Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/joshrogin/status/1465675008454369286

another case of too tragically long to be a thread title

quote:

The myth of the man-child
Bachelorhood often allows for a more, not less serious life

yesterday

A friend treats me to an insider’s tour of LA’s Atwater Village. As with eye contact across a bar, it is possible to see a neighbourhood for a brief moment and just know. Craftsman bungalows, omakase chefs of unsmiling excellence, a Santiago-like backcloth of mountains: within hours, I arrange a month-long Airbnb here. I will see which enclave of Southern California I fancy after that. There is a magazine subscription to reroute, some bags to lug, but no spouse or child to inform, much less square.

It is not for everyone, this untethered life, or even for a large minority. Yes, family men tend to sidle up and inquire as to the going on the path not taken. But let us put that down to curiosity, shall we, not regret. A clue to the public’s real thoughts on bachelorhood is the absence of it from elected office. Of late, the jockeying of Pete Buttigieg and Kamala Harris has revived the question of whether the US would ever wear a gay or female president. I wager that we’ll see at least one of each before the next unmarried one. 1970s Britain elected Ted Heath, true, but on the tacit understanding that he wasn’t doing much with all that private freedom.

The received view of bachelorhood cannot see that it is often a bid for a more, not a less serious life

This exclusion from high office is doubtless a bullet dodged. The gently mocking films (both versions of Alfie, for instance) leave no deep bruise either. But it all rests on the premise that bachelors are case studies in arrested development. Observing the friends who have remained single well into their thirties, it is a less and less credible trope. What stands out about them is not their frivolity so much as the austere opposite.

The most adult conversations I have are with the childless. They read more, attend more, travel more and (through lack of mental distraction, I stress, not higher intellect) notice more. If you tend to enjoy this column, consider that half the ideas come from these supposed gadabouts. The notion that we high-five each other and trade lewd tales in front of Leeds vs Arsenal is a Nick Hornby slander.

In fact, in manners and comportment, bachelors often have more in common with the cliché of the spinster. Theirs is a decorum, almost a formality, born of aversion to the smells, stains and general boisterousness of a kid-filled home. Bucking the term “man-child”, each of the ones I have in mind comes across as older than his passport age. That phrase seems to better fit the rounded shoulders and over-washed T-shirts, not to mention the scatological anecdotes, of fatherhood.

The mistake is to think that Eros is what keeps people single. More often, it is the promise of maximum control over their lives (including, as often as not, the option of solitude). I know with some precision the list of cities in which I want to pass the rest of this decade, and in what sequence. No one with dependants could be so mobile or so cavalierly strategic. Whatever part of the self is being exercised here, it is not the id. Indeed, it should only take a moment’s reflection to see that lots of bachelors have already performed an act of discipline. There is no greater feat of self-control than walking away from a happy romance because it hampers other callings in life.

The charge of self-regard is fairer. If anything, those who make it don’t know how true it is, or why. If you seldom have to do anything that doesn’t reflect your exact desires in the moment — no school run, no cooking — you become ever less tolerant of such claims on your time. And so, inverting the usual order of things, I am more selfish at 39 than I was at 24. By 50, I will resent even the decennial census as an imposition.

But self-regard is not the same as silliness. Egoism is not the same as immaturity. The received view of bachelorhood (“Oh, you boys”) doesn’t allow that it is often a bid for a more, not a less serious life. Even the glamorisation of it by the married-but-curious misses the point. Our horizons widen as our commitments narrow.

Email Janan at janan.ganesh@ft.com

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/joshrogin/status/1465675008454369286

another case of too tragically long to be a thread title

mawarannahr posted:

ikanreed posted:

I got fed a video by the YouTube algorithm by some "criminal psychology body language expert" who was explaining why a random black guy picked up at a crime scene committed by a white guy was innocent.

And it all boiled down to "look at how much of a Chad this innocent person is and the cop is a virgin."

That was it.

Everything used in criminal investigation and prosecution besides fingerprints* and DNA** is complete pseudoscience.

*Okay sometimes they kinda make poo poo up about
**Okay sure, maybe my state crime lab had a scandal where every DNA analysis was skipped and they just returned a piece of paper confirming whatever the cops' current theory was.

mawarannahr posted:

1970s Britain elected Ted Heath, true, but on the tacit understanding that he wasn’t doing much with all that private freedom.

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/Sulliview/status/1467135906004049926

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1467219675582971910

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1467219675582971910

Phone posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk872ERRVxA

the tl;dr on it is that nyt reporter ian urbana asked a bunch of artists and musicians to help collaborate with him to promote his book on ocean stuff...

and oh yeah gets 50% of the royalties because we're using the studio his wife setup

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1467219675582971910

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1467219675582971910

ikanreed posted:

I got fed a video by the YouTube algorithm by some "criminal psychology body language expert" who was explaining why a random black guy picked up at a crime scene committed by a white guy was innocent.

And it all boiled down to "look at how much of a Chad this innocent person is and the cop is a virgin."

That was it.

Everything used in criminal investigation and prosecution besides fingerprints* and DNA** is complete pseudoscience.

*Okay sometimes they kinda make poo poo up about
**Okay sure, maybe my state crime lab had a scandal where every DNA analysis was skipped and they just returned a piece of paper confirming whatever the cops' current theory was.

ikanreed posted:

I got fed a video by the YouTube algorithm by some "criminal psychology body language expert" who was explaining why a random black guy picked up at a crime scene committed by a white guy was innocent.

And it all boiled down to "look at how much of a Chad this innocent person is and the cop is a virgin."

That was it.

Everything used in criminal investigation and prosecution besides fingerprints* and DNA** is complete pseudoscience.

*Okay sometimes they kinda make poo poo up about
**Okay sure, maybe my state crime lab had a scandal where every DNA analysis was skipped and they just returned a piece of paper confirming whatever the cops' current theory was.

PERPETUAL IDIOT posted:

Check out how DNA works here.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...c310_story.html

Stringent posted:

i was a big clapton fan growing up, like i read a biography of him, listened to all of his albums, learned a bunch of his solos etc.

as far as i can tell the man is just a perfect airhead. he just absorbs whatever is ambient around him and spits it right back out. so what's been coming out of him for the past 10-15 years is probably about as unvarnished a look as you're ever likely to get of the english ruling class.

Atrocious Joe posted:

https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker/status/1467913983436988419?s=20

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/RachaelBL/status/1467919691880534016

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/RachaelBL/status/1467919691880534016

Palladium posted:

i heard victimhood is stronger than crack

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/dagenmcdowell/status/1468545386084196356

Jose posted:

so boris johnson hosted an illegal party at 10 downing street last christmas and its just made the news. meanwhile if you question why we only found out now you're a conspiracy theorist. anyone pointing out how ridiculous this take is is getting blockedf by him lol

lol he's turned off replies now

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1466735525566554117?s=20

Some Guy TT posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/sullydish/status/1467916248717701138