless stream of Megan McArdle diavlogs fails to achieve this goal. Hang in there, and don't stop with your righteous complaints. There are many more here who agree with you than don't. If you're not hearing enough voices contradicting the few chauvinist trolls who are polluting this thread, I suspect it's because a lot of us, like you, are exhausted from the futility of past efforts of trying to overcome bigotry with reason. To Exeus99, danking, and JoeK: If you were wondering

Quoting brucds: I think I met JoeK in bar once. Moved to another stool.

Saying another stool right after mentioning JoeK carries an obvious implication which strikes me as spot-on.

Quoting Wonderment: Uh, sorry. (Crinkle, crinkle, opening envelope)

And the winner is.....

I demand a recount.

Quoting jmoe: I really enjoyed this discussion, but doesn't there seem to be a disproportionate number of libertarians on bloggingheads? It'd be great to see Megan or Kerry or Will Wilkinson debate libertarianism on it's merits. Maybe someone can convince an economist in the ilk of Krugman to come on for it.

It's easy enough to agree with a libertarian on the amazing utility of free markets in most cases, but as soon as the discussion turns to universal child care or health care, you start to see the ideology trump reality.

You got me. I guess Bob keeps running them because they're so glib. He must love people who smirk a lot.

Quoting ohcomeon: OK. Here is my first post on this subject.

ohcomeon wrote on 07/09/2008 at 05:57 PM
Re: Whose Patriotism?
I just want to point out that in the last 10 episodes there have been 0 female participants. And, with the exception of Mr. Loury, they have all been remarkably pale. But don't worry, I am certain this reflects the demographics of the viewers - or at least explains them.

Notice I don't just mention gender, but also skin hue. As I stated during that round of this debate, being a female, I am most naturally concerned that by not having my gender represented questions are being framed in a way that excludes my segment of the population. But I am not just concerned about seeing my world view reflected back at me. I want variety of color, religion, education, social class, political party, nationality, subject matter, and so much more.

Diversity's great, but it'd be too bad if bhtv replicated the MSM's shameful tokenism. It's a relief that somebody like Heather Hurlburt isn't boxed into only talking about women's issues. The Loury/McWhorter episodes are great too. I guess the ideal is an effortless diversity, which I think bhtv has some of, but it'd be great to build on it.

Don't steal my shtick! All I have left is profanity! Actually, for one who called for more 'heads and more frequent rotations, I actually liked mmTV the last few diavlogs. Firstly, she didn't do horse race crap, which alone endears her to me. Secondly, she seemed to continue what was an interesting franchise of sorts-on food-from Patel to Coates. I wouldn't mind more bhTV coverage of this topic. Lastly, I have to praise McArdle for her down-to-earth stylings. MM-Coates was very chatty in parts but devoid of jargon-bravo! Howley at times sounded like she ate a primer, but MM would come back with an anecdote. It's easy to stay on talking point if one exchanges theory, but when one talks about one's own experience, one's own family, it's easier for the other 'head to counter. I give MM props for her courage in talking about what she knows and applying it. That's good social science. But, this is no way means I don't want more 'heads. MM is on a roll!

What? Intimidated by two confident women? Too prudish for intellectual foreplay?

I had to laugh when Howley purred so confidently about braving Iowa because Wilkinson was confident about cooking in the kitchen. Here's Will in the kitchen, and I'm surprised MM missed a chance to counter. MM was right there when WW sliced his finger cutting butter, and then WW quipped that folks at home should leave cooking to pros! Maybe MM can give Howley her matron outfit she wore on that Blogging Chefs diavlog! She might need it! And too, after one diavlog and a thread on food, at least MM could have played DA. The processed food so many suburbanites buy is exactly some of the least healthiest food to consume. But then again, Patel argued about how the free-market system was rather unfree. MM and KH take a stick man, like government regulation, and oppose it to a fantasy like the free market. In between is a reality where large corporations choke a global food production system at the midpoint and churn out cloned food (and food that is made of clones) high-achievers like MM and KH have to buy running from office to home. Maybe WW plans to stay home and blog and do bhTV as he learns

Quoting cragger: Pretty hard to agree that men have no post coital choice, given the number that chose to walk away and leave the woman to deal with any result.

Of course pointing out the group in which this occurs the most would get me branded as a a racist.
And the woman has NO legal recourse against the man. She cannot get child support. You seemed to have missed Bill Clinton's signing of the deadbeat dad law.
Next you will claim that the family court system is not biased against men.
There was even a case where the man finds out that the child is not his and still has to pay child support.

No, "racist" is not the wrong sobriquet. It's "misogynist" Forcing anyone into a courtroom, if one can, is hardly a policy option for the victims of deadbeat dads. The pool of ambulance chasers is a mixed lot, and the rules of testimony result more often in trauma and public shame than restitution. Men who commit to fatherhood, and then renege, should just be chemically castrated and have their wages garnered for life. That's a public policy option designed to discourage the next wave of garbage.

Quoting Baltimoron: Men who commit to fatherhood, and then renege, should just be chemically castrated and have their wages garnered for life. That's a public policy option designed to discourage the next wave of garbage.

Quite a double standard, compared to the Pro-choice view that:
Women who commit to Motherhood, and then renege, should just be applauded for exercising their right to choose and taking control of their own bodies.

Quoting razib: i find the term "lipstick" an excessive concession to white male heteronormative expectations of what a "woman" should be; i.e., "lipstick" = normative and "non-lipstick" = many unmentionable terms of opprobrium.

On the one hand Megan and Kerry eschew the patriarchal society that will trap them in the 'concentration camp' of being a stay-at-home mom/parent. On the other hand, they have no problem when their political and professional selves are labeled in a sexual manner. They are allowing society to undercut their efficacy for the sake of a perceived compliment. Megan said it best in another diavlog: http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/112...0:31&out=41:02

In response to Megan's assertion that men don't feel bad about messy houses, I can testify that one of my (male) best friends routinely apologizes for his messy house, I also tend to reflexively apologize if I have people over and haven't cleaned. I would note, however, that I think I patterned that value after my mother, and anyway, the voice in my head telling me to clean my house is less prominent than the more male-value voices in my head.

Quoting Baltimoron: No, "racist" is not the wrong sobriquet. It's "misogynist"

No, he means "racist". He is actually lamenting the fact, in print, that he can't directly make his assertion that most dead-beat dads are a certain minority! Which, even though he thinks he got around it, makes him a racist.

Quoting PaulL: Of course pointing out the group in which this occurs the most would get me branded as a a racist.

Baltimoron: Ask him what he thinks of the Korean people..
PaulL: Too late to put that bike in reverse, yo, but I've got 5 bucks says you are still gonna try..

Quoting bjkeefe: ohc:

Everything you have said on this topic is entirely correct. You were right, and remain so, to ask for a more diverse range of voices. You are right to say that an endless stream of Megan McArdle diavlogs fails to achieve this goal.

Hang in there, and don't stop with your righteous complaints. There are many more here who agree with you than don't.

You are right to say she is right, am I right?

Quoting bjkeefe: If you're not hearing enough voices contradicting the few chauvinist trolls who are polluting this thread, I suspect it's because a lot of us, like you, are exhausted from the futility of past efforts of trying to overcome bigotry with reason.

True, but I haven't yet tired of my efforts to taunt and mock them for my own perverse self amusement, sorry folks (by "folks" I mean innocent bystanders).

Quoting handle: True, but I haven't yet tired of my efforts to taunt and mock them for my own perverse self amusement, sorry folks (by "folks" I mean innocent bystanders).

My bhtv experience would be a little dimmer without you.
And you may have chased whyfur away. For that, if true, I would have mixed feelings.

Quoting graz: My bhtv experience would be a little dimmer without you.
And you may have chased whyfur away. For that, if true, I would have mixed feelings.

'preciate that..
As for my "girlfriend", Who's still around by the way, I was trying to help him become aware of, and transcend, his emulation of the mean spirited talk radio types, and understand that even Bill O'reilly himself looks like a compete ahole outside of his studio, but his ability, Like BO's I suspect, to dish it out far succeeded his ability to take it. That's why I love being a snide, mean, creepy, centrist with an allergy to BS and hidden agendas. But he didn't run from me I'm sure...
His name was Whatfur... in death, we have a name (silly fight club reference) But you're not dead yet, are 'ya fur 'ol buddy? He's just prepping for another surge, that is about to begin, right? ding ding (Rocky 17.5.1)

Who's confusing choice and consequences now? Even with abortifacients and adoption, a woman who makes the decision to fuck a cute guy's brains out has to deal with the statistical probability of pregnancy, even if both use some form of protection. But a guy can just disappear the next day. I'm talking about the husband or BF who encourages the woman, especially the cases where the pregnancy is a surprise, to go for the pregnancy, with or w/o marriage, because he'll support her, and then when the kid is born, or even before, gets cold feet.

I understood that, but his misogyny is more apparent than his racism. As for Koreans, I think something deeper than a lack of work equality is involved. Although ROK rates the lowest for women in the OECD. Koreans traditionally favor family over individuals. It's developmental. Women are just realizing that kids are very expensive, that different states have different cultures and laws supporting women, and that they don't like how Korean men live and consider them. It's only been since 1988 that South Koreans have had a stable democratic state. The government tries to encourage childbirth, but women are pushing back. I view the current situation like the American 50s before the 60s. It's all very proper still, with most women still wanting to marry and have a house, etc. It's just that they still want to have a job, the husband to do housework, and a certain romance and pampering before considering kids.

Thanks for the insight, sounds a lot like many pockets in the US still. It's encouraging to hear that things are moving forward.
I don't know how you feel about it, but I am seriously relieved that you are not hosting the next invasion of the AOE.

[quote=PaulL;84536]
Next you will claim that the family court system is not biased against men.
QUOTE] Any other straw men you would like to set up and attribute to my single-sentance post noting a basic fact of human reproduction provides a post-sex option available to and exercised by many men? And when did a woman's every engagement in sexual activity equate to "a commit[ment] to Motherhood" (your capitalization) as you post below? Since you freely place the quoted text above in my mouth I will make so bold as to reciprocate, suggesting that the comments you post here are sadly reminiscent of the tired old misogynist sneering "A bitch wants to play, she gotta pay".

Wait, I'm a chauvinist troll why, again? I like having women on BHTv, I like McArdle! I thought ohcomeon's repeated posts pointing out the number of consecutive 'vlogs w/o any women were overwrought and a little annoying, and I think it's silly now that some who agreed w/ohcomeon are now complaining about too much McArdle--who is after all a woman. But mostly I was poking a little fun at people who seemed to insist that BH desperately needed more women 'vloggers and now complain about too MUCH of a particular woman 'vlogger. I actually agree that it's important to have variety BH, but I think it's a bad idea to conflate a desire for variety of perspective generally with a focus on the precise proportion of women represented in any given sample...for reasons the dissatisfaction w/so much McArdle show. I recognize that ohcomeon probably wanted more variety generally, and I hope that in the future they'll emphasize that, and not just their desire for more women. So, yeah, obviously I'm both a troll and a chauvinist--busted hardcore.

Oh, wait, did I just fail to "save [myself] some typing on this," as there'll be no debate on my status as a chauvinist troll? Signed, sealed, delivered, I'm chauvinist! I assume you mean male chauvinist, by the way...the evidence for which is my having fun in pointing out the silliness of pointedly counting the number of consecutive BH episodes w/o a woman over a given sample, which, as we all know, is the textbook definition.

Quoting Exeus99: Oh, wait, did I just fail to "save [myself] some typing on this," as there'll be no debate on my status as a chauvinist troll? Signed, sealed, delivered, I'm chauvinist! I assume you mean male chauvinist, by the way...the evidence for which is my having fun in pointing out the silliness of pointedly counting the number of consecutive BH episodes w/o a woman over a given sample, which, as we all know, is the textbook definition.

Hey, aren't you the perv who coined the term 'mooseturbation'?! Just kidding. Carry on.

Not just the perv, sir, I'm the chauvinist troll who did so. Pardon me while I call the printer, I believe I may have a spare sixteen spaces on my business card...

I never ate better than when I was living with "high achiever" women. This was partially because they were rich and busy and I was a pretty deadbeat with enough potential to get past the "I shall not date below this" bar. If your girlfriend is working 80 hours a week at some big law firm doing M&A stuff and you are putting in 40 hours at some stay busy job, you learn to cook if for no other reason than you feel some moral obligation to repay your mate for the fact that she is paying for the high end eating out experiences and the vacations. This happens regardless of your best intentions (lets go camping? I want to go to Paris! I can't afford Paris and don't want you to resent me for not pulling my weight. I don't care as long as the sex is good.)

All the McArdle haters can hush. Don't like it, don't watch it. To Megan (RE: European men not dating American women because American women expect to be treated like people): I am a US male and have dated many US women, but married a non-US woman who out-earns and is more brilliant than I...hands down. I think what makes a US woman the kind of person to be avoided (in those Euro-male terms), comes down to the method of stating her opinions and demanding not just to be treated like a person, but flipping quickly back and forth between wanting to be treated like a non-gendered person in the present day to wanting to be a woman in the 1950s (when it comes to the man giving her what she wants) and back in the blink of an eye. I'm not saying it's easy being a woman, I have no idea, but for some reason, my wife doesn't do this on-again-off-again thing like almost all of my US girlfriends did. Keep up the good work, Jane Galt.

A word of admonition to Kerry. I was watching for 15 minutes or so and my head was spinning. I could make a comment of beware of very fast talking women, but that would be predictably sexist. I guess I was shocked, yes shocked (you know the drill) when I heard for the first time the conjugal act and all that ensues referred to as a "comfortable concentration camp". Talk about reductio ad Hitlerum. If that idea is out there, God help us as it would seem that the relations between the sexes are irremediably poisoned. Kerry and Megan (this might be helpful to you too), we're coming up to the fortieth anniversary of Humanae Vitae. July 29 to be exact. Forget about Paul 6's prophecy. Just consider his raw anthropology. What am I trying to say? LUV!! We men and women have to get back to the LUV.

Quoting nyc123: All the McArdle haters can hush. Don't like it, don't watch it.

There's something to your point. On the other hand, I also think it's fair to register dislike with particular diavloggers, in hopes that more effort will be made to book others in the future.

Baltimoron, I'm no Megan, who is truly awesome, but I am a decent cook! Kerry will not starve. Anyway YOU try making sense of Spencer Ackerman over a lousy earpiece while trying to make a pie crust, or whatever I was doing. Also, our new place is just a couple blocks away from the New Pioneer Coop which is basically to Whole Foods what Whole Foods is to a Wal-Mart Supercenter. Our level of rural organic localism will be basically unmatchable by anyone who does not actually live on a self-sustaining farm. So eat it yuppie posers! You WISH you were moving to Iowa. Also, this looks neat. The ethanol economy pisses me off for many reasons, but one of the more selfish ones is that otherwise we'd have even more neat nearby artisanal farms to visit. Anyway, I will be working for Cato from home while Kerry gets paid by the University of Iowa Arts Foundation to read and write literary essays. We'll probably have some time within our fast-paced, high-achieving Iowa City schedule to do some cooking. I might even have time for a knife skills course. So don't worry about us. Did I mention that it

Quoting Will Wilkinson: Did I mention that it is weird how much strangers know about our life?

Congratulation! Enjoy your sweet life on the "A"-list!

Quoting Will Wilkinson: Our level of rural organic localism will be basically unmatchable by anyone who does not actually live on a self-sustaining farm.

Oh boy! You practice Yoga (rather than lift weights), you are not allowed to get angry, you cook and now this localized organic crap? Can this thing get more...? I don't know, I can't stand it, I am going to choke on my McDonald's fries and puke half-eaten Big Mac on my already greasy keyboard.

Quoting Will Wilkinson: Did I mention that it is weird how much strangers know about our life?

Yeah, but that's what you two do.

Baltimoron, I'm no Megan, who is truly awesome, but I am a decent cook! Kerry will not starve.

I'm truly glad to hear that. The loss, or slow drain, of both or either of you would be a greater loss for playful intelligence in the universe.

Anyway YOU try making sense of Spencer Ackerman over a lousy earpiece while trying to make a pie crust, or whatever I was doing.

That is one of my criticisms of the Blogging Chefs format. I assumed participants were quite taxed. As I said before considering McArdle's mini-franchise on food, talking about food, unless there's are tech breakthroughs allowing for beaming food to viewers or installing olfactory monitors, is not only sufficient but needed. I don't know enough about Ackerman to know if he's especially hard to deal with.

Also, our new place is just a couple blocks away from the New Pioneer Coop which is basically to Whole Foods what Whole Foods is to a Wal-Mart Supercenter. Our level of rural organic localism will be basically unmatchable by anyone who does not actually live on a self-sustaining farm. So eat it yuppie posers! You WISH you were moving to Iowa.

This was the

As I've said so many times before, it's rarely the personalities of the individual 'heads, but the combination and the rotation that makes for bad product. At least McArdle paired with two different people and different topics. It might be harder to attract new 'heads if commenters zero in on personalities and not the structure, i.e. how pairings are rotated and topics selected.

Quoting Baltimoron: As I've said so many times before, it's rarely the personalities of the individual 'heads, but the combination and the rotation that makes for bad product. At least McArdle paired with two different people and different topics. It might be harder to attract new 'heads if commenters zero in on personalities and not the structure, i.e. how pairings are rotated and topics selected.

It's not so much the personalities -- in the case of Megan, she seems like a pleasant person -- it's what the people bring to a discussion. If someone consistently displays, say, pure partisan hackery or obvious ideological axes to be ground, that person doesn't appeal to much of the BH.tv audience, especially not more than once. Same problem if someone consistently displays no particular knowledge on the topics being discussed -- it's annoying to hear conversation no more elevated than one could get from the loudmouth at the office water cooler or three stools down at the local bar. Given how many other people there are out there who do seem from their writing and appearances elsewhere as though they have lots to offer, it's

Everything Megan is saying about child rearing today is exactly what John Rosemond has been writing about for years.

'Reproduction is just plain unfair.' "Unfair"? Why does it seem that Ms. McArdle is attempting to prove Freud correct about women? "Unfair"!!! Reproduction is biology; "unfair" is ideology.

doubleplusgood diavlog, touched on some interesting points. One which struck me while watching is could we take the coddling argument into the realm of Sociobiology and argue that kids are being coddled more because we are having fewer of them and so our primitive monkey brains tell us to compensate by investing more in our offspring? I remember my youth being a care-free one where we trusted our neighbors and maybe that's part of the problem, our local communities have dissolved because of John Nash and Game Theory, not on it's own, but because politicians and business people have adopted it because it is in a scientific sense elegant. I have met some good parents, even today, who don't bubble wrap their kids, plural. On the other hand, parents who make superkids do set their kids up to do well, sure they're boring and lack any internal monologue, but they're multi-googolionaires (1 googol = 1 x10^100) with therapists and legal drugs so, in the end society marches on. Hmm, I seem to have written into a corner, oh well this vlog got me thinking, good job.

Ayn Rand, Margreth Thatcher, Angela Merkel... please don't run off to the left.. As Malcolm X argued - if blacks had basic human rights - there would be not need for civil rights. the reason why blacks as full humans were so confusing to whites was because of culture (Descartes - beasts are instinctive machines)? It needed "super-blacks", those much better than the best whites, like Malcom and MLK, in order to get some changes? It is true that we often wait for a personification of an idea. Megan makes a good point regarding the historical point of technology. Which led to muscle being less important to daily life. however - as bonoboos have shown compared to chimpanzees - it was not technology per se but rather cooperation among women that triggered the social changes. After all - two unarmed women are usually stronger than one unarmed man. two armed women are usually stronger than one armed man...

Soon to be in a town near you.

Quoting Whatfur: Soon to be in a town near you.

Welcome to Alaska! Brrrrrrrr!

Don't ever just take off like that again, young man! We were worried sick!