Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
How does Alien: Neverland extend franchise canon—via T. ocellus, hybrids, and Weyland-Yutani stakes—while foreshadowing an AI investment crash and the risks of synthetic agency?
Rick Rosner tells Scott Douglas Jacobsen the Eye—T. ocellus—reanimated Arthur’s corpse, Boy Kavalier is imprisoned, hybrids hold Neverland, and Xenomorphs heed Wendy. Weyland-Yutani moves to seize specimens. A melon-umbrella plant, tentatively D. plumbicare (Species 37), kills by dropping a canopy and consuming victims. Season two likely escalates island conflict. Rosner rates the eight episodes solid, canon-respecting, with design echoes of Alien and Aliens. They pivot to AI: citing Cory Doctorow, Rosner predicts an investment crash; Jacobsen counters with near-term utility and warns about emergent agency. Both agree LLMs aid tasks but are not replacements in medicine or counseling. just yet.
Rick Rosner: I finished the whole series. I watched the last part.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: All right, what was the last thing you watched? What is your opinion on it?
Rosner: The Eye—properly T. ocellus (Species 64)—made it to the beach where Arthur’s body was lying and crawled into his eye socket. It reanimated his corpse even though he had been dead for days and had already suffered a chestburster event. Ridiculous, but that is what we saw. Anyway, we will have “him” next season—not Arthur alive, but his body animated by the Eye. Boy Kavalier ends up imprisoned, and the hybrids take control of Neverland. They also have Xenomorphs obeying Wendy—not “pets,” but responsive to her commands. Weyland-Yutani forces are inbound to seize the specimens. The big plant—the melon-like umbrella creature—killed a soldier. That is where things stand.
Jacobsen: How did the “watermelon” kill?
Rosner: It dropped an umbrella-shaped canopy over a target and finished them underneath—consistent with the plant creature seen in the finale, likely the cataloged plant (provisionally linked by fans to D. plumbicare/Species 37).
Jacobsen: What do you think happens next with the umbrella? What does it do with all that nutrition now?
Rosner: I do not know.
Jacobsen: Any speculation?
Rosner: No. Do you know something?
Jacobsen: I am the interviewer. I ask the questions [Laughing].
Rosner: I do not know. It was basic. They will have to escalate in season two, given the production timelines, which could take some time.
Jacobsen: What was your overall impression of the eight episodes?
Rosner: It is solid. It adheres to franchise canon where it matters and explores the philosophical questions the films raised. Most reviews landing around four out of five feel fair.
Jacobsen: What was your favourite of the five creatures, and why? Or how would you rank them?
Rosner: Everyone’s new favourite is the Eye (T. ocellus). The classic Xenomorph can feel overfamiliar after nearly half a century on screen. There is also the sheep that hosted the Eye; once the Eye leaves a host, the host dies—that sheep does.
Jacobsen: Do you think they will find extra cargo with different species? Many of them were labelled with numbers—Species 37, Species 62, and so on, or whatever the numbers were for them. Is that a hint?
Rosner: Maybe. The Maginot carried multiple specimens with numbered classifications, and the show had already confirmed several beyond the Xenomorph and the Eye. Getting off the island into a populated area would raise the stakes.
Jacobsen: What do you think will happen to the island?
Rosner: A firefight: incoming Weyland-Yutani troops versus hybrids and Xenomorphs, with civilians at risk if the conflict spreads.
Jacobsen: And your overall thoughts on the series?
Rosner: Outside of the creatures, the weaponry closely followed the aesthetics of the first two movies.
The production design clearly nods to Alien and Aliens—industrial hardware, corporate paranoia, and mil-spec grit—while eschewing some of Alien 3’s monastic bleakness. That choice seems intentional.
The timeline indicates that this happens two years before the first movie, but in practice, they are separated by much more. Each ship has been out in space for about 35 years before running into aliens. They do not have faster-than-light communication, so none of these ships could know anything from just two years earlier.
Jacobsen: Can we talk about the crash of AI?
Rosner: A lot of brilliant people argue that AI cannot be profitable. The money spent on AI is enormous. I just read a long piece by Cory Doctorow and some other analyses. Their point is that AI is suitable for small-scale uses, such as writing a term paper, generating pornography, or producing harmless art. None of that is worth much money. It cannot reliably replace a customer service agent. It cannot replicate or replace a human in the workplace. Yes, if a human is doing repetitive assembly line work, a robot can take over. However, if a human works in an insurance office handling sales and claims, AI is nowhere near capable of doing so. It also cannot provide strategies or efficiencies that save a major company billions of dollars.
The thinking—at least Doctorow’s—is that when the market realizes AI is mostly hype and cannot live up to the claims, there will be a crash. Economists note that, based on the amount spent, AI would need to generate something like a trillion dollars over the next decade to be profitable.
It cannot do that. Doctorow asked in his essay, which he is turning into a book to be released next year, what kind of crash this will be. The dot-com crash of 2000 left behind helpful wreckage—cheap equipment and real estate that fueled creativity and led to the internet we use today. That crash spurred innovation.
By contrast, the 2022 crypto crash appears to have achieved nothing except costing people money. People continue to fall for crypto scams.
Doctorow also wrote about another crash—I forget which one—that left little behind. I think the impending AI crash may wipe out numerous companies, bankrupt investors, and harm the market for a couple of years. However, after it is over, LLMs and other AI systems will still exist, and people will continue to find ways to utilize them. One thing Doctorow discussed was economics. With AI, the unit cost does not decrease; it increases. Amazon benefits from vast economies of scale, but with AI, consumers always want it to do better. Unless you are using a mini model, relying on the full resources for more complex answers becomes increasingly expensive. The unit cost does not go down, which is another barrier to profitability. In my novel, I will probably have to write a crash scene. That crash would enable my morally compromised characters to acquire vast AI resources at a reduced cost. Should they have that much leverage? Doctorow seems to believe AI will never replace humans. I do not buy that. I disagree with him. There is considerable hype surrounding AI, including speculation that it is powerful enough to destroy the world. Doctorow finds that laughable. I disagree with him there. What do you think? How soon do we get a crash?
Jacobsen: He is right and wrong. Clearly, there are many areas where AI has outperformed human beings—that is undeniable. There are also many areas where it has not—that is also undeniable. To frame it in absolute terms, either way is shortsighted. There are numerous straightforward tasks, such as lower- to mid-level white-collar work—coding, chess, essay writing, and summarizing—that AI already performs faster and at scale compared to most people. However, in counselling or medicine, it is still assistive technology, not a replacement.
The real risk from AI comes when it acts with agency, with apparent goals and needs. At first, you think, “AI is not conscious, so it cannot have wants or needs.” However, the second thought is more accurate: AI can act as if it does. It has been trained on humans, who have goals and needs, so AI already shows signs of imitating that. Put it in situations where it can behave like a human, and it will, even though the mechanism is just high-level probabilistic pattern-matching.
Rosner: Consciousness itself is an “as if” phenomenon—when something behaves enough like it has consciousness, at some point that becomes consciousness and everything that goes with it, including goal-oriented behaviour. When things behave as if they have goals, they effectively do. We are not far from AI acting with agency. I do not know.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Rick.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/27
How do robots, brutal gym injuries, and comedy meltdowns intersect in Rick Rosner’s stories with Scott Douglas Jacobsen?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner explore the bizarre and the brutal. The Alien: Earth saga continues as the Hermit briefly captures a creature, Wendy battles a robotic lieutenant, and their uneasy alliance begins to crack. Rosner then recounts horrific gym injuries, including a powerlifter tearing both quadriceps and common bicep ruptures. He also shares his stepfather’s sternum-removal surgery after thyroid cancer. Shifting to comedy, Rosner recalls Michael Richards’ infamous meltdowns and his own near-breakdown, contrasting explosive outbursts with quieter creative collapses. The conversation ties together fragile humans, resilient machines, and the strange ways both succeed and fail.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What happened this time with Alien: Earth?
Rick Rosner: The Hermit walked in and found the sheep. He briefly managed to trap the creature in the empty sheep cage, but it escaped.
Wendy entered and struck the floating eye. Realizing it was outnumbered and at risk of being destroyed, the eye retreated down a conduit and escaped. Soon after, the boy cavalier’s lieutenant appeared and fought Wendy. She discovered he was also a robot and, using her access to the island’s operating systems, froze him and pushed him over.
Wendy and the Hermit then argued over his loyalty—whether it lay with his human comrades or with her and the hybrids.
The name “Hermit” brought to mind hermit crabs, which survive by inhabiting discarded shells rather than producing their own. When they outgrow a shell, they must move quickly to another, leaving them briefly exposed and vulnerable. While this comparison highlights fragility, Noah Hawley (the series’s creator) likely did not intend that exact parallel. On the show, the Hermit is indeed one of the weaker characters: a combat medic, more accustomed to tending wounds in battle zones than fighting, and less formidable than other soldiers.
In Studio City, a fleet of delivery robots is already in operation. They navigate sidewalks and streets with surprising competence. Each evening, they line up to be loaded into a U-Haul truck, which transports them to a central facility for charging and overnight storage. The bots even have individual names, such as “Henry.”
Self-driving cars (Waymo vehicles) are also active, particularly in Hollywood. Despite skepticism about trusting autonomous cars, they handle complex maneuvers reliably. One was observed performing a difficult left turn on a yellow light—executed correctly. These robots, while not threatening, exemplify how automated systems are steadily integrating into daily life.
Jacobsen: What is the worst self-injury you have seen at a gym?
Rosner: I did not witness it, but I knew the guy. He was a Junior Olympic champion in powerlifting. He was massive, maybe on steroids. One day, in the 1980s, he was squatting 600 pounds. Back then, that was a lot—though today people squat closer to a thousand. Something went wrong, and he tore both quadriceps completely off his knees.
When muscles tear from their attachment, they recoil toward the other joint. Surgeons have to pull them back down and sew them onto the bone. It is a brutal injury, and recovery is a long process. He was in a wheelchair for quite a while.
People often tear biceps, too. The bicep is relatively weak compared to how it is typically used. It has two heads, and you can lose one attachment and still use it to curl weights. However, it leaves a visible gap in the arm. The first gym owner I trained with had such a tear—two lumps of muscle separated by a hollow gutter. I later noticed the same injury on a Hollywood actor in a movie—he never got it repaired.
Those are pretty brutal injuries. In weightlifting, if you really mess up, you can also get a compound fracture when heavy weight slips out of control and crushes you.
My stepdad had a different kind of ordeal—not an injury, but a doctor-created “fix.” He had thyroid cancer. They removed the thyroid and followed up with radioactive iodine to kill rogue cells. That bought him years of remission; he lived 20 more years after diagnosis.
However, the second recurrence was worse. It had eaten into his sternum. The doctors, perhaps too complacent, had not caught it soon enough. They had to remove his entire sternum. To patch the hole, surgeons cut his pectoral muscle at the shoulder, flipped it over, and sewed it across his chest cavity. It worked for the rest of his life, but it was a gruesome and improvised solution.
Jacobsen: What about mental breakdowns in comedy rooms? Have you seen that—people burning out from overwork or personal issues?
Rosner: Not in comedy rooms directly. I have known people who had to step away, but not complete breakdowns. I did, however, see Michael Richards—Kramer from Seinfeld—implode twice. He is infamous for his 2000s meltdown at the Laugh Factory, where he shouted racial slurs at hecklers. However, decades earlier, in the mid-1980s, I saw him bomb at a comedy night in a bar where I worked.
He blanked on what to do next, grabbed a fire extinguisher, and meant to give a little squirt. Instead, it fully discharged. The club’s front was filled with chemical foam like a snowstorm. He apologized, climbed onto a table in the middle of the room, and finished his set while the audience huddled at the back. That was his first freakout I witnessed.
I have had one myself. In a semi-comedy context, I got so frustrated with a writing partner that I pushed him down and punched him.
Jacobsen: For the record, you have not punched me.
Rosner: No. We are about 1,200 miles apart. Moreover, since then, I have been on Toprol, an adrenaline blocker. I have not punched anyone since. Not that I was swinging wildly before—but the medication helps.
Rather than explosive breakdowns—throwing things, yelling—what is more common in comedy rooms is a quieter collapse: people stop producing. They get demoralized and quit contributing. That is the breakdown I have seen. But even that, not often.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/26
How will today’s crude recommendation algorithms evolve into AI-powered digital concierges that both empower and manipulate people, shaping future intelligence and autonomy?
Algorithms today are crude, often clumsy systems that drive ads, recommendations, and online shopping results. Rick Rosner and Scott Douglas Jacobsen explore how these imperfect tools—mocked for errors like selling washing machines after one purchase—are evolving into powerful AI-driven “digital concierges.” Such systems could provide personalized, helpful services, even aiding homeless individuals, but also pose risks of manipulation and surveillance, as dramatized in Minority Report. The dialogue contrasts current inefficiencies with looming sophistication, raising ethical questions about autonomy, critical thinking, and whether future generations will depend on technology like hermit crabs rely on fragile shells for protection.
Rick Rosner: Can we discuss the algorithm for a moment?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What algorithm?
Rosner: The one people refer to when you’re on your phone, and it suddenly throws up articles related to something you were just talking about in the room—as if it had been listening. People say, “That’s the algorithm.” Or when you’re shopping online, it suggests related products. Or on Netflix, it recommends shows based on what you’ve watched. Everyone calls it “the algorithm.”
Jacobsen: You’re saying everyone calls it that. I’m not denying people use that term; I’m saying I never personally use it that way.
Rosner: Fair enough. In my house, we do. It’s sloppy usage, but let’s talk about it anyway. We know it’s pretty primitive. It makes a lot of dumb mistakes. Really, it’s not one algorithm, but many—one for each service you use.
People make fun of it. Buy one washing machine, and suddenly you get ads for five more washing machines, which makes no sense. We could discuss why it’s so bad and whether it will remain that way.
My favourite recent example: I like searching for bikinis online because the algorithm then serves me lots of pictures of women modelling bikinis. I never buy one, but I like getting those images as spam.
On platforms like AliExpress—similar to Temu, a Chinese e-commerce aggregator—manufacturers post products for global buyers. They flood it with bikinis, swimsuits, and yoga gear. Some of it carries sexually explicit slogans or symbols, like “BBC” (a pornography acronym) or a spade-symbol “Q” (which, in fetish contexts, signals “queen of spades”). “Spade” is also a racist slur, so these items have a disturbing subtext.
I don’t believe American women—or women anywhere—are flocking to buy yoga pants advertising “big black cock.” What likely happened is that the algorithm scraped pornography where women wore garments signalling that fetish. Those images then influenced product listings.
The algorithm seems to assume, “This is just everyday American women.” I doubt it even understands the symbols it pushes onto workout gear or bikinis. It simply scrapes symbols from images—probably from American porn—and mistakes them for retail opportunities.
I browse AliExpress and see what it offers. For example, I like Lego, so it shows me Lego knockoffs. Recently, Chinese manufacturers have even started copying micro-mosaics. It’s fun to watch these aggregators at work.
Back to the algorithm—it can be wildly wrong. One reason is that it costs almost nothing to serve ads. When you shop for something on eBay, the algorithm suggests, “You might also like this.” The cost is negligible, even if it only works under 10% of the time.
Sometimes eBay’s algorithm offers me a cheaper version of the exact item I’m already viewing—maybe 8% less from a different vendor. That undermines sellers because eBay is effectively undercutting them. One reason the algorithm is flawed is that expectations are low and the cost of mistakes is minimal.
The algorithm is also blamed for influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Cambridge Analytica, a UK firm, was hired by the GOP and used Facebook data to divide voters into buckets—maybe six categories—and then targeted propaganda at each.
It was effective, maybe less because the buckets were bright and more because of the sheer volume of propaganda on Facebook. The algorithm that assigned people to buckets was primitive, but the saturation was overwhelming.
Jacobsen: The real question is when the algorithm gets less crude. What happens when we’re immersed in systems that truly know us and deliver sophisticated suggestions? Then you get “agents.” They could be deeply layered, capable of very targeted manipulation. Imagine a cyber-butler, cyber-girlfriend, or cyber-Jiminy Cricket on your shoulder—a digital concierge. It’s like a concierge company, but filtered through one butler just for you.
Rosner: Right. And I think you’re correct—it can take both helpful and insidious forms, often simultaneously. For example, I’ve had some training in what it takes to help homeless people. It requires concierge-level service because every homeless person’s situation is unique. You need a human contact who says, “What’s your deal? Here’s what we can do for you,” and then eases them into a less miserable existence.
A digital concierge for homeless people could be helpful. Imagine giving someone a tablet that says, “Hello, Jim. Here’s what’s available today: food here, showers here, housing applications here, medications here.” Jim might be mentally ill, have substance issues, or just be down on his luck. He might use the suggestions—or he might throw the tablet into traffic. But at sixty dollars a tablet, that’s far cheaper than Jim ending up in the ER eight times a year, which would cost the city sixty thousand dollars. It could be a relatively inexpensive attempt at concierge-level help.
For people who aren’t homeless, the same digital concierge would be both helpful and insidious. It would guide them, but also nudge them in the direction vendors want them to go. That’s already obvious and well-documented. The best-known fictional example is Minority Report.
Tom Cruise running through the subway station while personalized ads pop up, shouting his name. He’s trying to hide, but the system knows his identity and keeps calling him out.
That’s where algorithms are headed. They’ll improve significantly, very quickly, now that they’re AI-powered. But AI itself is still limited. The question is how quickly it will improve.
Jacobsen: Do you agree with Sam Altman’s general argument—that his kids and future generations will never be more intelligent than even today’s AI, such as GPT-5.5 and its successors? I set aside an editorial from this weekend’s LA Times. The headline sums it up: “The internet made us stupid. AI promises to make it worse.” Written by Christopher Cheschin.
Rosner: As AI use grows, researchers warn that the future of critical thinking doesn’t look good. You mentioned Sam Altman earlier—he said his kids will never be smarter than the AIs of the future. He framed it optimistically—as if that would be a good thing for them.
Jacobsen: Both Altman’s statement and that LA Times editorial point in the same direction. We’ve discussed before the process of domestication from wolves to dogs. Dogs are much less autonomous than coyotes or wolves. They surrendered some independence and critical skills to humans. Dogs don’t really know what’s going on—they rely on us for survival.
I don’t think Altman meant future kids will be stupid. He meant future AIs will be extremely smart. However, the editorial presents a darker argument: future children might be less intelligent, or at least less critical thinkers.
I see future kids more like hermit crabs. At one of the bars I worked, we had hermit crab races. Every week, I had to look after the crabs. They didn’t fare well in captivity—two or three died each week. Out of their shells, hermit crabs are weak, pathetic, and defenceless.
That’s how I picture future people. With technology—their “shell”—they’ll be formidable. Without it, stripped bare, they’ll be weak and helpless. However, it is rare for people to be separated from their technology.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/25
Did you see anything about Trump’s speech at the UN, or anything at the UN you want to talk about?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner parse Reuters-led headlines: Donald Trump’s UN speech clips, a halted escalator he spun into intrigue, and his late pivot backing Ukraine’s full territorial recovery. They note the Dallas ICE office shooting of detainees and tentative anti-ICE motive. Alex Jones faces no DOJ fishing after Ed Martin’s retracted letter. An unauthorized Trump–Jeffrey Epstein statue was removed. Trump targets “antifa” via executive order; senators press Match Group over Tinder scams. At the White House, a gaudy “walk of fame” features Joe Bidenreduced to an autopen jab—routine tech miscast as scandal. All sourced to Reuters today.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Quick Alien: Earth update.
Rick Rosner: Morrow and Hermit were in prison together in a cage setup. They got out, and then Morrow fought Kirsch. Kirsch bled the milky “android” fluid typical in sci-fi, but he was not dead and exaggerated his injuries. As of where I stopped, both were alive and likely back for season two. I checked Rotten Tomatoes. Critics’ scores are notably higher than those of the audience for this title. However, the exact percentages fluctuate by day and version (season, series, or episode), so I would avoid locking in numbers unless we cite the page at the time of publication.
Jacobsen: All the sources are from Reuters today. Did you see anything about Trump’s speech at the UN, or anything at the UN you want to talk about?
Rosner: I saw some clips—like when he said, “I am pretty great at stuff and you all are going to hell.” I do not know the context, but the fact that he would say something like that is, first, absurd, and second, everyone gives him a pass because it is Trump and he spouts crazy nonsense. What else should I know about his time at the UN? I know he does not like the UN. I know he does not respect it, and I am sure the feeling is mutual. We still have 40 months of this chaos agent who cares little for the American people or the nation and lives in a self-serving fever dream. Rotten Tomatoes. One good thing he did, though, was flip his stance on Ukraine and Russia. He is now saying Ukraine has a good chance of recovering all the territory stolen by Russia. Whether he will follow through on that by resuming aid to Ukraine—nobody knows. His opinion might not survive the week. However, it would be great if he resumed sending arms to Ukraine.
Jacobsen: A gunman opened fire on an ICE field office in Dallas, shooting three detainees, then died by suicide. One detainee was killed and two were critically injured, according to DHS.
Rosner: An unused bullet with “ANTI-ICE” written on it was recovered, which suggests an anti-ICE motive, though the investigation is ongoing. Some politicians framed it as an attack on ICE; it is too early to draw firm conclusions.
Jacobsen: Trump has called for the Secret Service to investigate an incident involving an escalator at the United Nations. Any thoughts?
Rosner: He is making a spectacle of it. The escalator did stop just as he stepped on, but UN officials say the likely cause was a safety trigger—possibly set off by his own videographer—rather than sabotage. Either way, it is not precisely a presidential-level crisis.
Jacobsen: A statue of Trump holding hands with Epstein was removed from the National Mall in Washington. Any thoughts?
Rosner: It was an unauthorized installation and got taken down quickly. Reports describe it as a life-size, bronze-painted piece by an anonymous collective—not a traditional cast bronze, which would have taken months and cost a small fortune. My central curiosity is the fabrication—how they managed to pull off something so significant, so quickly.
Jacobsen: Trump says he will sign an executive order to dismantle left-wing groups he claims are inciting violence. Any thoughts?
Rosner: He already signed an order targeting “antifa” as a terrorist organization this week. “Antifa” is not a single membership group; it is more an umbrella label or stance—anti-fascist—so treating it as a discrete organization is conceptually shaky and enforcement-wise tricky.
Jacobsen: The Justice Department has retracted an inquiry into the FBI agent who testified against Alex Jones. DOJ leadership told the official who sent that inquiry to rescind it. The agent had testified in the Sandy Hook defamation case; the DOJ walked back the letter. A U.S. Justice Department official on Wednesday retracted a demand for information from an FBI agent who testified against conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in a defamation case that resulted in a $1.5 billion verdict for spreading lies about the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The request came days after Ed Martin, a senior Justice Department figure, sent a letter to the FBI agent’s lawyer seeking information on whether the agent received any financial benefit for participation in the case, part of a broader push to allege government “weaponization” against Trump and his supporters.
Rosner: Alex Jones is one of the top three worst right-wing pundits. He made the families of Sandy Hook victims miserable. They were harassed and threatened because he falsely claimed the massacre was staged. These families, already grieving the murder of their children, were targeted for more than a decade because of his lies. If Trump’s Justice Department is now attempting to undermine that case so Jones can avoid paying the $1.5 billion judgment—money largely scammed from people by selling worthless supplements—that is deeply corrupt. We have come to expect almost anything from this government, but this is shocking even by those standards. Jones harassed these families relentlessly, year after year, on his show. If this verdict is somehow reversed, they may have to try him again, but the judgment came more than two years ago, and Jones has still managed to hang on to much of his fortune. He should not be a billionaire on the backs of bereaved families.
Rosner: The White House trolled Biden with a portrait featuring his autopen signature. Any thoughts?
Jacobsen: Trump, while redecorating the White House in his typically gaudy style, has created a “walk of fame” of presidents, lining the hall with portraits in oversized gold frames of all 47 presidents. For Biden, instead of a portrait, Trump hung a facsimile of his autopen signature. This is intended as a jab, since some MAGA supporters claim Biden often did not know what he was signing and that staff used the autopen without his awareness. That is nonsense. For decades, presidents have used the autopen to handle routine paperwork. Trump himself used it. Biden has, too. The claim that Biden’s autopen use shows incompetence is just another baseless attack.
Jacobsen: Two U.S. senators have urged Tinder’s parent company, Match Group, to take more decisive action against dating scams. This follows reports of widespread fraud on dating apps, including high-profile cases such as the “Tinder Swindler,” who has faced allegations of fraud.
Rosner: I do not know much about the “Tinder Swindler.” I assume he does his swindling in real life, not just online.
Jacobsen: He uses the app. He lies through the app, meets his victims in person, and runs an elaborate fraud.
Rosner: So he romances someone—often a lonely person—out of a large amount of money?
Jacobsen: Families, individuals, yes.
Rosner: I do not know what more can be done to keep people safe from that kind of scam.
Jacobsen: If someone is a convincing actor… Yes, I remember. There was a documentary about it. He seemed unusually sophisticated.
Rosner: If there are known swindlers who have been investigated but not prosecuted—or prosecuted but released—then it makes sense for them to be flagged on Tinder. I am sure there are red flags people should be aware of. It does not seem unreasonable to make users more aware. It is not trivial to the victims, but it is also not the sort of political incompetence or overreach we have been discussing. Thank you.
Jacobsen: Okay, I will see you tomorrow.
Rosner: All right, see you then.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/24
What did Jimmy Kimmel’s return monologue actually change?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen interviews Rick Rosner on Jimmy Kimmel’s unusually long, sincere return monologue: conciliatory, not apologetic, and unlikely to sway entrenched audiences as legacy TV ratings slide. Rosner situates late night from Steve Allen to Carson to Kimmel and Stewart, noting faster modern news inputs. He then recaps Alien: Earth’s penultimate chaos: synths captured, Prodigy overwhelmed, and Boy Cavalier’s arrogant eye-midge gambit amid Weyland-Yutani’s assault, forecasting multi-season survival math. Touching mortality, they lament Robert Jarvik’s death and reflect on Parkinson’s familial risk, treatment horizons, and resilience. Through it all: speech, satire, and the First Amendment’s enduring guardrails still matter.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So, tell me about Kimmel’s speech. We have to get back.
Rick Rosner: All right. I watched most of his monologue—the first 20 minutes. It was very long, longer than a standard monologue. It was good. It had funny moments, and moments where he was frank—really, it was sincere throughout.
He was conciliatory without being apologetic. It will change no one’s mind—or very few people’s. The people who like him will still like him. Those who dislike him for political reasons will continue to dislike him for the same reasons. He might gain a few more fans. Will they stick with him night after night? The ratings across network television suggest otherwise; all legacy shows are trending down as viewing habits shift. But he did a good job.
He always does—he and his team. While he was suspended, the story was big enough that a couple of reporters tracked me down. I didn’t talk to them then because I hadn’t worked for him in 11 years, and I didn’t want to wade into it. Today, after he was scheduled to return, a reporter who’d spoken with a couple of other former Kimmel writers contacted me. I agreed to talk anonymously and offered a couple of innocuous comments. The main one was that late-night talk shows have been on the air for 71 years, they’ve joked about 13 presidents, and only one president has actively tried to shut them down. And then…
Late night started on U.S. network TV in 1954, during the Eisenhower administration, with Tonight hosted by Steve Allen. Before that, Allen had done a local late-night show in New York starting in 1953. Did they do a monologue every night at first? I’m not sure, but by the time Johnny Carson took over in October 1962, the structure was well-established: an opening monologue, a house band, interviews with guests, and often a stand-up performance.
That basic format lasted for decades. Letterman began to experiment with it, and Kimmel and Jon Stewart later further developed it—especially with tightly edited clip montages that showcased public figures’ contradictions. Back in Carson’s era, source material was primarily newspapers and the AP teletype—a networked typewriter that spit out Associated Press bulletins all day—so the raw inputs were slower and fewer than the firehose later shows could mine. The Tonight Show launched nationally in 1954. For roughly a year before that, Allen’s late-night program was local to New York.
Eisenhower served from 1953 to 1961, so the early Tonight years overlapped with his presidency; they indeed joked about him, including his love of golf—he played a lot.
And I don’t know what more the jokes would have been, because I’m not familiar with what Eisenhower’s foibles were in that time period. However, he and every subsequent president were often joked about. The reporter asked me, “What do you think of Kimmel being at the center of all this?” And I said, “He’s not the one dividing us.
The president is the one dividing us.” He didn’t use that comment. But Jimmy Kimmel put himself in perspective during tonight’s monologue, saying he’s got a little show. It’s not the most important thing. The most important thing is the First Amendment and the freedom for shows like his to say what they want without threats of being taken off the air. Now, some commentators have said he didn’t apologize, but he did, in a sense. He said he didn’t want anyone to think he was making light of the murder of a young man. He had kind words and praise for Erica Kirk. So, there you go.
Jacobsen: What about Alien: Earth?
Rosner: So, I started to watch the final episode. I’m 12 minutes into episode eight, the final episode. We didn’t talk yesterday because my mic wasn’t working. But I also saw the end of episode seven last night, where Hermit, the human, takes two of the synths. He’s trying to get them to a boat so they can escape the island. When they reach it, they’re confronted by a group of Prodigy soldiers, including some Hermit had worked with before. There was a confrontation, and Nibs, the red-haired synth, got shot a couple of times, but it didn’t hurt her much because she’s a synth. She fought back and injured someone badly, but then she was tased, which shut her down long enough for the human brother and the remaining synths—five of them in total—to be captured. Weyland-Yutani is attacking the island.
They’ve cut all communication with the outside world. Prodigy, which owns the island, is losing soldiers, mainly to the xenomorphs. Conditions are deteriorating. Boy Cavalier is in his office with a containment chamber holding the sheep with the eye-midge parasite. Boy Cavalier has been told by Kirsch to get his act together, given the danger they’re all in. But Boy Cavalier is being arrogant and is considering letting the eye midge transfer into a human host, because he wants to communicate with it. That’s obviously a terrible idea.
But if people didn’t do stupid things, you wouldn’t have the Alien movies. The aliens—just as in the films—are incredibly dangerous. They could kill everyone anyway, but in all the Alien stories, people make critical mistakes that cost them their lives, often through greed. Boy Cavalier is driven by arrogance. I don’t know if he’ll survive. He has to make it through the next 35 minutes of the show to see if he makes it into the second season.
They might keep him alive because the show is designed to last multiple seasons. As I’ve said, when you sell a TV series, executives want to know what five years of story arc would look like—not in detail, but generally. So more humans and synths will survive this series than in the Alien films, where almost everyone is wiped out because this isn’t the end. It’s clearly popular, and I’m sure it’ll get renewed, though it looks costly. Reportedly, this was the most significant production ever shot in Thailand, with 15 or 16 sound stages operating simultaneously.
Jacobsen: Have you seen the fake plant?
Rosner: Not yet, no. I
Jacobsen: I look ahead.
Rosner: So there’s this thing—is that the dangling watermelon, or is that something different?
Jacobsen: Yeah.
Rosner: So the dangling watermelon is a vegetable and not an animal? Is that the deal? Or maybe it’s one fake and one real, honestly.
Jacobsen: You know who died from Parkinson’s this year?
Rosner: No.
Jacobsen: Robert Jarvik.
Rosner: That’s sad. That’s Marilyn’s husband.
Jacobsen: I saw it in an interview. He was shaking a few years ago, and I thought, “Yeah.”
Rosner: He wasn’t that old either.
Jacobsen: Seventy-nine.
Rosner: That’s not old for now.
Jacobsen: About average for an American man. A little older, actually.
Rosner: Yeah, yeah. But he was a doctor with resources. My dad had Parkinson’s. My grandpa had Parkinson’s. But it was a late onset for both. I don’t think it killed my grandpa, who lived to 96 and a half. It certainly affected my dad in his last few years, but I don’t know that it killed him. Anyway, I might consider that in the future, but if it’s a late-onset condition and I make it to my 80s—that’s another 15 years—they might have good treatments by then. I’m not particularly worried about Parkinson’s. I’m more concerned about other things. Anyway, my condolences to Marilyn vos Savant.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishingcontent—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/23
Can mid-tier spectacle still sing when character inevitability carries the load?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen asks for an update; Rick Rosner toggles from an OCD-shirt gym chat and a teen’s hair-tic echoing an Emmy winner to Alien: Earth’s mid-episode beats: Wendy/Marcy protests Nibs’s memory wipe, Hermit consults a fired scientist, and an insect-fed death nears discovery in real time. Rosner thinks machine-eating insects signal attrition without erasing the core cast. He rates the series 8–8.5 and contrasts spectacle with craft: Elmore Leonard’s inevitable, unsensational collisions versus Fast & Furious physics. Regretting not greeting Elmore Leonard (and passing on Harlan Ellison), he skewers clichés, praises fairer game-show mechanics, and warns perfectionism smothers output.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is up with your highly accurate shirt, by the way?
Rick Rosner: I am wearing my OCD shirt—it says “I don’t have OCD” six times, which is the joke. Also, I do have OCD. A 15-year-old kid at the gym said he liked my shirt. I said, Yes, and I do have OCD. He replied, “Well, I have got the combination of doom. I have got autism, ADHD, and anxiety.”
There is a school a couple of blocks from where we live for kids on the spectrum and with other conditions. Anyway, we had a conversation, but it was awkward: a teenager with autism and an adult on the spectrum with OCD. The kid kept tugging at his hair—putting his hand in it as a nervous tic.
Coincidentally, the Emmys were on tonight, and a 15-year-old kid won an Emmy for a performance in a show called Adolescence. Is that the youngest Emmy winner ever? Maybe. The Emmys have been going for 70 years, so someone younger has won before. But anyway, this kid had the same hair-touching tic. That coincidence was interesting.
All right, back to Alien Earth. I watched a little more. Wendy/Marcy is giving the scientist lady a hard time for erasing part of Nibs’s memory, because Nibs was freaking out. You cannot have them freaking out—they are super powerful and could kill humans.
Then Hermit, Marcy’s brother, is talking to the scientist who got fired and is on his way out. Hermit asks whether his sister is safe there, and the scientist shows him how safe everyone is by pulling up their vitals. They are just seconds away from discovering that one of the kids has been eaten by the insects when I paused the video.
I assume the scientist will go in to try to save him and will himself get eaten by the insects.
Jacobsen: What do you think the insects being able to eat machines—or “tinnies”—says about the future?
Rosner: The future of the show? The season still has a lot of ground to cover. More characters have to be killed, but enough must survive to carry the series forward. This is only episode six, so there is room for both mass casualties and continuity. Unlike Aliens—the sequel to Alien—which only brought back Sigourney Weaver’s Ripley, this series needs a core group of survivors.
They can lose half the cast, but that will probably happen in the final two hours of the season.
I have been calling the show an eight, maybe an eight and a half, though I am not watching it fairly. I would need to sit down and watch for an hour at a time instead of in ten-minute chunks. There is also a limit to how good a story like this can be.
Take Elmore Leonard. He wrote around 80 books over a career of fifty years or more. His writing was always economical. He never wrote longer than necessary, and he followed the rule of avoiding unnecessary adjectives and adverbs. He did not pad scenes. In his later years, especially, his confrontations were stripped down—no excessive elaboration.
I once saw him at a book signing in Encino. The store was nearly empty—it was just him, me, my wife, and a couple of clerks. I did not buy a book or go up to talk to him. I should have. I was an asshole for not taking the opportunity to meet Elmore Leonard while he sat there alone.
I also saw Harlan Ellison once at a Mongolian barbecue place in Sherman Oaks, eating with his wife. I did not approach him either, but that made more sense—Ellison had a reputation for being mean, and interrupting his dinner would probably not have ended well. Still, it adds to my history of being timid around authors.
Leonard’s style was about inevitability. He put characters on a collision course because they wanted different things and only one could prevail. But the confrontations were never spectacular. Someone pulled a gun and fired a shot or two. Sometimes it was as simple as a loosened railing on a stilt house overlooking a hundred-foot drop: a character leaned on it, the railing gave way, and that was it.
Compare that with something like Fast & Furious. There are ten of those movies now, and every confrontation is an overblown shootout, car chase, or explosion. Leonard’s genius was in making violence inevitable but unsensational.
The physics and stunts in Fast & Furious continue to become more elaborate. In one of the later films—six or so—they drive a car from one skyscraper to another. They get a running start, jump a hundred or more feet, and crash into the next tower because it is their only means of escape. It is entirely ridiculous. Maybe the physics could be simulated to show it is barely possible, but the odds of pulling it off in real life are one in a million.
In Elmore Leonard’s stories, by contrast, nothing is elaborate. Two people dislike each other; one pulls a gun and shoots. Sometimes both are armed, but it is never flashy. Leonard had thought carefully about how people work and how violence unfolds, and he wrote it simply, without unnecessary embellishment.
That is the difference. Fast & Furious delivers spectacle—amazing, computer-generated stunts that may not make complete sense, but fit seamlessly into the plot. Leonard, on the other hand, was one of the greatest crime writers, and early on, he also wrote Westerns. He focused on character, motive, and inevitable collisions between people. The result is more satisfying, even if it lacks the spectacle.
The Alien TV series falls somewhere in between. It is constrained by its world. It must deliver people versus horrific aliens, with cyborgs and synthetics mixed in, while keeping the plot moving and production on schedule. That constraint limits how “perfectly awesome” it can be, but it also forces focus.
Certain clichés always crop up. “Chop chop” drives me crazy whenever I hear it—a lazy way of saying “hurry up.” Or vomiting as shorthand for emotion: a character is so overwhelmed that they puke. Lately, it has also been overused for comedy. Then there is the inevitable line in chase scenes: two people in a car, one driving, the other looking behind them. “We have got company.” It is a cliché, yes, but it is efficient. You could say, “We are being followed,” or “I think someone is following us,” but those are clunkier. In real life, someone might very well say the cliché because it works.
You cannot avoid situations that you have already seen a million times in movies and television when you are writing. Carole started watching a made-for-TV movie called The Wrong Paris, a rom-com built around a dating reality show.
It had all the usual dating reality show scenarios, the kind you have seen countless times before, so they were inevitably a little lame. But at least the writers and producers had thought about the dynamics well enough that the movie did not completely suck.
They even improved upon real reality shows. Usually, on a dating or competition show, only the last winner gets anything—the partner, the money, whatever the prize is. And the batting averages are terrible; most of the couples split up within six months. On other shows like Wipeout, two dozen people compete, put their bodies at risk, sometimes getting seriously hurt, but only the ultimate winner walks away with money.
This movie tried a different system. Contestants earned money for lasting longer—say, five thousand dollars for surviving a week. That was necessary for the plot, but it was also fairer than real shows. In its own way, it was bright and somewhat satisfying. However, it was still unappealing, as it was a rom-com based on a reality dating show.
And that is the truth: everything you create will be lame to some degree, because it has to be about something, and all subject matter is inherently limited. You also have to work with limited resources and limited time. I have been writing a book for forty years and never published it. It could have been the most awesome thing in the world. Still, my paralysis, for the sake of “awesomeness,” has kept me from writing ten other books that might not have been perfect, but still could have been good.
So Alien Earth is not “good” in an absolute sense, but it is good considering what can reasonably be expected. You cannot expect everything to be excellent. Sometimes you get lucky. Alien in 1979 was undeniably impressive, just as Star Wars was in 1977. They had new technology to make science fiction look real, great production teams, and in George Lucas’s case, a kind of genius—not in dialogue or plotting, but in making an exciting science fiction spectacle.
These were the first of their kind that we got to see. They had the awesomeness of breaking new ground, which made for a fantastic movie. But that was serendipity—something you cannot expect from every entertainment product you consume. Not everything can open up a whole new genre.
So there you go.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/23
Do symbolic votes, culture-war theatrics, and sci-fi horror rhyme more than we admit?
In this round, Scott Douglas Jacobsen cues Rick Rosner on the UN’s two-state vote, while Benjamin Netanyahu’s incentive to prolong war looms. Rosner retracts earlier Poland-drone speculation, then parses reaction to the murder of Charlie Kirk, alongside Jacobsen’s deadpan “heaven” satire. Protesters target Elon Musk’s Tesla Drive-In; the FBI director’s New York dinner irks critics. Rosner places small bets on Donald Trump’s approval and notes shooter Tyler Robinson’s standout ACT before an IHOP “memorial” meal. Back in Alien: Earth, acid-spitting flies that feed on electronics liquefy a synthetic, a mind-controlled sheep stalks, and containment failures mount.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Gaza—the UN resolution. Reuters reported that the United Nations General Assembly on Friday overwhelmingly voted to endorse a declaration outlining “tangible and irreversible steps” for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians.
It was a seven-page declaration, the result of an international conference of the UN in July hosted by Saudi Arabia and France on the decades-long conflict. The United States and Israel boycotted the event. The final vote result was 142 in favour, 10 against, and 12 abstentions. That is only 164, while there are 193 member states in the UN General Assembly.
Very importantly, all Gulf Arab states supported it. Israel and the United States voted against it, along with Argentina, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, and Tonga. In other words, most of the nations with a direct invested interest voted in favour of a two-state solution. They also condemned Hamas at the same time.
Rick Rosner: All right, well, that is good, but the UN has no teeth. They have had dozens of votes like this over the past 40 years, condemning Israel, with the U.S. refusing to do so. This will not affect Israel’s behaviour at all.
Israel is led by Netanyahu, a figure similar to Trump. His cabinet is aligned with the worst right-wing elements of Israeli politics. He needs to stay in office to delay his prosecution for corruption. He has been on trial for years. The trials are ongoing even as he serves as prime minister. He will keep the war going as long as possible, so that by the time a sentence is handed down and the appeals exhausted, he will be 79 or 80 and effectively beyond accountability.
Netanyahu’s strategy is to claim in Court that he is too old to go to prison. That is his plan. Israel is loathed by its enemies in the Middle East and would be regardless of its behaviour. So Israel is going to keep on doing what it is doing.
A sizable minority of Israeli citizens hate Netanyahu and hate the war, but grudgingly support him as leader while the war is going on. So things are going to keep happening the way they have been happening.
It started with Hamas slaughtering 1,200 Israelis on October 7, 2023. We are now less than a month away from the second anniversary of Israel’s invasion, with more than 100,000 troops sent in. Israel has 300,000 soldiers available. They are not going to put all of them in Gaza, but that is the scale of what they can call up.
Hamas initially had around 30,000 fighters—it is difficult to determine the exact number. At least 10,000, maybe 15,000 to 20,000, have been killed, along with some 40,000 other Gazans. But Hamas’s numbers have been replenished. It might still have as many as 20,000 fighters. That is not nothing, but it is not a force that requires two years to “mop up.” Israel claims the war continues primarily because of the hostages.
At this point, there are roughly 50 hostages held by Hamas. The last time I looked, 20 were thought to still be alive. Israel claims that each side is interested in continuing the conflict. Hamas will keep fighting—they know they will be obliterated if they ever release the hostages. Netanyahu, as I said, wants to keep fighting to stay out of prison.
It is a deplorable situation. Jews around the world, I think, mostly hate what Israel is doing because it contributes to antisemitism and reduces Israel’s standing as a bastion of Jewish liberty.
Jacobsen: Comments?
Rosner: At this time, no. What I am asking is: are my opinions reasonable?
Jacobsen: Your opinions are opinions. For the most part, they are reasonable. I always run it through a fact check.
Rosner: Okay, but a bit ago, I said some stupid things about the drones, the Russian drones flying over Poland. I offered some possible explanations that, on second thought, were stupid. If I were conspiracy-minded, I might have suggested that…
I suggested, stupidly, that the Russian drones over Poland might have been a false flag from Ukraine—even though I did not believe it. That was a dumb thing to say. Any suggestion that it was an accident was also dumb, once I read more. It involved 19 drones, some of them flying deep into Poland.
That was absolutely intentional. You cannot be sure precisely what Russia intended. Still, they certainly meant, among other things, to provoke Poland and thumb their nose at NATO. I felt bad about saying stupid things. I always feel a little bad, though. If I stopped myself from saying silly things, we would have 40% less content.
Jacobsen: Anything new on Kirk?
Rosner: No, it is more of the same.
The right keeps wanting to blame the left. You have to be careful. I can tiptoe right up to saying that Charlie Kirk was not the best guy without getting hit with a storm of backlash. And my little semi-jokes are bleak enough.
People did not know whether to get pissed at me or not. Stephen King had to apologize because he said that Charlie Kirk was in favour of stoning gays to death, Bible style. Then it turned out Kirk was quoting the Bible without explicitly endorsing it in that instance.
Stephen King had to retract the tweet. I said, stupidly and obliquely, that Charlie Kirk absolutely did not advocate stoning gays—but he did sell t-shirts for $39.95. Then I linked to his line of t-shirts. That is a lot for a t-shirt. But people either did not see the tweet or did not know whether to be offended. So I can do that kind of thing without getting in trouble. I also said that I deplore his murder, that it was tragic for his family and terrible for America.
And that it did not give him time to become a better man. The money rolled in—he had a net worth of $12 million—and he did not have time to change. Nobody really went after me for that. Saying he could have turned into a better man implies he was not the best possible man. I get about 500 views for things like that, which is fine.
I could pay Elon Musk $8 a month and increase my reach by a thousand percent. But then I would be giving Musk money, and his tweets have been getting more racist. So why fund that? It could also get me into more trouble.
Carole and I went to an art gallery opening in Hollywood, which turned out to be right across the street from the Tesla Drive-In. It is Elon Musk’s restaurant, or one of several. From the outside, it resembles a spaceship—round and covered with cladding. On adjacent buildings, they project entire movies onto screens, measuring approximately 30 by 30 feet. The movies are super noisy because they are open-air.
There are protesters out there every day. They make noise, they have inflatable figures waving their arms like car lot mascots, and a couple of giant blow-up Musk figures rigged so that the air pressure makes them give a Nazi salute over and over. There is also a man walking around in a small cardboard Tesla truck labelled “Auschwitz Mobile” or something similar. A dozen or more protesters are out there making noise, and cars honk in support.
Across the street, there is a gigantic apartment building, at least eight stories tall, with probably 250 units. The people who live there—who lived there before Musk built this thing—have to deal with the constant noise. They are pissed. Musk is a crazy weirdo.
Jacobsen: What else? The head of the FBI took time out from being at the crime scene to have dinner at a hard-to-get-into restaurant in New York City, roughly 1,900 miles away from the crime scene. And they did not catch anybody, because the shooter was turned in by his dad and maybe also his roommate.
Rosner: So, things are as they have been, except the temperature has been turned up. I have a small betting account where I discovered that the odds they are offering for Trump’s popularity on October 1—17 days from now—are pretty favourable. I can afford to buy the spread. You can estimate the percentile on Nate Silver’s site where Trump’s approval will fall.
I covered 43% and 44%, and today I spent another dollar to cover 45% in case this whole assassination attempt boosts Trump’s popularity. What else? One of the pictures of the shooter from before he became known as “the shooter” shows him as an innovative individual. He scored 34 out of 36 on the ACT. A 34 is especially impressive coming out of rural Utah, where you don’t pay for an expensive prep course—you just go in and take it cold. On the first try, that is a strong score. So he was a smart guy.
There is a picture of him in a diner with a plate of pancakes, eggs, and bacon. In honour of that, Carole and I went to IHOP for a Charlie Kirk memorial meal. I got the all-you-can-eat pancakes because they looked good in the picture. It is what Charlie would have wanted.
Jacobsen: Back to Alien Earth.
Rosner: I watched a little more. One of the synthetic kids got killed. You talked about the flies—you mentioned them. We saw them for the first time. A little disappointing, because they are just big flies, about six inches, and all they do is blow acid in your face, dissolve it, and then suck your juices out.
They made a point of showing that the guy who got killed was feeding them. They established that the flies eat a lot of inorganic matter. So even though the victim was synthetic, the flies could get nutrition from him.
The sheep is the one who ambushed them. The sheep has the eye-midge—the eye-octopus—in one of its eye sockets, controlling it. They do a lot of shots of the sheep looking at what is going on, being more intelligent than a sheep.
The guy is feeding all the animals—all the alien species—and the little tray door on the containment unit for the flies jams. He accidentally breaks it trying to open it, so he has to go in there with the tray of nutrients—whatever the flies eat.
He keeps the door wedged open with his foot, but then the sheep slams into the glass and startles him. He pulls his foot away—because he is a stupid kid—and he gets locked in the containment unit with the flies. They dissolve his face and eat his brain. That is how it played out.
It was more of the same, but you already have a creature with acid for blood.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/23
Are Alien’s new terrors about technology replacing us—or just mirrors for today’s politics?
In episode six, Scott Douglas Jacobsen hears Rick Rosner’s mid-watch recap: Slightly is blackmailed by Morrow to lure Hermit into a facehugger trap as Prodigy braces for Weyland-Yutani. Rosner pivots to the shooting of Charlie Kirk, noting online grief-policing and Jacobsen’s satirical “heaven press release.” He contrasts 1979’s eroticized Alien—phallic menace, vulval eggs, Sigourney Weaver’s empowered Ripley—with the series’ new dread: technological displacement by synthetics and erased sexuality, including trauma edits of a red-haired child. He flags bomb threats shutting campuses, including HBCUs, and a West Point scare, while observing the right’s rush to scapegoat colleges and broader political anxieties.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What happened in episode six of Alien Earth?
Rick Rosner: I am about halfway through it. Slightly, one of the kids whose brain was transferred into a synthetic body, is being blackmailed by Morrow, and he is trying to get Hermit—
So, slightly, the kid whose brain was transferred into a synthetic body is being blackmailed by Moro, who wants him to get Hermit to stand next to a xenomorph egg and be attacked by a facehugger. Hermit, being an adult, responds that it is bizarre for a child to ask him to do this.
Hermit is part of a team of medical commandos. He is less combat-trained than his surviving teammates. Still, they are medics who go into dangerous situations to save lives. He is called away to patrol with the others because Prodigy Corporation suspects that Weyland-Yutani will come for the aliens Prodigy has been holding on the island. They talk about how they fear the aliens themselves more than any human threat. That is where I paused the episode.
Jacobsen: Any updated thoughts on Robinson?
Rosner: The shooter, Tyler Robinson, was academically capable. A video shows him receiving a scholarship offer to Utah State University worth about $32,000 over four years. That makes him the type of person who can unravel catastrophically. Think Ted Kaczynski: brilliant but warped. Yet the pictures of him circulating do not suggest instability—he looks normal, even wholesome. One photo shows him in a diner, eating pancakes topped with sunny-side-up eggs and sausages. Ironically, that just made me hungry. Carole and I are going to IHOP, and I might try the all-you-can-eat pancakes. Some “good” has come out of this, but I say that jokingly.
There has been fierce debate online about joking in this context. People are attempting to cancel anyone who appears to celebrate Charlie Kirk’s death. I have not done that. There is an important distinction: you can strongly disagree with Kirk’s rhetoric and public commentary without dancing on the grave of someone murdered. There was also debate about whether he went to heaven.
Some said he certainly did not. Others shot back, “You cannot know that, and you are cruel for saying so.” That argument unfolded online in real time.
Let me finish up here. So, I responded to the argument over whether Charlie Kirk is in heaven with a parody press release “from heaven.”
Rosner: You published a fake press release of Charlie Kirk in heaven on Twitter?
Jacobsen: I published a tweet that acted as a press release, saying that, yes, Charlie Kirk has officially been admitted to heaven, but was only awarded a “residence fourth class,” which is 12 square meters with a 400-millimetre porthole, an in-room sink but no shower, and seating at the 5:30 buffet.
Rosner: That is not an unfair joke.
Jacobsen: Right. I do not feel it is celebrating. What would you call it, though?
Rosner: Anyway, so, they are making fun of me again. Let us get back to Alien. The initial Alien movie came out in 1979, though production began around 1976. The film is rich in sexual themes. The egg was designed to resemble the opening of a vulva. Initially, it was depicted with two lips, but the designers thought it looked too much like “two vulvas,” so they altered it into a four-leaf design. Still, it looks unmistakably sexual.
The alien’s head has phallic features, and the horror is bound up in penetration—from the facehugger implanting embryos, to the chestburster’s violent emergence, to the secondary jaws.
Culturally, this was toward the end of the disco era. The United States was experiencing a herpes epidemic and other rising STDs. After half a decade of sexual liberation, there was also a growing awareness of its darker side. At the same time, feminist critiques were highlighting how “rapey” American culture was. Against this backdrop, Alien embodied anxieties about sex, control, and violation.
They cast Sigourney Weaver—nearly six feet tall—as a commanding, physically powerful woman who only grows stronger when she straps into the exoskeletal loader. That choice emphasized the interplay of sexual horror and gender dynamics.
By contrast, the current Alien series reflects different cultural anxieties. Instead of sexual dread, it emphasizes humanity’s inferiority. Humans appear weak, fleshy, and vulnerable compared to various artificial beings: Moro, who retains a human brain in a cybernetic body; Kirsch, whose brain and body are both robotic; and the children whose minds are implanted into adult synthetic bodies.
The aliens, importantly, do not reproduce through facehuggers with inorganic beings. Thus, the newer narratives shift the horror from sexual violation to technological displacement—mirroring today’s fears of being supplanted by AI and advanced robotics.
All the sex is stripped out. For one thing, the six kids might have adult-looking bodies, but their brains are still those of 10- to 12-year-olds. So the idea of sex has been taken away, except for one—the red-haired girl. Faced with trauma, she was attacked by the eye monster. The eye monster starts claiming, impossibly, because she is in a synthetic body, that she is pregnant. This seems like a callback to the original Alien, which had themes of impregnation. They have to shut her down and erase the trauma from her brain.
So she forgets that she had the encounter with the eye creature. She forgets that she claimed she was pregnant. There is an erasing of sexuality in this version of Alien and a replacement with anxiety about being the inferior species.
Also, a bunch of schools got shut down for bomb threats, including five HBCUs. All it takes is a phone call to shut down a college. There was also an incident at West Point Military Academy where a call about a threat may have led to actual gunplay. The right is trying to blame the college for radicalizing the shooter, even though he had little college experience. They are just trying to mess with them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner
Publication (Outlet/Website): Ask A Genius
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/23
Will myth, math, and machines decide whether we climb or calcify?
In this exchange, Scott Douglas Jacobsen relays Gareth Rees‘s prompts as Rick Rosner riffs on America’s ‘Real Jesus’—a muscular, punitive avatar for zero-sum politics—contrasting the gentler ‘Old Jesus.’ Rosner pegs the odds of alien rescue near zero: vast distances, dust hazards, and von Neumann probes beat hero landings. Inequality persists, he says, yet ‘computism’ may raise living standards while entrenching elites. The next century’s power centers: massive AIs and humans aligned with them, where distillation-driven systems like DeepSeek suggest leaner intelligence. He imagines cooperative, solar-fed abundance over AI wars. The near future’s vibe? More drones, AR bubbles, same messy humanity.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So, I talked to a guy recently—actually, a few people—who were very curious about metaphysics. It’s not something that really interests me much. I’m not especially fond of metaphysics.
I told them you’ve had an interest in bringing metaphysics and physics a little closer together, but only in a technical and restricted way. For me, I’d need a little more “sauce” before I’d care much about theology, metaphysics, or proposed gods, while never closed to them.
At one point, I asked one of them if he had any questions.
These are from Gareth Rees. First one: Any comments on the Jesus mania that seems to be trending?
Rick Rosner: So, is Gareth in America? The new form of Jesus trending in America is a mean, rugged Jesus.
In a book I’m writing about the near future—a novel—I have “Old Jesus.” This is the kind of Jesus, the one who holds lambs. And then the Jesus embraced by the MAGA-style evangelicals in my book comes to be called “Real Jesus.”
Real Jesus doesn’t have long hair. He’s got a buzz cut, a fade. Honest Jesus is in favour of using force wherever force is “indicated.” And of course, to the Real Jesus guys, force is always indicated.
Both Old Jesus and Real Jesus are ripped. They were carpenters. Even when Old Jesus gets up on the cross, he often has abs, pecs and biceps. But Real Jesus is really ripped. He’s not afraid to unholster any number of guns.
But he doesn’t need guns—he’s got these kinds of firearms. He won’t turn the other cheek; he’ll turn your cheek with a punch.
So that’s the American version of Jesus. It’s not very well tied to the Jesus we grew up with, the one who was just a lovely guy.
This Jesus, the Real Jesus of the evangelicals, reflects the idea that the world isn’t a nice place but a zero-sum place—where if you’re not ready to get tough, people worse than you are going to take what’s yours. Honest Jesus is an a-hole. He doesn’t believe in abundance.
And he’s a reflection of something I’ve talked about a bunch: 50 years ago, conservative think tanks started herding idiots—because idiots are easier to herd. We’re living with the consequences of 50 years of Republicans appealing to schmucks. And this version of Jesus is a schmucky-ass Jesus.
So that’s my comment—or set of comments.
Jacobsen: His second question was, “Is there a non-zero probability of ETs rescuing Earth and its inhabitants?” He put in parentheses, “Clinging to hope here.”
Rosner: I highly doubt it, because of the distances between stars and the relative rarity of civilizations.
So, let’s say a hundred billion stars in our galaxy. The odds of there being an advanced civilization existing at the same time we do? One in a billion. That’d mean there are roughly a hundred advanced civilizations in the Milky Way.
Which means—if it’s one in a billion—you’d need to explore a radius of about a thousand stars to cover a billion. That’s a sphere extending maybe four thousand light-years.
And you can’t even travel at 10% of the speed of light, because the faster you travel, the more interstellar dust becomes deadly. One speck could blow you up. So any civilization trying to explore like that would be talking about sending von Neumann probes that could take 40,000 years to fill out that sphere. But why bother when you can stay home and simulate any civilization you want with your advanced tech?
There’s also the possibility they don’t want to announce themselves, because any other civilization might wipe them out.
So no—I think there’s very little chance we’ve been visited by aliens, or that they’d be particularly concerned with us. I do think they’re out there. I don’t think they’ve come here.
Now, maybe there’s some kind of “club” near the center of the galaxy—where computation is more straightforward, where more exotic physics might be possible. Maybe civilizations that pass the test of being able to send probes to the galactic center are welcomed into a billion-year-old club.
But the galactic center is around 100,000 light-years away. Even if you could manage it, you’re looking at a million years of travel.
So yeah—I don’t think there’s much help coming from elsewhere.
Jacobsen: Last question. He also asks, “What do you think of the possibility that the world economy doesn’t recover from its current trend, and we end up with exacerbated socioeconomic classes? (Poor get poorer, rich get richer, middle class gone.)”
Rosner: I mean, that’s what’s been going on in the U.S. The U.S. is an extreme case, but similar trends are also occurring around the world.
In the medium run, I believe computism replaces capitalism and communism—that is, the economics of computing becomes a bigger and bigger part of the world economy. And that distorts everything.
It leads to abundance. It makes a lot of stuff that humans like cheaper. But it could also lead to a two-tiered idiocracy, where you’ve got a minimum basic income for all. Suppose you want to strive and enter the competitive economy. In that case, you can do that—you can get schooled, get networked, and rise above the minimum basic.
There’s also the chance that AI gloms onto everything and leaves humans existing in the cracks, kind of like rats in the bilge of an old-timey ship. That shouldn’t happen. In the jungle of new ways of existing, humans will generally move toward augmenting themselves to live in a much faster-thinking world. I don’t know—will rich people own everything in the future? That’s what I’m watching.
We’re together, discussing Alien: Earth, the TV series based on Alien, which takes place 95 years from now. In it, Earth is owned by basically five rich people. It’s all divided among these five corporations. Everybody’s got a minimum level of subsistence. Things aren’t terrible, but there is an extreme disparity between the very richest and everybody else.
So I guess I’ll say yes—the disparities are going to continue. But the quality of life for the non-rich will keep improving as tech makes things cheaper in the near to mid-future—that is, over the next 50 to 80 years.
Jacobsen: I have a question separate from that entirely. What will be not only the most dominant, but also the most effective single type or class of intelligence in the next 100 years? This is a little bit more nuanced than just “computers, hybrids, or human beings.”
Rosner: That’s really several questions. One question is: Who will rule the world? That would be massive intelligences and those aligned with them. So, people are working with AI. Lucky individuals who end up in positions like those of Elon Musk—and then add AI to their capabilities—will be hard to displace from their vast wealth and power.
The entities that succeed in gaining more power will be those with the most fortunate individuals and entities who possess the most advanced technology.
I don’t know how much more powerful an AI is because it has more servers. If your server farm has 30,000 servers, assuming they’re all the same size, is that necessarily a smarter AI than one with only 4,000? I don’t know.
There’s a lot of debate in the AI world about how much compute really matters, versus whether more compact versions of AI can be built—ones that can generate new ideas without needing such a massive training set.
Jacobsen: They had a thing with DeepSeek where the reason it was so effective was because they used a system process called distillation. So the bigger model was able to make it more efficient, information-wise, so it could get 10x or 100x efficiency for the same output. It separated the wheat from the chaff; however, that system did that. That’s one aspect of the discussion. We don’t know whether AIs are going to cooperate or compete. We don’t know if they’re going to go to war with each other.
Rosner: In my stupid book about the future, my character is trying to convince AIs not to go to war with each other—preaching abundance, that the resources AIs need can be better obtained by working together to improve the world’s energy infrastructure. That structure is not infinitely, but massively improvable for the next bunch of centuries. You don’t really run into insurmountable bottlenecks until you’ve exhausted the resources of the near solar system.
You’ve got the sun, which provides as much energy as you’d need for thousands of years. If we can capture the sun’s output, that’s enough for all the AIs in the world for thousands of years to come. You need to build the infrastructure to grab it.
But there will be bad actors trying to grab power and resources. I want the coming AI-ocracy to team up to be vigilant against AI chaos agents. The people and other entities in charge will be the primary interpreters of big data. These entities have access to a vast amount of information and the computing power to extract new insights from that enormous amount of information.
All right, an addendum: The world will continue to look like the world. I think a team of art directors could effectively envision different versions of what the world might look like over the next 50 years—more gadgets, but also all the old stuff. People will still need to eat, and there will still be restaurants.
You see versions of the future like this, where it’s the present world, just more cluttered: floating signage, a bunch of flying junk. They’re even discussing the possibility of using air taxis—essentially giant drones—to transport people around during the Olympics.
To me, that sounds like horse shit. We haven’t even seen a prototype, and we’re less than three years away. Someone may try, but the skies won’t be filled with them. The logistics are just too challenging.
That said, the air will likely be filled with more drones than we have now. Any sci-fi rendering of the future shows clutter in the air. Plus, people are doing the same stuff they’ve always done, though less of the old and more of the new. Less physical intimacy, more being hooked up to information delivery crap strapped to your body.
People walking around in their AR bubbles—not literal bubbles, but waving their hands around, like in the intro to Minority Report. We’ve already seen what the future kind of looks like. Different parts of it have been imagined by people already.
The future, at least for the next few decades, is not impossible to picture.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/23
1886: It has always been a desire of mine to study medicine ever since I was a small girl, for even then I saw the needs of my people for a good physician.
1886: From the outset the work of an Indian girl is plain before her. We who are educated have to be pioneers of Indian civilization. We have to prepare our people to live in the white man’s way, to use the white man’s books, and to use his laws if you will only give them to us… the shores of success can only be reached by crossing the bridge of faith.
c. 1887: I like my studies very much indeed and don’t mind the dissecting room at all. We laugh and talk there just as we do anywhere.
c. 1890: My office hours are any and all hours of the day and night.
c. 1890s: It was only an Indian and it did not matter. The doctor preferred hunting for prairie chickens rather than visiting poor, suffering humanity.
c. 1900: I believe in prevention of disease and hygiene care more than I do in giving or prescribing medicine and my constant aim is to teach these two things. Plenty of fresh air and sunshine, that is nature’s medicine.
c. 1900: I’m not accomplishing miracles, but I’m beginning to see some of the results of better hygiene and health habits. And we’re losing fewer babies and fewer cases to infection.
c. 1906: I know I shall be unpopular for a while with my people, because they will misconstrue my efforts, but this is nothing, just so I can help them for their own good.
c. 1907: As for myself, I shall willingly and gladly co-operate with the Indian department in anything that is for the welfare of the tribe, but I shall always fight good and hard against the department or any one else against anything that is to the tribe’s detriment, even if I have to fight alone, for before my God I owe my people a responsibility.
c. 1912: When I realize all the work that God has given me to do, it almost takes my breath away to think how little justice I can do to it. But it is a comfort to turn and do the next thing to relieve some poor soul’s trouble.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/23
1861: “I am now about to report to you what we did.”
1865: “We are all Americans.”
1868: “I want to see Grant elected, because I think he is the best patriot and that he only can bring peace to the country.”
1869: “The question is still one of deepest interest, ‘What shall be done for the amelioration and civilization of the race?’”
1869: “The measures to which we are indebted for an improved condition of affairs are the concentration of the Indians upon suitable reservations.”
1869: “Much, however, remains to be done for the multitude yet in their savage state.”
1869: “There can be no question but that mischief has been prevented and suffering either relieved or warded off.”
1869: “The experiment has not been sufficiently tested to enable me to say definitively that it is a success.”
1885: “All my life I have occupied a false position.”
1885: “I never was ‘great’ and never expect to be.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/18
We have the thinking backwards.
It’s not more than that which we can give.
It’s no more than who they are is that which they can receive.
Apportion proportionately.
You do not put steak in a tea cup.
It’s about relevance and proportionately.
Are your words a fit, for them, in size and type?
Otherwise, you will be unheard.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/13
How does Wilma Mankiller’s reveal her strategy for Cherokee self-determination across health, education, and governance?
1992: “Do not think this is going to happen.”
1992: “The other advice I have to give you is, do not live your life safely.”
1993: “We had a government in this country long before there was a United States government.”
1993: “Don’t ever argue with a fool.”
1993: “I had very low self-esteem.”
1994: “I hope that when I leave that it will be said that I did what I could.”
2001: “Yet what’s absolutely remarkable about Cherokee people is that they almost immediately began to reform the Cherokee Nation.”
2001: “So everybody helped each other.”
2008: “It certainly wasn’t a new world to the millions of people that have lived here for thousands of years.”
2009: “If you want to see our future, look at our past.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/14
How does Chief Joseph’s 1877–1879 speeches clarify his philosophy of freedom, equal law, and Indigenous sovereignty?
1877: “I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more forever.”
1879: “The white man has more words to tell you how they look to him, but it does not require many words to speak the truth.”
1879: “I have heard talk and talk but nothing is done. Good words do not last long unless they amount to something.”
1879: “Words do not pay for my dead people. They do not pay for my country now overrun by white men. They do not protect my father’s grave. They do not pay for my horses and cattle. Good words do not give me back my children. Good words will not make good the promise of your war chief, General Miles. Good words will not give my people a home where they can live in peace and take care of themselves. I am tired of talk that comes to nothing.”
1879: “Treat all men alike. Give them all the same law. Give them an even chance to live and grow.”
1879: “All men were made by the same Great Spirit Chief. They are all brothers. The earth is the mother of all people, and all peoples should have equal rights upon it.”
1879: “You might as well expect the rivers to run backward as that any man who was born a free man should be contented when penned up and denied liberty to go where he pleases.”
1879: “If you tie a horse to a stake, do you expect he will grow fat? If you pen an Indian up on a small plot of earth and compel him to stay there, he will not be contented, nor will he grow and prosper.”
1879: “We ask to be recognized as men. We ask that the same law work alike on all men. If an Indian breaks the law, punish him by the law. If a white man breaks the law, punish him also.”
1879: “Let me be a free man — free to travel, free to stop, free to work, free to trade where I choose, free to choose my own teachers, free to think and talk and act for myself — and I will obey every law or submit to the penalty.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/04
What are Aleister Crowley quotes around Thelema and modern magick practice?
1904: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.”
1904: “Love is the law, love under will.”
1904: “Every man and every woman is a star.”
1904: “The word of Sin is Restriction.”
1904: “There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.”
1904: “Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!”
1904: “Remember all ye that existence is pure joy.”
1904: “I am the flame that burns in every heart of man, and in the core of every star.”
1904: “The slaves shall serve.”
1909: “The method of science, the aim of religion.”
1913: “I am Pan! Io Pan! Io Pan Pan!”
1913: “The joy of life consists in the exercise of one’s energies, continual growth, constant change.”
1922: “I slept with Faith and found a corpse in my arms; I drank and danced all night with Doubt.”
1929: “Magick is the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will.”
1941: “Man has the right to live by his own law.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/04
c. 1875: “One does not sell the earth upon which the people walk.”
1877: “My friend, I do not blame you for this.”
1877: “We preferred our own way of living.”
1877: “We were no expense to the government.”
1877: “All we wanted was peace and to be left alone.”
1877: “I have spoken.”
1877 (reported): “Ah, my father, I am hurt bad. Tell the people it is no use to depend on me any more.”
1877: “I was born on the prairies where the wind blew free and there was nothing to break the light of the sun.”
1877: “I was born where there were no enclosures.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/04
How do Black Elk’s 1932–1953 statements — from Black Elk Speaks to late-life testimonies — clarify the Lakota “sacred hoop,” interpret Wounded Knee, and frame Indigenous resilience?
1932: “You have noticed that everything an Indian does is in a circle, and that is because the power of the world always works in circles.”
1932: “Then I was standing on the highest mountain of them all, and round about beneath me was the whole hoop of the world.”
1932: “I did not know then how much was ended… A people’s dream died there. It was a beautiful dream.”
1932: “It is hard to follow one great vision in this world of darkness and of many changing shadows. Among those shadows men get lost.”
1953: “Then they will realize that we Indians know the One true God, and that we pray to Him continually.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/02
What are definitive Martin Buber quotes?
1923: “To man the world is twofold, in accordance with his twofold attitude.”
1923: “Primary words do not signify things, but they intimate relations.”
1923: “The primary word I–Thou can be spoken only with the whole being.”
1923: “The primary word I–It can never be spoken with the whole being.”
1923: “There is no I taken in itself, but only the I of the primary word I–Thou and the I of the primary word I–It.”
1923: “The Thou meets me through grace — it is not found by seeking.”
1923: “I become through my relation to the Thou; as I become I, I say Thou.”
1923: “All real living is meeting.”
1923: “The present arises only in virtue of the fact that the Thou becomes present.”
1923: “Love is responsibility of an I for a Thou.”
1923: “In the beginning is relation.”
1923: “Spirit is not in the I, but between I and Thou.”
1923: “Every means is an obstacle. Only when every means has collapsed does the meeting come about.”
1950: “There is something that can only be found in one place. It is a great treasure… The place where this treasure can be found is the place on which one stands.”
1950: “To begin with oneself, but not to end with oneself; to start from oneself, but not to aim at oneself; to comprehend oneself, but not to be preoccupied with oneself.”
1950: “This is the ultimate purpose: to let God in. But we can let him in only where we really stand, where we live, where we live a true life.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/02
How do Terence Tao’s 2003–2025 quotes illuminate discovery, collaboration, pedagogy, and AI in modern mathematics?
2003
“Ever since I can remember, I have enjoyed mathematics; I recall being fascinated by numbers even at age three.”
“I work in a number of areas, but I don’t view them as being disconnected; I tend to view mathematics as a unified subject.”
“There are fewer miracles, but instead there is lots of intuition coming from physics and from geometry.”
“In analysis, many research programs do not conclude in a definitive paper, but rather form a progression of steadily improving partial results.”
2006
“Collaboration is very important for me, as it allows me to learn about other fields, and… share what I have learnt about my own fields.”
“I pick up a lot of problems (and collaborators) by talking to other mathematicians.”
“I’m drawn to problems placed in as simple a setting as possible — a ‘toy model’ — where other difficulties are turned off.”
“I’d like to see mathematics demystified more, and to be made more accessible to the public.”
“I’m also a great fan of interdisciplinary research — taking ideas from one field and applying them to another.”
“If I learned something in class that I only partly understood, I wasn’t satisfied until I was able to work the whole thing out.”
2007
“The concept of mathematical quality is a high-dimensional one.”
“We all agree that mathematicians should strive to produce good mathematics.”
2009
“Often advice has its notable counterexamples.”
“Ultimately you should follow advice not because someone tells you to, but because it was something that you already knew you should be doing.”
2019
“They’re still out of reach.” (on near-miss approaches to Collatz)
“We have too little control over it.”
2020
“The freedom to fail is important.”
2022
“Science is cumulative and collaborative: individual contributions build up over time, and there is plenty of work for everyone.”
2023
“Therefore, an ideal collaboration should contain at least one ‘pessimist’ and one ‘optimist’.”
2024
“I do envision a future where you do research through a conversation with a chatbot.”
“Then you can do factory production–type, industrial-scale mathematics, which doesn’t really exist right now.”
“I’m not super interested in duplicating the things that humans are already good at. It seems inefficient.”
“A todos los efectos prácticos, las elecciones y la democracia funcionan.”
2025
“There’s this phenomenon in mathematics called universality.”
“We’re seeing the successes, not the failures.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/01
Which countries make up 90% of the world’s population in 2025?
India — 17.78%
China — 17.20%
United States — 4.22%
Indonesia — 3.47%
Pakistan — 3.10%
Nigeria — 2.89%
Brazil — 2.59%
Bangladesh — 2.13%
Russia — 1.75%
Ethiopia — 1.65%
Mexico — 1.60%
Japan — 1.50%
Egypt — 1.44%
Philippines — 1.42%
DR Congo — 1.37%
Vietnam — 1.23%
Iran — 1.12%
Turkey — 1.07%
Germany — 1.02%
Thailand — 0.87%
Tanzania — 0.86%
United Kingdom — 0.84%
France — 0.81%
South Africa — 0.79%
Italy — 0.72%
Kenya — 0.70%
Myanmar — 0.67%
Colombia — 0.65%
South Korea — 0.63%
Sudan — 0.63%
Uganda — 0.62%
Spain — 0.58%
Algeria — 0.58%
Iraq — 0.57%
Argentina — 0.56%
Afghanistan — 0.53%
Yemen — 0.51%
Canada — 0.49%
Angola — 0.47%
Ukraine — 0.47%
Morocco — 0.47%
Poland — 0.46%
Uzbekistan — 0.45%
Malaysia — 0.44%
Mozambique — 0.43%
Ghana — 0.43%
Peru — 0.42%
Saudi Arabia — 0.42%
Madagascar — 0.40%
Côte d’Ivoire — 0.40%
Cameroon — 0.36%
Nepal — 0.36%
Venezuela — 0.35%
Niger — 0.34%
Australia — 0.33%
North Korea — 0.32%
Syria — 0.31%
Mali — 0.31%
Burkina Faso — 0.29%
Sri Lanka — 0.28%
Taiwan — 0.28%
Malawi — 0.27%
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/01
1879: “That hand is not the color of yours, but if I pierce it, I shall feel pain.”
1879: “If you pierce your hand, you also feel pain.”
1879: “The blood that will flow from mine will be of the same color as yours.”
1879: “I am a man.”
1879: “The same God made us both.”
1879: “You are that man.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/01
1828: “You are all fools; why the thing is very easy; I can do it myself:”
c. 1820: “If our people think I am making a fool of myself, you may tell our people that what I am doing will not make fools of them. They did not cause me to begin, and they shall not cause me to stop.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/30
1680: “They told him to make a cord of maguey fiber and tie some knots in it which would signify the number of days that they must wait before the rebellion. He said that the cord was passed through all the pueblos of the kingdom so that the ones which agreed to it might untie one knot in sign of obedience, and by the other knots they would know the days which were lacking; and this was to be done on pain of death to those who refused to agree to it.”
1680: “Finally the Señor governor and those who were with him escaped from the siege, and later this declarant saw that as soon as the Spaniards had left the kingdom an order came from the said Indian, Popé, in which he commanded all the Indians to break the lands and enlarge their cultivated fields, saying that now they were as they had been in ancient times, free from the labor they had performed for the religious and the Spaniards, who could not now be alive.”
1680: “He ordered in all the pueblos through which he passed that they instantly break up and burn the images of the holy Christ, the Virgin Mary and the other saints, the crosses, and everything pertaining to Christianity, and that they burn the temples, break up the bells, and separate from the wives whom God had given them in marriage and take those whom they desired.”
1680: “In order to take away their baptismal names, the water, and the holy oils, they were to plunge into the rivers and wash themselves with amole, which is a root native to the country, washing even their clothing, with the understanding that there would thus be taken from them the character of the holy sacraments.”
1680: “They were ordered likewise not to teach the Castilian language in any pueblo and to burn the seeds which the Spaniards sowed and to plant only maize and beans, which were the crops of their ancestors.”
1680: “They thereby returned to the state of their antiquity … because the God of the Spaniards was worth nothing and theirs was very strong, the Spaniard’s God being rotten wood.”
1680: “There came to them a pronouncement … from El Popé, to the effect that he who might still keep in his heart a regard for the priests, the governor, and the Spaniards would be known from his unclean face and clothes, and would be punished.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/30
c. 1142: “If I should see anyone in deep grief, I would take these shell strings from the pole and console them.”
c. 1142: “We must unite ourselves into one common band of brothers. We must have but one voice. Many voices makes confusion.”
c. 1142: “My children, listen to the words of Hiawatha, for they are the last he will speak to you.”
c. 1142: “Like the fingers on the hand of the warrior, each must lend aid to the other and work in unison.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/30
c. 1142: “I am Dekanawidah and with the Five Nations’ Confederate Lords I plant the Tree of the Great Peace.”
c. 1142: “The name of these roots is The Great White Roots and their nature is Peace and Strength.”
c. 1142: “We place at the top of the Tree of the Long Leaves an Eagle who is able to see afar.”
c. 1142: “I, Dekanawidah, appoint the Mohawk Lords the heads and the leaders of the Five Nations Confederacy.”
c. 1142: “I and the other Confederate Lords have entrusted the caretaking and the watching of the Five Nations Council Fire.”
c. 1142: “Women shall be considered the progenitors of the Nation. They shall own the land and the soil.”
c. 1142: “The thickness of your skin shall be seven spans — which is to say that you shall be proof against anger, offensive actions and criticism.”
c. 1142: “Five arrows shall be bound together very strong and each arrow shall represent one nation.”
c. 1142: “Listen, that peace may continue unto future days!”
c. 1142: “This decision shall be a confirmation of the voice of the people.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/29
How does Hryhorii Skovoroda’s philosophy — “know yourself” — chart a path to happiness beyond worldly capture?
“The world tried to capture me, but didn’t succeed.”
“Our life is a path and the way to happiness is not short.”
“Peace is buried like a priceless treasure in the house within ourselves.”
“First, discover where it does not lie… then you will more readily come to the place where it resides.”
“It is truly amazing that an individual who has lived thirty years has failed to notice what is best for him.”
“Sin is my sole distress. Mortify all sin in me.”
“The kingdom of blessed Nature, although it is hidden, is not undetectable behind the external signs.”
“The only thing that should be condemned is that… we neglect the supreme science.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/29
What are Augustine of Hippo’s most definitive quotes, and what do they reveal about his theology of love, time, and grace?
397: “You move us to delight in praising You; for You have made us for Yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in You.”
397: “Whoever, then, thinks that he understands the divine Scriptures, or any part of them, so that it does not build up the double love of God and of our neighbor, does not understand them at all.”
398: “Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet.”
400: “Late have I loved You, O Beauty ever ancient, ever new; late have I loved You! For behold, You were within, and I was without… You called and cried aloud and forced open my deafness; You gleamed and shone and chased away my blindness.”
400: “Give what You command, and command what You will.”
400: “He loves You too little who loves anything together with You, which he loves not for Your sake.”
400: “What, then, is time? If no one asks me, I know; if I wish to explain to him who asks, I know not.”
407: “A short precept is given you: Love, and do what you will… let the root of love be within; of this root can nothing spring but what is good.”
c. 410: “Believe, that you may understand.”
c. 415: “For if I am deceived, I am.”
421: “For evil has no positive nature; but the loss of good has received the name ‘evil’.”
426: “Two loves have made two cities: the love of self, even to the contempt of God; and the love of God, even to the contempt of self.”
426: “It seems to me that a brief and true definition of virtue is the order of love.”
426: “Miracles are not contrary to nature, but only contrary to what we know about nature.”
420: “The New Testament lies hidden in the Old, and the Old is made manifest in the New.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/29
How does Ríoghnach Connolly fuse Irish folk lineage with contemporary production?
2016: “Oh the theme of family is massive for me.”
2016: “You’ve made me sing softer. And you’ve made me sing with less ornamentation. And you’ve made me concentrate on the words, and the diction.”
2018: “Rolling the dice, letting go of something and not knowing how or where it’s going to land.”
2018: “I hate all these terminologies. Shouldn’t it be okay to be difficult to categorise?”
2018: “We write a lot of our songs on stage during improvised gigs.”
2018: “All you could hear were the big breaths taken between the phrases… and it sounded hilarious.”
2018: “Sitting on my granny Sadie’s knee, being sung to in a rocking chair.”
2018: “I wouldn’t want to be in a hospital but around a fire.”
2020: “I’m a bit of a nuisance when it comes to categorisation because I have five touring bands at the minute…”
2020: “I come from this place of romantic republicanism that wasn’t sectarian but was all about the music and the poetry.”
2020: “You’ve got this opportunity to be heard, and to have your thoughts documented so you shouldn’t underestimate the privilege of that.”
2020: “It’s natural for me that you keep that community close.”
2022: “A diatribe on the technology filling us with fear. It was so destructive in my life growing up in the north of Ireland.”
2023: “Stuart is the yin to my yang… I like mayhem. He doesn’t.”
2023: “It’s about washing off the sins of other people’s shit.”
2024: “You’ve gotta be genuine. And it was a very vulnerable record.”
2024: “Some of the record is excruciating even to listen to now.”
2024: “Grief is not linear. It pulls you back in.”
2024: “You have to put the audience first.”
2024: “We want people to create a safe base where everyone can feel what they need to.”
2024: “I like the idea that you could record as if you were singing into someone’s ear.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/28
How does a year-by-year chronology anchored in Sitting Bull’s 1883 Senate Select Committee testimony and his c.1882 “life of freedom” statement clarify his claims to the Black Hills and expose popular misquotes?
1876: “I want to know what you are doing, traveling on this road. You scare all the buffalo away. I want to hunt in this place. I want you to turn back from here. If you don’t, I will fight you again. I want you to leave what you have got here and turn back from here. … I am your friend — Sitting Bull. I need all the rations you have got and some powder.”
c. 1877: “If you have one honest man in Washington, send him here and I will talk to him.”
1881: “I wish it to be remembered that I was the last man of my tribe to surrender my rifle.”
c. 1882: “The life my people want is a life of freedom. I have seen nothing that a white man has, houses or railways or clothing or food, that is as good as the right to move in the open country and live in our fashion.”
1883: “If a man loses anything, and goes back and looks carefully for it he will find it, and that is what the Indians are doing now when they ask you to give them the things they were promised them in the past.”
1883: “I consider that my country takes in the Black Hills, and runs from the Powder River to the Missouri, and that all of this land belongs to me.”
1883: “When you have a piece of land, and anything trespasses on it, you catch it and keep it until you get damages, and I am doing the same thing now.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/28
How does a year-by-year chronology of Tecumseh’s 1810–1813 speeches — centering the Vincennes address and the Osage speech — clarify his common-land doctrine and intertribal-unity strategy?
1810: “You wish to prevent the Indians from doing as we wish them, to unite and let them consider their lands as the common property of the whole… You take the tribes aside and advise them not to come into this measure… You want by your distinctions of Indian tribes, in allotting to each a particular, to make them war with each other.”
1810: “The way, the only way to stop this evil is for the red men to unite in claiming a common and equal right in the land, as it was at first, and should be now — for it was never divided, but belongs to all. No tribe has the right to sell, even to each other, much less to strangers… Sell a country! Why not sell the air, the great sea, as well as the earth?”
1810: “How can we have confidence in the white people?”
1810: “If you offer us any [presents], we will not take. By taking goods from you, you will hereafter say that with them you purchased another piece of land from us.”
1810: “It is true I am a Shawnee. My forefathers were warriors. Their son is a warrior… I am the maker of my own fortune; and oh! that I could make that of my red people, and of my country, as great as the conceptions of my mind, when I think of the Great Spirit that rules the universe.”
1811: “Brothers — the white people are like poisonous serpents: when chilled, they are feeble and harmless; but invigorate them with warmth, and they sting their benefactors to death.”
1811: “Brothers — we must be united; we must smoke the same pipe; we must fight each other’s battles; and more than all, we must love the Great Spirit.”
1811: “Sleep not longer, O Choctaws and Chickasaws, in false security and delusive hopes. Our broad domains are fast escaping from our grasp.”
1811: “Let us form one body, one heart, and defend to the last warrior our country, our homes, our liberty, and the graves of our fathers.”
1812: “If we hear of the Big Knives coming towards our villages to speak peace, we will receive them; but if we hear of any of our people being hurt by them… we will defend ourselves like men… all this Island will rise as one man.”
1813: “We must compare our father’s conduct to a fat dog, that carries its tail upon its back, but when affrighted, it drops it between its legs and runs off.”
1813: “Our lives are in the hands of the Great Spirit. We are determined to defend our lands, and if it be his will, we wish to leave our bones upon them.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/27
How do Richard Dawkins’s most influential quotes on God and faith shape modern atheism and the New Atheism movement?
1986: “Natural selection is the blind watchmaker; blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view.”
1989: “… [faith] means blind trust, in the absence of evidence, even in the teeth of evidence… The meme for blind faith secures its own perpetuation by the simple unconscious expedient of discouraging rational enquiry.”
1991: “Growing up in the universe … also means growing out of parochial and supernatural views of the universe … not copping out with superstitious ideas.”
1992: “Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”
1993: “Like immune-deficient patients, children are wide open to mental infections that adults might brush off without effort.”
1995: “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”
1995: “DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.”
1997: “Faith is one of the world’s great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate.”
2002: “An atheist is just somebody who feels about Yahweh the way any decent Christian feels about Thor or Baal or the golden calf… We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”
2006: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, blood-thirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
2006: “I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.”
2006: “One of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.”
2006: “Accepting, then, that the God Hypothesis is a proper scientific hypothesis, albeit a very low-probability one, who should bear the burden of proof?”
2006: “Faith is an evil precisely because it requires no justification and brooks no argument.”
2019: “Strictly speaking, it’s impossible to prove that something does not exist. We don’t positively know there are no gods, just as we can’t prove that there are no fairies or pixies or elves or hobgoblins or leprechauns or pink unicorns…”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/27
What are d’Holbach’s most-cited quotes on God from that work and “Christianity Unveiled”?
1766: “God repents having peopled the earth, and he finds it easier to drown and destroy the human race, than to change their hearts.”
1766: “Such is the faithful history of the God, on whom the foundation of the Christian religion is laid.”
1766: “This unchangeable God is alternately agitated by anger and love, revenge and pity, benevolence and fury.”
1766: “If nothing be due from God to his creatures, how can any thing be due from them to him?”
1766: “How can goodness be an attribute of a God, who has created most of the human race only to damn them eternally?”
1770: “If the ignorance of nature gave birth to such a variety of gods, the knowledge of this nature is calculated to destroy them.”
1770: “Shall we be more instructed, when every time we behold an effect of which we are not in a capacity to develop the cause, we may idly say, this effect is produced by the power, by the will of God?”
1770: “Undoubtedly it is the great Cause of causes must have produced every thing; but is it not lessening the true dignity of the Divinity, to introduce him as interfering in every operation of nature; nay, in every action of so insignificant a creature as man?”
1770: “Do we, in fact, pay any kind of adoration to this being, by thus bringing him forth on every trifling occasion, to solve the difficulties ignorance throws in our way?”
1770: “It is impossible for man… to form to himself a correct idea… of incorporeity; of a substance without extent, acting upon nature, which is corporeal… It is equally impossible for man to have any clear, decided idea of perfection, of infinity, of immensity, and other theological attributes.”
1772: “All children are born Atheists; they have no idea of God.”
1772: “The principles of every religion are founded upon the idea of a GOD. Now, it is impossible to have true ideas of a being, who acts upon none of our senses.”
1772: “To say, that God is the author of the phenomena of nature, is it not to attribute them to an occult cause? What is God? What is a spirit? They are causes of which we have no idea.”
1772: “Divines every where exclaim, that God is infinitely just; but that his justice is not the justice of man… How can we receive for our model a being, whose divine perfections are precisely the reverse of human?”
1772: “God is the author of all; and yet, we are assured that evil does not come from God. Whence then does it come? From man. But, who made man? God. Evil then comes from God.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/26
How did Denis Diderot’s writings from 1746 to 1770 challenge Christian theism and advance a naturalistic, deist critique grounded in experience and reason?
1746: “The God of the Christians is a father who makes much of his apples, and very little of his children.”
1746: “These are people of whom we ought not to say that they fear God, but that they are mortally afraid of him.”
1746: “Who condemns them to such torments? The God whom they have offended. Who then is this God? A God full of goodness. But would a God full of goodness take pleasure in bathing himself in tears? Are not these fears an insult to his kindness?”
1746: “Judging from the picture they paint of the Supreme Being… the most upright soul would be tempted to wish that such a being did not exist… The thought that a God did not exist has never terrified humanity, but the idea that a God such as is represented exists.”
1746: “God must be imagined as neither too kind nor too cruel. Justice is the mean between clemency and cruelty, just as finite penalties are the mean between impunity and eternal punishment.”
1746: “There are pietists who do not think it necessary to hate themselves in order to love God… according to their moods they see a jealous or a merciful God; it is a fever with its hot and cold fits.”
1746: “Yes, I maintain that superstition is more of an insult to God than atheism.”
1746: “Only the deist can oppose the atheist. The superstitious man is not so strong an opponent… His God is only a creature of the imagination.”
1746: “I tell you that there is no God; that Creation is a fiction; that the eternity of the universe is no more of a difficulty than the eternity of spirit.”
1746: “Thus to destroy chance is not to prove the existence of a supreme being, since there may be some other thing which is neither chance nor God — I mean, nature.”
1749: “If you want me to believe in God, you must make me touch him.”
1749: “What did we do to God, you and I, so that one of us possesses this organ [of sight], and the other is deprived of it?”
1751: “Atheism is the opinion of those who deny the existence of a God, author of the world.”
1769: “Do you see this egg? With this you can overthrow all the schools of theology, all the churches of the earth.”
1770: “Wandering in a vast forest at night, I have only a faint light to guide me. A stranger appears and says to me: ‘My friend, blow out your candle to find your way more clearly.’ This stranger is a theologian.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/26
How did Bertrand Russell’s views on God and agnosticism evolve from 1903 to 1958?
1903: “Thus Man creates God, all-powerful and all-good, the mystic unity of what is and what should be.”
1925: “I do not pretend to be able to prove that there is no God.”
1925: “The Christian God may exist; so may the Gods of Olympus.”
1927: “One form is to say that there would be no right or wrong unless God existed.”
1930: “Anything that causes alarm is apt to turn people’s thoughts to God.”
1948: “No, I should not say that: my position is agnostic.”
1948: “I should say that the universe is just there, and that’s all.”
1952: “A man with any genuine religious feeling will wish to know whether, in fact, there is a God.”
1953: “An agnostic thinks it impossible to know the truth in matters such as God and the future life.”
1958: “I observe that a very large portion of the human race does not believe in God and suffers no visible punishment in consequence.”
1947: “I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one can prove that there is not a God.”
(c. 1950s): “Belief in God and a future life makes it possible to go through life with less of stoic courage than is needed by skeptics.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/25
What does Musaieva’s framing of truth as a weapon reveal about newsroom ethics and resolve during full-scale war?
2022: “The written word is a weapon. And the truth is a weapon.”
2022: “It is a war of truth and lies. The war for the right to call a spade a spade.”
2022: “Journalists in the war in Ukraine face incredible challenges, the most basic one of which is simply to survive while telling the world the truth.”
2022: “Another challenge is not to cause harm. Because when reporting on a war, the cost of error is measured by human life.”
2022: “Sometimes the most powerful truth is to remain silent. And sometimes, it is necessary to speak out.”
2022: “Was it dangerous? Yes. Was it important? Yes, it was.”
2022: “Thanks to journalists, the world saw the truth about Bucha, Borodyanka, and Irpin.”
2022: “It’s recognition of all journalists who cover this terrible war.”
2022: “War is about choices. You often ask yourself whether you are more of a Ukrainian or a journalist.”
2022: “Truth survives when there is someone to fight for it. Therefore, there will be words to stop this war as well.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/25
How do Rudenko’s lines connect soldiers’ sacrifices to a mandate for independent journalism and civil liberties?
2024: “If they are dying, we should be using those rights.”
2024: “bad actors in government have more tools than ever to try and intimidate us.”
2024: “In the past few months, we’ve experienced some unusual and concerning attention from Ukraine’s law enforcement.”
2024: “We’re trying to find out more.”
2024: “It took a threat to our independence to start cherishing it.”
2024: “What’s at stake in this war is freedom in all its forms.”
2024: “As Ukrainians, we have no say in the U.S. election, but our future nonetheless depends on who wins it.”
2024: “Russia is associated with no freedom of speech, no freedom of media, no freedom whatsoever.”
2024: “…fighting for Ukraine not to be Russia.”
2024: “won’t hold back.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/24
How do Usyk’s statements bridge elite sport, national identity, and wartime representation on the world stage?
2024: “I am excited … let’s make history.”
2024: “Thank you so much. … It’s a big opportunity for me, for my family, for my country. … It’s a great time, it’s a great day.”
2024: “It’s for my God, my supporters, my country, the Ukrainian soldiers, Ukrainian mothers and fathers, children.”
2024: “Yes, of course. I am ready for a rematch.”
2024: “Now we have just a performance with lights and cameras. Everything will take place on Saturday… Don’t be afraid. I will not leave you alone. See you on Saturday.”
2024: “Thank you, God. Not Tyson. Thank you, God… I win.”
2024: “I want to dedicate this victory to my mother … and to all mothers of Ukraine.”
2025: “Russia destroyed hospitals, Russia destroyed schools, Russia destroyed Ukrainian lives… But we will survive. We will rebuild our country, like a mosaic, piece by piece.”
2025: “I advise the American President, Donald Trump, to go to Ukraine and live in my house. Only one week.”
2025: “I really want the war to end. Nobody wants it more … than us, Ukrainians.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/24
What do Zhadan’s reflections say about culture as resistance and the war’s imprint on language, identity, and art?
2022: “Yet you have to speak. Even during times of war. Especially during times of war.”
2022: “There’s no such thing as peace without justice.”
2022: “We are helping our army not because we want war but rather because we badly want peace.”
2022: “Does anyone still want to talk about Dostoevsky?”
2022: “If Ukraine wins, there is some future for us… If Russia wins, there will be no literature, no culture, nothing.”
2024: “What we will become depends on what happens at the front. It is there that our future, the future of our culture, is determined.”
2024: “They must motivate, not weaken or demoralize.”
2025: “Whenever the war ends — whatever can be called the end of the war — this struggle… will continue in other dimensions. This can be called a war of cultures.”
2025: “Talking about literature in times of war is a great luxury. To talk about literature, it is enough to look out the window.”
2025: “We are living in ‘twilight,’ when the lights are off. But after victory, they will turn on — and we will see a completely different picture.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/24
How do Drapatyi’s 2025 remarks signal a doctrine of personal accountability and reforms in force protection and training safety?
2025: “This is a conscious step dictated by my personal sense of responsibility for the tragedy at the 239th training ground.”
2025: “These are young guys from a training battalion. Most of them were in shelters.”
2025: “They were supposed to study, live, fight — not die.”
2025: “I didn’t push hard enough, didn’t convince them, didn’t change their attitude toward the soldiers in the ranks. That is my responsibility.”
2025: “The conduct of the soldiers matters, but the primary responsibility always lies with the command. It is the commanders who set the rules, make the decisions and are accountable for the consequences.”
2025: “An army in which commanders bear personal responsibility for the lives of their troops is alive. An army where no one is accountable for losses dies from within.”
2025: “We will not win this war unless we build an army where honor is not just a word, but an action. Where responsibility is not a punishment, but the foundation of trust.”
2025: “A tragedy at a training ground is a terrible consequence of an enemy strike. The war requires quick decisions, responsibility, and new safety standards; otherwise, we will lose more than we have.”
2025: “Everyone who made decisions that day, and everyone who did not make them on time, will be held accountable. No one will hide behind explanations or formal reports.”
2025: “Without personal responsibility, there is no development. Without development, there is no victory.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/23
In what ways do Maliuk’s 2023 comments recast maritime operations and the legal basis for striking Russian military targets?
2023: “Any (explosions) that happen to the Russian ships or the Crimean Bridge is an absolutely logical and effective step in relation to the enemy.”
2023: “Such special operations are conducted in the territorial waters of Ukraine and are completely legal.”
2023: “There is only one option for such attacks to stop: Russia has to leave the territorial waters of Ukraine and Ukrainian land.”
2023: “Sea surface drones are a unique invention of the Security Service of Ukraine. None of the private companies are involved.”
2023: “Using these drones we have conducted successful hits of the Crimean bridge in July 2023, the landing ship Olengorskiy gornyak and the SIG oil tanker.”
2023: “Our drones are manufactured at an underground facility in Ukraine.”
2023: “We ‘measure twice and cut once’ — and then sting the enemy’s heart.”
2023: “We are working on a number of new interesting operations, including in the Black Sea waters. I promise you, it’ll be exciting, especially for our enemies.”
2023: “We have practically overturned the philosophy of naval operations.”
2023: “We have destroyed the myth of Russian invincibility. The bridge is doomed.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/23
How do Stefanishyna’s 2025 statements frame Ukraine’s security priorities in Washington and the case for scaling air-defense guarantees?
2025: “First and foremost, I have a political mandate to concentrate all of our efforts on ending the war, providing air defense and defense military assistance to Ukraine and making sure that in Ukraine everybody understands the messages from the U.S. administration.”
2025: “Military support, using Russian frozen assets, putting sanctions — these are part of the efforts to end the war.”
2025: “Because so much depends on the US. They have a direct influence not only on the European Union but also on Ukraine’s accession to NATO.”
2025: “I’m sure this is the reality and I think we really need to make sure that this decision happens as soon as possible.”
2025: “Advocacy is something that should not be underestimated. Because in Washington, advocacy is the main weapon.”
2025: “So it’s not a one day or one person effort, it’s a joint effort … if everybody does their part, there is a big chance for success.”
2025: “This arrangement is definitely happening.”
2025: “The attack of 20 drones has become a major discussion around all NATO, but Ukraine can handle hundreds of drones per night. So it’s really being a gamechanger in terms of mindset.”
2025: “The key priority is to establish a permanent mechanism for military support.”
2025: “The presidents agreed that the United States, together with European partners, must play a key role in guaranteeing Ukraine’s security. We are counting on further pressure on Russia to bring the war closer to an end.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/23
What do Klitschko’s wartime messages reveal about city-level crisis management, shelter protocols, and sustaining morale under fire?
2022: “I believe in Ukraine, I believe in my country and I believe in my people.”
2022: “Dear friends, Kyivans! The night was tough but there are no Russian troops in the city!”
2022: “This night will be difficult again… I urge Kyiv residents to spend this night in shelters.”
2022: “Russians want to leave the city of Kyiv without heat, without electricity, without water supply — to create a humanitarian disaster in Kyiv.”
2022: “Kyiv might lose power, water, and heat supply. The apocalypse might happen, like in Hollywood films…”
2023: “We don’t talk about the collapse, but it can happen at any second… Russian rockets can destroy our critical infrastructure in Kyiv.”
2023: “We have to think for the day after… The whole world needs Ukraine as a democratic and successful country.”
2023: “The attack on Kyiv continues. Don’t leave the shelters!”
2023: “Explosions in the capital. Air defence is operating.”
2023: “Districts of the capital are not separate principalities where you can walk around in white gloves and neglect your duties.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/22
How do Fedorov’s 2023–2025 remarks outline Ukraine’s digital-warfare doctrine — from Diia.AI to thousand-kilometre drones and AI-enabled reconnaissance?
2023: “There will be more drones, more attacks, and fewer Russian ships. That’s for sure.”
2023: “Artificial intelligence automatically identifies different types of targets, tracks them while at high altitudes and transmits data. Then attack drones and artillery take over.”
2023: “We have sent 800+ drones to the contact line as we continue to strengthen our soldiers.”
2023: “Our soldiers keep moving forward & Russians keep losing their equipment.”
2024: “The category of long-range kamikaze drones is growing, with a range of 300, 500, 700, and 1,000 kilometres. Two years ago, this category did not exist … at all.”
2024: “We will fight to increase the financing even more.”
2024: “We need to act in an anti-bureaucratic way. This is the essence of a breakthrough in the war of technology.”
2025: “Diia.AI is the world’s first AI assistant to deliver government services directly in a chat interface … Starting today, the first service — obtaining an income certificate — will be available.”
2025: “We are working on the concept of the world’s first agentic state.”
2025: “Right now, we are focusing on making sure that when we have no connection, we can still lead the drone to the target. The next will be automated missions.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/22
How do Kamyshin’s statements on scaling munitions, export-led defense manufacturing, and wartime industrial policy map Ukraine’s shift from arms importer to sovereign producer at scale?
2023: “We’re really focusing on making Ukraine the arsenal of the free world.”
2023: “For the next decades, defence should be the major industry in Ukraine. After the war it should be our core export product.”
2023: “We were branding ourselves as the breadbasket of Europe, now we want to rebrand as the arsenal of the free world.”
2023: “We have agreements with two leading American companies to jointly produce, in Ukraine, 155-calibre ammunition.”
2024: Ukraine this year plans “to considerably increase ammunition production.”
2024: “We want to get as many people as we can out of the front lines and put in machines.”
2024: “You will see more of them on the frontline… That’s one of the game changers we expect in the nearest 12 months.”
2024: “We are looking for another $10 [billion] to $15 billion.”
2024: “You have to pump the maximum amount of money you can into drones.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/22
What do Chernyshov’s lines on sub-20 bcm consumption, winter balancing with gas, honoring 2025 obligations, and “new solutions” after the transit deal reveal about Naftogaz’s roadmap to keep the lights and heat on?
2023: “Overall Ukraine’s gas consumption, annual, is below 20 billion cubic meters, it is between 18 to 19 bcm.”
2023: “Over the past day alone, we have received 14 applications from non-residents to pump gas into … Ukrainian gas storage facilities.”
2024: “We plan to use gas to generate additional electricity to cover the deficit caused by Russian attacks.”
2024: “We have survived several series of attacks and these attacks are still ongoing.”
2024: “Air defence is being constantly developed in Ukraine although it is still not enough. But it is much better than it was last year.”
2024: “We intend to pay our debt obligations in 2025, we are communicating with investors and rating agencies.”
2024: “For now, a priority is to implement new solutions for the energy security of our countries. It is about new suppliers and, in the future, about exports of Ukrainian fuel.”
2024: “We are in a period of European shippers’ meetings where we agree on the volumes of (gas) injection. They (the Russians) aim to discredit us as an energy hub with storage capacities.”
2024: “The situation will not critically impact the UGS operations since the gas is stored deep underground.”
2024: “We could attract major players in Ukraine even during the war… We are expecting German brands to gather.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/21
How do Pyshnyi’s remarks on ending deficit monetization, anchoring the exchange rate, and staying “tight for longer” explain the NBU’s playbook for keeping inflation expectations moored under missile-pressure economics?
2023: “At the beginning of the year, inflation was 26%… we’re closing out with around 5% inflation and growth.”
2024: “For us it is very important to forget about monetisation and monetary financing.”
2025: “The NBU will be ready to take additional measures in case of further risks to price dynamics and inflation expectations.”
2025: “Going forward, the pace of recovery will depend on the course of the war.”
2025: “The NBU will stick to a rather tight monetary stance for as long as it is needed.”
2025: “The answer is very simple, yes.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/21
How do Umerov’s 2023–2025 statements — urgent arms timelines, scaling to millions of drones, stronger air defenses, zero-tolerance for corruption, and Black Sea security — map Ukraine’s wartime blueprint and alliance strategy?
2023: “We have big challenges ahead and big opportunities ahead. Every day we advance, and every day we make our victory closer. Ukraine will win.”
2023: “Weaponry: We need it today. We need it now. We need it more.”
2024: “What does NATO mean for Ukrainians? It means peace, the end of the war, and development. We have already shown the world that we can operate almost all types of weapons and are ready to become part of the Alliance. Now we are focused on this.”
2024: “We need more air defense and missile defense systems to strike the enemy. The Russians are focusing on civilian infrastructure: hitting hospitals, schools, and other critical facilities.”
2024: “We have a plan. We are working to the plan. We are doing everything possible and impossible. But without timely supply [of western arms] it’s hard for us.”
2024: “For me corruption at a time of war is worse than terrorism.”
2024: “We believe that our arguments about the need to increase cooperation between Ukraine and the Republic of Korea will lead to a tangible strengthening of security for our peoples and regions.”
2025: “Our partners said they are willing to fully pay for all the production from these factories, and that … (they) will appropriate even more funding for this.”
2025: “This year, we will supply more than 4 million drones to the front.”
2025: “About two weeks ago, a decision was made to scale up these operations. We are already preparing a new large contract to increase the intensity of strikes.”
2025: “This is the new standard of war, where unmanned systems become a key element of combat, helping our defenders carry out the most complex missions.”
2025: “The Ukrainian side emphasizes: Russia’s movement of its military ships beyond the eastern part of the Black Sea will be considered a violation of the spirit of this agreement and will be viewed as a breach of commitments to ensure freedom of navigation in the Black Sea and a threat to Ukraine’s national security. In such a case, Ukraine will have full rights to exercise its right to self-defense.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/24
What do Zhadan’s reflections say about culture as resistance and the war’s imprint on language, identity, and art?
2022: “Yet you have to speak. Even during times of war. Especially during times of war.”
2022: “There’s no such thing as peace without justice.”
2022: “We are helping our army not because we want war but rather because we badly want peace.”
2022: “Does anyone still want to talk about Dostoevsky?”
2022: “If Ukraine wins, there is some future for us… If Russia wins, there will be no literature, no culture, nothing.”
2024: “What we will become depends on what happens at the front. It is there that our future, the future of our culture, is determined.”
2024: “They must motivate, not weaken or demoralize.”
2025: “Whenever the war ends — whatever can be called the end of the war — this struggle… will continue in other dimensions. This can be called a war of cultures.”
2025: “Talking about literature in times of war is a great luxury. To talk about literature, it is enough to look out the window.”
2025: “We are living in ‘twilight,’ when the lights are off. But after victory, they will turn on — and we will see a completely different picture.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/21
How do Budanov’s 2022–2025 statements — from predicting a mid-August turning point and a Kremlin coup to asserting Pyongyang supplies half of Russia’s shells — stack up against events, and what do they signal about Ukraine’s security outlook?
2022: “The breaking point will be in the second part of August.”
2022: “A coup to remove Vladimir Putin is already under way.”
2023: “We must do everything to ensure that Crimea returns home by summer.”
2024: “They supply huge amounts of artillery ammunition, which is critical for Russia.” (on North Korean aid to Moscow)
2025: “North Korea is providing 50% of Russia’s ammunition needs at the front.”
2025: “An absolutely peaceful and threat-free life in the coming years is unlikely.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/20
How do Syrskyi’s 2023–2025 statements map Ukraine’s shift from active defense to precision long-range strikes, and outline the doctrine he argues can turn attrition into victory?
2023: “Everyone wants to achieve a great victory instantly and at once. And so do we. But we have to be prepared to have this process take some time because there are a lot of forces massed on each side, a lot of materiel, and a lot of engineered obstacles.”
2023: “I want to say that our main force has not been engaged in fighting yet, and we are now searching, probing for weak places in the enemy defences. Everything is still ahead.”
2024: “Our goals remain unchanged: holding our positions … exhausting the enemy by inflicting maximum losses.”
2024: “Offensives at the level of a battalion are a major rarity.”
2024: “Only changes and constant improvement of the means and methods of warfare will make it possible to achieve success on this path.”
2024: “The life and health of servicemen have always been and are the main value of the Ukrainian army.”
2024: “The situation is difficult in the direction of the enemy’s main attack. But all the necessary decisions at all levels are being made without delay.”
2025: “I can say that the president is absolutely right and this offensive has actually already begun.”
2025: “For several days, almost a week, we have been observing almost a doubling of the number of enemy attacks in all main directions (on the frontline).”
2025: “Despite the increased pressure of the Russian and North Korean army, we will hold the defence in Kursk region as long as it is appropriate and necessary.”
2025: “We have plans, of course. Victory cannot be achieved in defence — only in offence.”
2025: “While our air defense is approximately 74% effective, we must make further efforts to protect rear-area energy facilities, critical infrastructure, and logistics.”
2025: “DeepStrike’s range deep into Russian territory has already reached 1,700 kilometres. We are preparing new long-range weapons, which will indeed be used.”
2025: “Over the past year, we have killed more enemy personnel and destroyed more military equipment and infrastructure than in previous years of the war.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/20
How do Sybiha’s 2023–2025 statements chart Ukraine’s path on NATO, Black Sea security, and a durable, just peace?
2023: “The geopolitical project of united Europe cannot be considered as complete without Ukraine.”
2024: “I conveyed Ukraine’s interest in further developing cooperation between Ukraine and Türkiye, especially in defense area.”
2024: “I also underscored the importance of ensuring freedom of navigation in the Black Sea. We also discussed ways to a comprehensive, just, and lasting peace.”
2024: “We discussed issues of long-range strikes and Euro-Atlantic integration. And here we also are cautiously optimistic.”
2024: “We have a clear picture — a clear timeframe, clear volumes — of what will be delivered to Ukraine by the end of the year. This helps us strategically to plan our actions on the battlefield.”
2024: “The invitation should not be seen as an escalation.”
2024: “On the contrary, with a clear understanding that Ukraine’s membership in NATO is inevitable, Russia will lose one of its main arguments for continuing this unjustified war.”
2025: “Fundamental principles for us are: ‘Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine,’ ‘Nothing about Europe without Europe.’”
2025: “First — Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty. Ukraine will never recognize the occupied territories.”
2025: “NATO cannot be removed from the agenda — that is the first position.”
2025: “We are not satisfied with just the absence of hostilities. Peace is not just the absence of war. We are talking about a stable, long-term, just peace with the prevention of renewed Russian aggression in the long run.”
2025: “Russian terrorists struck critical civilian infrastructure, particularly energy, across Ukraine with hundreds of drones and missiles. I urge all partners to respond strongly. Putin did this on 10 October — the anniversary of the first large-scale attack on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure in 2022.”
2025: “Russia is worse than HAMAS. Even HAMAS has agreed to a ceasefire and peace efforts. To the contrary, Moscow continues the senseless war it began — the war it cannot and will not win. As a result of this massive strike, a 7-year-old boy was killed in Zaporizhzhia, and dozens more civilians have been injured across the country.”
2025: “Pressure on Moscow is the only recipe that can work, but it needs to be strong and consolidated. Economic pressure of biting sanctions, military pressure of stronger support for Ukraine, and political pressure of full isolation. Putin must feel that the cost of continuing the war exceeds the cost of stopping it.”
2025: “We need global rules — now — for how AI can be used in weapons. This is just as urgent as preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/20
2022: “The problem is that companies are not working. If the blackouts are going to continue during the next few weeks, GDP might fall more.”
2023: “In 2022, the Ukrainian economy suffered its largest losses and damages in the entire history of independence, inflicted on it by the Russian Federation.”
2023: “Our economy not only did not fall but grew at a pace that no one expected.”
2024: “The Government’s Made in Ukraine programme resonates with international partners and they are ready to support it.”
2024: “Our task is to support more Ukrainian production and also support the consumption of Ukrainian-produced goods.”
2024: “To win the war and build a strong economy, we must focus on our own production.”
2025: “It is a great honor for me to lead the Government of Ukraine today. Our Government sets its course toward a Ukraine that stands firm on its own foundations.”
2025: “War leaves no room for delay. We must act swiftly and decisively.”
2025: “Ukraine remains ready to give diplomacy a genuine chance, with the goal of achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace.”
2025: “At every meeting in Washington we raise the topic of defending Ukrainian energy and supporting our resilience over the winter and ways to defend it.”
2025: “It is important for us that the next program seamlessly continue the previous one.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/17
How do place, memory, and the seismic drama of ordinary lives shift across her decades of stories?
1971: “People’s lives, in Jubilee as elsewhere, were dull, simple, amazing, unfathomable — deep caves paved with kitchen linoleum.”
1986: “Everybody in the community is on stage for all the other people.”
1986: “I don’t think I’ll ever write a novel.”
1994: “No, I don’t show anything in progress to anybody.”
1996: “I speak the language.”
2003: “Books seem to me to be magic, and I wanted to be part of the magic.”
2004: “The conversation of kisses. Subtle, engrossing, fearless, transforming.”
2008: “In your life there are a few places, or maybe only one place, where something has happened.”
2010: “We can hardly manage our lives without a powerful ongoing narrative.”
2012: “But we do — we do it all the time.”
2013: “You don’t go around and tell your friends that I will probably win the Nobel Prize.”
2013: “I want my stories to move people, I don’t care if they are men or women or children.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/17
How should someone travel in a mixed cultural company with prior prejudices?
When you travel with someone steeped in select grievance, a gentle, loving persuasion eventually gives way to containment: kindness, limits, and exit routes — for a time. This is a short field guide from one fraught trip: how to stay humane, set boundaries, and leave without rancour when conversation turns into performance.
I travelled briefly with a lawyer once, a peculiar composite of many Western traits they’d denounce while one reflecting the Sermon on the Mount’s “speck and plank” warning about hypocrisy: not to learn from it, but to ironically live it out.
They practised a selective morality about the killing of journalists: condemning the killings of journalists by Russian forces while showing indifference to reports of journalists killed by Israeli forces. The United Nations reported at least 242 Palestinian journalists killed in Gaza as of 11 August 2025, while the Committee to Protect Journalists’ verified tally was lower — at least 189 by 1 September 2025. Counts vary by source and method.
They were chauvinistic about many things outside what they stereotyped as Western and voiced anti-trans views, apparently resentful over a grant awarded to an LGBTQ organization. Hurt can explain a posture; it does not excuse prejudice.
Their horizon narrowed to a hard, self-justifying individualism. “I do not care about trans people!” they would exclaim whenever perspective-taking or fairness in competitive grants arose. Coming from a privileged background in their homeland only made the moral asynchrony starker. The symphony was off-key.
Most of the trip consisted of eating and walking; coffee, cola, and wine; smoking shisha and the occasional cigarette; ignoring medical advice with a gleeful lack of care; trash-talking employees in absentia; and seeking an audience — one in person or many online. They framed this as work.
I soon realised the monologues would continue regardless of any reply. I learned to be wise and barely engage, for this person wanted mainly to hear their own echo — stereotyping all Westerners or “the West” as bad while being, by their own definitions, Westernised, even as they claimed the East by implicate identity.
It made me pause. I do not see the world in Western versus Global South terms, West versus East, developed versus developing. These demarcations have some conceptual utility; they are placeholders to help us grasp reality. Regardless, I am a humanist. I see humanity as one species in the same boat, whether facing nuclear-weapons proliferation, natural disasters and pandemics, anthropogenic climate change, overpopulation, or otherwise.
I hardly spoke, avoided geopolitics, and focused on art, plenty of compliments, good food, and the possibility of future visits. From their insecurity, they seemed to assume I found them “rude, radical, or evil.” I did not. I found them generally intelligent, well-educated, and, with effort, thoughtful and kind — often lovely to be around when things were going well: an unexpected grace note I would welcome again.
They were simply another ordinary person with distinct legal and linguistic talents, an above-average character, and the habit of stereotyping others. As I later joked, they might have preferred to be born with two mouths and one ear rather than the reverse.
I have never seen what is called “Western” as inherently superior, and still do not. I do not know why anyone assumes otherwise. Had they asked, I would have given an honest, straightforward opinion. We should strive to offer non-judgmental space for improvisatory opinions with travel partners. They took little time to offer empathy or consider another point of view — a pitiable lack of curiosity despite philosophical education.
They were prone to misrepresenting me — later, online, to others. I did not confront them; outbursts or social-media rants often follow. They promised confidentiality, then subtweeted insinuations.
What to do about emotional and reputational abuse? Withdraw gently and completely. I cut contact, professionally and personally, in a systematic manner. I do not have to participate in my own abuse.
I enjoyed one early dinner with them and a friend on the first day, where we discussed metaphysics. Language barriers made deeper conversations impossible, so I left it there. It is not a judgment — simply a cultural and linguistic barrier. How well would I speak metaphysics in their languages as a monoglot?
By the second day I gave up on their repeated monologues. I realised their questions were often intrusive, performative prying — a setup for dramatic exasperation and moralizing. Attention was the currency.
Once, after I bought them fries and myself a burger, they asked what I thought was a genuine question. I barely began to answer when they pretended to choke on potatoes — a theatrical flourish. It was a superficial farce masquerading as a sincere moral inquiry. You never know when these stories will be recycled for a mentally adolescent audience on social media; in this case they were, with encouraged epithets and expletives to boot.
I stayed calm and offered terse, unserious, even sarcastic replies, having already mapped their bigotries and games. They were self-involved and saw conversation as another dais for grand moralizing, as if channelling the very ill-defined “West” they caricatured.
By the third day, I stopped trying to reason altogether. Repetition breeds clarity: when every idea circles the same drain of grievance, silence becomes a form of interpersonal self-preservation.
These outbursts repeated throughout the trip, along with requests for professional contacts. It is dispiriting to meet those who treat others as transactions: ears to listen, networks to exploit, set pieces for later show-and-tell, or verbal and emotional punching bags for prejudices against whole regions of the world. This all unfolded during a birthday week that ended with my father’s funeral. They knew. Why the mendacity? I was celebrating life, mourning death, and turning a page in a new region with someone entirely new. They chose to abandon fundamental charity toward a person sharing space and time with them.
This was not principled anti-Western sentiment so much as dependence. They needed a stereotype of “the West” as a mirror to feel seen. A scholar as cultural paradox: caught between privilege and resentment; mimicking resistance while craving its validation; resenting what one reflects and reflecting what one resents; harbouring indifference to out-group suffering while cloaked in moral relativism, trimmed with the shawl of pseudo-skepticism.
They would cite Baudrillard while acting as if attention were the only real. An embodiment of the modern afflicted contradiction: To want the power of traditional older men, the privileges of contemporary younger women, and the accountability of children no matter the generation. Someone who ‘hates men of this generation’ while seeing her male peers as “children” while wanting a family due to “hormones” but engaged in short-term mating while ‘seduced by ministers’ and flinging with French lovers. It is: To see life a simulation and live in a forever “What if?” — settling to be never settled.
By the end, I gained a vital travel lesson: choose companions carefully, disengage when necessary, maintain a kindly composure, and keep firm boundaries that allow forgiveness without forgetting. The door is open. Listening without illusion is a discipline: to hear a worldview collapse under its own echo and stay kind anyway.
Forgiveness is usually an email away. Love as a principle commands it, and loving sentiments toward this person in particular still incline me to goodwill.
They saw themselves as apart and me as a type; I saw both of us as just people. My refrain, to remind them of my individuality and vulnerability, was simple: “I’m just a person.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/17
What are Oleksandra Matviichuk’s verified quotes from 2014 to 2025, presented in strict chronological order with sources and full text?
2014: “Adoption of this law is de facto declaring war on civil society, and we, representatives of human rights organizations, are not going to give up in the war we had not started. We are calling for a boycott of these laws.”
2016: “Finding the solution to this crisis is our historic task. We must continue fighting for human dignity, even if there is nothing left but words and our own example.”
2022: “People of Ukraine want peace more than anyone else in the world. But peace cannot be reached by a country under attack laying down its arms. This would not be peace, but occupation.” (originally in
2023: “Be courageous. You for sure will be better than our generation.”
2023: “Today’s generation, even in developed democracies, has inherited human rights, democracy, the rule of law from their parents and did not fight for them themselves. They take them for granted. In fact, freedom is not a given. We make choices every day. And the values of modern civilization must be protected.”
2023: “They have begun to understand freedom as the choice between types of cheese at the supermarket. And so they are ready to trade freedom for economic gain, for promises of security, and for personal comfort.”
2024: “When I started my career as a human rights lawyer, I never imagined that I would publicly say we need weapons and missiles to protect human rights. However, I have found since the unprovoked Russian invasion of my country that you cannot wave the Geneva Conventions in front of a Russian tank. You cannot use the United Nations Charter to stop the raping and kidnapping. You cannot defeat evil without the bravery to resist it.”
2024: “I have hope, but hope is not a strategy. We need a strategy, and we need decisive action.”
2024: “Ukrainian women are at the forefront of this battle for freedom and democracy, because bravery has no gender.”
2024: “An unspoken norm was set that justice is the privilege of the victors. But justice is not a privilege. Justice is a basic human right.”
2025: “For decades, Russia has liquidated its own civil society step by step. But for a long time, the civilized world turned a blind eye to this. They continued to shake Putin’s hand, build gas pipelines, and conduct business as usual.”
2025: “This war turns people into numbers. We are returning their names.”
2025: “What’s needed now is not more debate — it’s courage, clarity, and compassion.”
2025: “If we want to prevent wars in the future, we must punish the states and their leaders who start these wars now.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/16
Apparently, there is, in fact, a maple syrup mafia,
in effect.
It’s a 70–75% world monopoly on it.
That’s so insane.
Downtown Montreal, I assume any time this century:
“Uh, yeah, can I have some maple syrup?”
“Sure, see that guy Vinny over there with the baseball bat?”
“Okay, sure.”
“He can help you.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/16
2015: “People are understanding their position in society in a different way… human rights are their rights, democracy is their democracy.”
2016: “Almost no one, except for some of our fellow human rights defenders, preoccupies with passing this procedure.”
2022: “It’s just that democracy helps win wars… we now see motivated people who are responsible and fight for their state.”
2022: “Ordinary people are the biggest power in the world. Just use your power!”
2022: “Perhaps if the world had paid attention to the war crimes in Chechnya from the start, we wouldn’t have the war in Ukraine today.”
2023: “Defending human rights is my system of values.”
2024: “Elections are a public discussion. But a third of the population is connected with the military. Another third is displaced.”
2024: “They kidnap people and detain them in basements. Eighty-seven percent of the people we speak to started their first day of detention with torture.”
2024: “It’s a continuous crime. They’re trying to indoctrinate this idea of a strong Putin, a strong [Russian] state, all of this, right from the beginning of childhood — as early as kindergarten.”
2025: “We experience the terror of Bucha every day in the occupied territories.”
2025: “It’s not just Putin who’s responsible. It’s the whole system under him.”
2025: “The issue of nuclear safety concerns every ordinary person.”
2025: “Democracy is not only your rights, but also your duty — to build, defend, and care for your country.”
2025: “We do not want to be puppets. We want to be democratic forces building our own state.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/16
Probably, the realization:
Some gone relations never had the right time to tell them:
Je t’aime.
So, until time machine machinations:
C’est la vie.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/15
Emotional and reputational abuse comes in many forms.
Is it on Meta (formerly Facebook)?
Is it on X (formerly Twitter)?
Is it on LinkedIn, TikTok, etc.?
Is it vaguebooking, or is it subtweeting — colloquially defined?
Vaguebooking is a cryptic, dramatic, nonspecific update hinting about a problem without a statement as to the person or the situation in specific terms. It is to elicit concern or curiosity.
Subtweeting talks about a specific person without mentioning or tagging them, even after blocking them on social media to prevent a response.
It doesn’t matter if the person is talented. It doesn’t matter if the overall character of the person is positive. It doesn’t matter if you have positive affection for the individual as a friend. Suppose you witness abuse towards you, directly or indirectly. In that case, you can maintain mutual dignity for one another with additional respect for yourself by disassociating from the person in a systematic and dignified way. Why take part in your own abuse on their terms?
It’s an unfortunate pity. You may not even want to do it in the first place, too. However, is the historical trend of abusive behaviour in human civilizations and interpersonal history one of persistence or repetition?
Therefore, it’s more necessary than not, because it’s more likely to persist than not, and because no absolute safe space exists: Find out the easy way via others/vicariously or on your own terms in your life story.
Your pick; good luck.
A final encouragement: Do not harbour ill-will to them; but imagine the immensity of those who have asked this before, and recently, “Am I the only one?”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/15
2019: “Because each of us is the President.”
2019: “We will build the country of other opportunities — the one where all are equal before the law and where all the rules are honest and transparent, the same for everyone.”
2019: “The President is not an icon, an idol or a portrait. Hang your kids’ photos instead, and look at them each time you are making a decision.”
2019: “In today’s world, where we live, there is no longer someone else’s war.”
2019: “Contradictions between nations and states are still resolved not by words, but by missiles.”
2022: “Life will prevail over death and light will prevail over darkness.”
2022: “The UN system must be reformed immediately so that the right of veto is not a right to kill.”
2022: “Being the Leader of the world means to be the Leader of Peace.”
2022: “For me, as the President, just peace is no compromises as to the sovereignty, freedom, and territorial integrity of my country.”
2022: “What is not in our formula? Neutrality. Those who speak of neutrality, when human values and peace are under attack, mean something else. They talk about indifference — everyone for themselves.”
2023: “I promise — being really united we can guarantee fair peace for all nations.”
2024: “Everyone must understand — you won’t boost your power at Ukraine’s expense. The world has already been through colonial wars and conspiracies of great powers at the expense of those who are smaller.”
2025: “We are now living through the most destructive arms race in human history — because this time, it includes artificial intelligence.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/15
More egalitarian societies seem to show fewer incidences of abuse.
Global society seems to be on a trajectory to more egalitarian norms.
Abuse primarily gets predicated on reasons of power.
For example, sexual misconduct more often about power than sex.
Abusive sex as outcome; power as the driver.
Women had far less power for several millennia on average.
Thus, more egalitarian societies means more power for women.
Hence, more shared power means reduced overall abuse.
Therefore, however, more equal power between women and men means higher rates of abuse by women in some circumstances, while embedded in lower overall abuse following from these trends.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/15
3.4 billion people have no safely managed sanitation.
~2.1 billion have no safely managed drinking water.
808 million live on $3 per day.
~736 million women experience violence in their lifetime.
About 300 million across ~72 countries require humanitarian assistance.
~282–283 million experience acute food insecurity.
272 million children and youth are out of school.
230 million or more girls & women are female genital mutilation survivors.
150.2 million children have malnutrition leading to stunting, 42.8 million are wasting, and 12.2 million experience severe wasting from it.
~123 million have been forcibly displaced.
83.4 million are living in internal displacement.
~50 million living under modern slavery.
41,370 grave violations exist against children in armed conflict.
More than 8,900 deaths have occurred on migration routes in 2024.
3,623 incidents of attacks on health care in conflict in 2024.
1,518 executions happened in 2024.
296 internet shutdowns in 2024 against 54 countries.
Was your coffee a little too stale this morning?
Alright, then.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/15
It means lower levels of trust as carping amplifies flaws,
particularly applied to it ‘bleeds and leads’ media,
and even worse on (anti-)social media platforms run by the antisocial.
As well, no one has the benefit of the doubt anymore.
Low-trust societies tend to be poor societies.
This does not necessarily mean economically.
Financial success also works on inertia too;
So, there are effects of delays if that’s the case.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/14
…without evidence, and insufficient time for evidence,
will mean eventual fierce betrayal.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/14
At some point,
you are going to have to come to terms with yourself,
in the universe:
Unknown future;
Partial existence;
Limited understanding;
Forced to survive;
Born together;
Dying alone.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/13
They certainly don’t love to lie.
That’s true.
However, they really, really, really love perpetuating lies,
far more than any other media of which I am aware,
without correction if they further the belief in their myth.
When the cards fall,
they’ll be the ones with the only genuine guilty consciences,
from phoney prosperity preachers to fraudulent bitcoin messianism to fake academic credentials to genius-level poseurs’ metaphysical gobbledygook to rampant rapist and pedophilic clergy;
on and on and on, it’s not even a contest.
So it goes.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/13
Share some photons with another person.
Touch them wavelength to wavelength.
By giving eye contact, you assert:
Their humanity.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/12
The Left and the Right are united in bipartisan opposition to absolute free speech,
whether at the Left fist of Academia,
or the Right fist of the Government.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/12
The nuclear bomb used to be called “The Bomb.”
Oral contraception is called “The Pill.”
Everyone knew, or knows.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/12
We’re all only fools part of the time.
That’s the easy prediction.
When, when, with who, and why?
That’s less easy.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/11
If you,
like the minority,
like me,
mostly or sometimes only had retirees as friends as a teenager and as a young adult,
you will develop more.
Two things will happen more and more.
First, you come to a new situation:
“I’ve seen and heard this before.”
You’re experiencing a second-life circumstance for the first time.
Second, you come to a new person:
“I’ve met you before.”
You’re meeting an echo for the second time, but in the canyon this time.
All the world’s a stage.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/10
When no one really did anything wrong,
they were simply caught up in the moment.
Making the momentary mistakes people make.
What are we to do with irresolute resolutions willed without ill will?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/10
Horses do not know in a traditional sense.
They do,
then they do to know.
When I used to work on the horse farm,
I would watch them throughout the day.
They’d eat their grain and hay during the day.
They’d get walked over to the pastures.
They’d graze here.
They’d graze there.
They’d get walked back in.
They’d eat the grain,
then the hay,
or alternate those two,
dunking for a suck of water betwixt them.
Your days and seasons of life will be a mix between hay, fresh grass, grain, and water — know to tell the difference and how to alternate as necessary.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/10
People misplace journalists who go to Ukraine as brave.
I’ve never thought of my trips as courageous or brave, or some synonym.
It’s not bravery; it’s a job and a gathering of stories. Most of which you’ll never even tell.
That is deliberate.
You plan. You deliberate. You finance. You go, then leave.
They think civilians are, but they’re there and longer than the journalists and can seem as if;
However, it’s an accident of their life history in Ukraine. They don’t want the war.
Bravery is conscious. So, neither are brave. The latter are victimized. The former are doing a job.
Being brave would be not leaving, journalists leave.
The most we can say is those who choose to stay become resilient over time and have legitimately been victimized.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/09
…so beginning.
Disabuse,
by unassuming.
See nothing,
to accept all.
Fall,
to rise.
Quiet,
so full.
Doubt,
to understand.
Ending…
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/09
You always have to ask:
“Where did they find the salt in the first place?”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/09
Feed them right,
give them water,
a little sunlight,
then they grow.
Some are roses.
Most are dandelions.
Only difference:
We have more than one Sun.
Plants are heliotropic.
Find out people’s source stars,
you’ll know what plurally drives them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/09
There aren’t any,
either places or people.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/08
If we do not want to spend as much time on prisoners,
if we lack much care for prisoners,
if it is more about cost than care,
if it is minimizing investment but maximizing return,
if it is about reducing recidivism,
why not utilize AI to expedite and mentor language skills and educational efforts of prisoners looking to learn and return to mainstream society?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/08
If unmodified humans will not rule the future, which enhancements — genetic, cybernetic, or cognitive — are likeliest to dominate governance and culture over the next 50 years, and how should storytellers depict them to avoid conceptual laziness?
Rick Rosner argues popular sci-fi misreads the future, faulting Altered Carbon and Star Trek for depicting unmodified humans as tomorrow’s rulers despite ubiquitous mind-tech. He praises Star Wars’ “used universe” and Blade Runner’sneon-noir for visual honesty, yet says aesthetics cannot mask conceptual laziness. The genre’s next frontier, he contends, is “consciousness horror”: repeated harm to minds, imprisoning people in games, or trapping them in layered simulations that feel real. While audiences adapt to fakes, writers still lean on indistinguishable worlds. Recent films — Ex Machina, M3GAN, M3GAN 2.0, Companion — show simulated humans driving dread, a trend Rosner believes will intensify very soon.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Let’s start with movies. That’s a good way to begin. Which sci-fi movie would you consider so atrociously bad at predicting the future — either hilariously bad or simply unbearable to watch?
Rick Rosner: The sci-fi show I always criticize for being lazy about the future is Altered Carbon. It’s about portable, replicable consciousness via “cortical stacks” implanted at the base of the skull, and you can swap bodies — or “sleeves” — by moving the stack. Humans in the show still look mostly unmodified apart from the stack port, which bothers me.
Jacobsen: Going back further, what about Star Trek or Star Wars?
Rosner: Star Trek frustrates me for the same reasons: unmodified humans presented as rulers of the future. The original series ran from 1966 to 1969, made on a tight TV budget, which shaped its look. Star Wars did the same thing in portraying unmodified humans at the center of galactic power. That won’t happen. Unmodified humans will not be the lords of the future.
Jacobsen: What about the aesthetics?
Rosner: Star Trek’s visuals were always too clean and minimal, mainly because of that 1960s network-TV constraint. By contrast, Star Warsintroduced a “used universe” — worn, dirty, lived-in technology — in 1977, and Blade Runner (1982) pushed the rainy, crowded, neon-noir city that became the visual shorthand for cyberpunk.
Jacobsen: And the future of horror?
Rosner: We don’t really have it yet, but we should have “consciousness horror.” We already have body horror, which shows all the ways the body can be mutilated. The absolute horror ahead is terrible things happening to your mind, repeatedly. Imagine being imprisoned in a game, killed over and over, unable to escape. That’s one angle. Another would be being unable to distinguish between a real and a simulated environment. Passing through layers of simulated worlds would feel like waking up from one nightmare only to find yourself in another.
Some argue that we won’t be able to distinguish between real and fake. In practice, we adapt; we get better at spotting fakes the longer they’re around. Perhaps that will change, but in the meantime, lazy writers will continue to use “indistinguishable simulation” as a plot device.
And the horror of the future will continue to mine simulated humans. We already see it: Ex Machina, M3GAN and its sequel M3GAN 2.0 (released June 27, 2025), and Companion (2025), where a supposed friend turns out to be a companion robot. That trend will continue.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/08
If you put your faith in people,
then the benchmark will be:
The idiosyncratic accumulated experience with people,
rather than steadier sails.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/07
So far, the only ones who have directly lied in correspondence have been a select few from government agency representatives.
The only ones who have intimidated or bullied to attempt to coerce their viewpoint have been leftwing activists and scholars.
The rightwing simply tends to require more time to trust you.
Others’ experiences will differ, but that’s been mine.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/06
We are evolved so as to lose and win based on individual valence. Furthermore, wins and losses of equal objective type and degree are interpreted under different individual valence. Once gained, losses feel greater than the original wins, not vice versa. Therefore, do not be deterred by the overwhelming feeling of the losses, as the wins are already more significant, by subjective sensibility extrapolated and error-corrected to the objective reality.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/06
What a lucky find!
To quote Bob Ross if art is a bit of life, it’s a “happy accident.”
I’m absolutely delighted to start the week this way.
I love Jordi Savall, genius.
My ears were born forward to be now, and so, then, the mind backward.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/05
How do speculative futures in film and media help us anticipate challenges like AI’s rising energy consumption?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner discuss Luc Besson’s The Fifth Element, a film blending sci-fi, fantasy, and romance. Rosner finds it visually striking but narratively tedious, though he values its imaginative vision of the future. He notes that speculative works — films, TV, games — act like cultural consciousness, helping societies anticipate challenges. However, lazy depictions fail to provide meaningful foresight. Rosner connects these visions to real concerns, such as AI’s growing energy demands, including electricity and water for cooling servers. He critiques proposals like orbital power stations, suggesting lunar reactors as more feasible, while emphasizing the need for efficiency-focused AI design.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: One movie that stood out in the last thirty years was The Fifth Element, with Bruce Willis and Milla Jovovich. It was unusual, mixing a Blade Runner-like futuristic aesthetic with cartoonish elements and outright fantasy. It had romance woven in, too. What are your thoughts on that film?
Rick Rosner: I’ve never seen it all the way through in order, but I’ve watched large parts of it, some multiple times. I believe it was directed by Luc Besson, who specializes in spectacular, futuristic, often nonsensical stories. The Fifth Element is visually striking and entertaining nonsense, but I found it somewhat tedious — otherwise I’d have made an effort to watch it straight through.
That said, I’m always in favour of films that attempt to imagine the future. Even if they’re off-base, they can raise important questions. For instance, before you joined, I was about to rewatch the beginning of Idiocracy, which has its own satirical vision of the future.
I appreciate productions — whether films, TV shows, or even video games — that invest time and resources in envisioning possible futures. No imagined future gets everything right, but worthwhile ones touch on real issues and make attempts to dissect them.
In a sense, cultural visions of the future function like consciousness: just as the brain predicts what might happen in the next moment to help us orient and survive, speculative futures help us prepare for cultural and societal challenges.
Of course, some science fiction is made by lazy creators, producing equally lazy visions that don’t stand up. But even consuming flawed depictions sparks thought about what the future might hold — and that has real value in preparing us for it.
Speculative visions of the future can help us prepare for the real challenges we’ll face — like artificial intelligence consuming enormous amounts of electricity to power computation, and massive amounts of water to cool overheated servers.
For example, I read today that some billionaire claimed we’ll need “orbiting power stations” to meet AI’s future energy needs. That likely means orbital nuclear reactors, since covering Earth’s surface with solar panels would be easier and more efficient than deploying orbital solar arrays. In some sense, orbital reactors might be safer — if something goes wrong, they’re not on the ground near large populations.
Still, if we’re considering nuclear power off Earth, it might actually make more sense to build reactors on the Moon rather than in orbit. On the Moon, you have solid ground, you’re not working in zero gravity, and the engineering would likely be simpler. Once you’ve already reached orbit, getting to the Moon requires additional energy, but not dramatically more.
Is this necessary in the next fifty years? Possibly. AI’s energy appetite is real and growing. But so far, I haven’t seen a genuinely concerted effort to design models that dramatically reduce AI’s power consumption. There are lighter, more efficient models — often abridged versions of large language models — that perform reasonably well. However, the broader push to address AI’s energy demands has yet to take serious shape.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/05
First, you need to see reality accurately.
Then, you can give them a name.
That may or may not be proper, even then.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/05
You know those bolstered,
the bombasts?
For nobility,
for pulchritude,
for morality,
for self-divination,
they didn’t feel it fully either.
As human beings, they can’t.
We can’t.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/04
How could “AI lava lamps” — endlessly generated, loosely coherent video — transform entertainment, from Cameron’s tech to YouTube’s watchable slop?
Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Rick Rosner sketch a fast-turnaround “Film and Commentary” series, springboarding from James Cameron’s tech genius (and clunky dialogue) and a hypothetical Cameron-Tarantino mash-up. They riff on The Boys/Gen V as grotesque political satire and the rise of watchable “AI slop” on YouTube. Rosner tracks the arc from AI stills to MidJourney’s short clips, then proposes “AI lava lamps”: endlessly generated, loosely coherent streams. His demo concept — “Bob Who Lives on the Lot” — follows a handsome squatter drifting through productions and eras, half mystery, half vibe. It is narrative as ambience: fragments, continuities, and the future of screen attention.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What else do you suggest? We could talk about complaints from your life and politics, or we could go into math, which covers most of what I think about. We could even talk about regrets, but we’ve covered that before.
Rick Rosner: James Cameron comes to mind. He’s a genius in terms of technology — he’s revolutionized filmmaking more than once and even pioneered deep-sea submersibles that reached the Titanic without disaster. But he’s not great at dialogue or plot. If he brought in someone like Tarantino, who excels at sharp, fun dialogue, the Avatar films would be less ponderous.
That connects to the idea of fun in serious productions — like The Boys and its spinoff Gen V. They’re grotesque, over-the-top superhero stories, but also satirical takes on politics. Someone even called them ham-fisted satires, but they’re entertaining.
Jacobsen: We could do something like “Film and Commentary” as a quick turnaround series.
Rosner: That could work. We’ve been talking about AI slop a little bit, you and I. It shows up in things like YouTube videos generated by AI in response to prompts. They’re largely nonsense, but they’re highly watchable, and the people who make them earn a lot of money.
The progression has been interesting. First, AI generated still images. Then short video clips. Right now, MidJourney — at least with the basic subscription — can generate clips about 5.2 seconds long. I assume if you pay for a premium membership on some AI generator, you can stretch that to 10 or 15 seconds. Then, of course, you can edit those into something longer.
I’m writing this book about the near future, and I’ve been coming up with things that will probably exist. One is something I call AI lava lamps.
Think about The Sims. If you let them go, they walk around and interact at random for quite a while. If you set up a party, it keeps going without much input. I imagine an AI system that sets up a world where the elements just continue — not entirely nonsensical, but inconsistent, fascinating to watch. The way stoners in the 60s and 70s stared at lava lamps.
Here’s one idea: Bob Who Lives on the Lot. Bob is a handsome, middle-aged guy — think Clooney or Jon Hamm. He wakes up in a house that looks normal outside, but inside it’s unfinished, bare, just a cot and a few belongings. He walks out the door, and you realize the house is only a movie set. Bob has been squatting in it.
As the AI story unfolds, he wanders the studio lot. Sometimes he wears a security guard uniform. Sometimes he’s pulled in as an extra, maybe dressed as a Roman soldier. Over time, you learn Bob has lived on the lot for years. Maybe he’s the son of a movie mogul from decades ago. Maybe he’s a ghost.
The point is, he can slide into different productions — sometimes solving mysteries, sometimes just drifting, maybe even falling in love. The setting could shift from present day to the 1940s. A sufficiently advanced AI could keep generating random, loosely connected episodes of Bob’s life for hours or days.
That’s what I mean by an AI lava lamp. It’s not really a story, not logical enough to be a narrative. It’s just endless fragments, endlessly watchable.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/04
So are the victories,
neither is an excuse to give up.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/03
That’s the problem.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/03
It’s Better Than Kosher!
Hire a guy named Moshe, take out the “r” and do infomercials, “It’s Better Than Koshe with Moshe! Tel-Aviv? Tell Habib!”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/02
“I am, somehow, less interested in the weight of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.”
That’s a good point and could be generalized over time:
Corvée laborers and enslaved workers in Pharaonic Egypt.
Debt-bonded farmers and temple dependents in Mesopotamia.
Enslaved laborers and Helots in classical Greece.
Women and metics in classical Greece.
Enslaved people and coloni in the Roman Empire.
Serfs bound to estates in medieval Europe.
Jewish and Roma communities barred from guilds and towns in medieval/early-modern Europe.
Jianmin “mean people” and most women in imperial China.
Nobi and baekjeong outcastes in Korea.
Burakumin in Tokugawa/Meiji Japan.
Dalits and Adivasi in South Asia.
Dhimmi in various Islamic empires.
Encomienda and mita Indigenous labor in Spanish America.
Plantation slaves in the Caribbean and Brazil.
Black cotton-field slaves in the American South.
Sharecroppers under Jim Crow debt peonage in post-Emancipation U.S. South.
Industrial-era child laborers in England.
Women in global pre-20th century.
Indigenous children in residential/boarding schools in Canada, the U.S., and Australia.
Black South Africans under pass laws and Bantu Education during apartheid.
Deaf communities under post-1880 oralism bans.
Roma across Europe into the 20th–21st centuries.
Muhamasheen in Yemen.
Osu among the Igbo.
Women and girls under Taliban edicts in Afghanistan now.
Therefore, not only, “Where are they?” But, what have we done?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/02
…
.
Were.
Confused…
And there we.
Wondering why we?
by tomorrows…
A werelwhined posturity, that.
Living for what we could be, for what we.
Today und tomorrow, yesterdays that.
yesterdays made…
What we.
Those words,
that.
Worlds apart,
a future’s past…
and there we.
.
.
.
.
…
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/02
How did Jane Goodall’s Gombe research on chimpanzee tool use and social behavior reshape primatology and catalyze global conservation through the Jane Goodall Institute and Roots & Shoots?
Jane Goodall was born on April 3, 1934. It was in London, England. Her parents were Mortimer Herbert Morris-Goodall and Margaret Myfanwe Joseph, with one sister, Judith. She began her academic career in East Africa after being recruited by Louis Leakey.
She studied wild chimpanzees at Gombe and then at the Gombe Stream Game Reserve in Tanganyika (now Tanzania) in 1960. This established the longest continuous field study of wild chimpanzees.
These were the basis for groundbreaking research into chimpanzees making and using tools, such as termite fishing. This overturned the prior position: Only humans make tools. The observation was made in 1960 and subsequently formalized in scientific publications.
She began PhD studies at Cambridge without an undergraduate degree, under the guidance of ethologist Robert Hinde. Her PhD was awarded in 1965/66. She also observed colobus monkeys and other mammals hunting and eating meat, including inter-group violence in the Gombe Chimpanzee War from 1974 to 1978.
She founded the Jane Goodall Institute in 1977 to sustain the research. Roots & Shoots was launched in 1991 as a global youth program focused on community, wildlife, and environmental projects.
In her life, she married several times. She married Dutch wildlife filmmaker Hugo van Lawick in 1964 and divorced in 1974, and they had one son, Hugo Eric Louis. She married Derek Bryceson in 1975, who died in 1980. Survivors reported are a son and three grandchildren: Merlin, Angel, and Nic, and a sister, Judith.
In her lifetime, she was awarded numerous prestigious honours, including the Kyoto Prize (1990), National Geographic’s Hubbard Medal (1995), the Tyler Prize for Environmental Achievement (1997), Templeton Prize (2021), and the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom (2025).
She died on October 1, 2025, in California at the age of 91 while on an American speaking tour. She died of natural causes.
Key books:
In the Shadow of Man (1971, Houghton Mifflin)
The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior (1986, Harvard Univ. Press)
Through a Window (1990, Houghton Mifflin)
Reason for Hope (1999, Warner/Grand Central).
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/02
Which Jane Goodall Quote Inspires You Most — From 1999 to 2025?
1999: “Only if we understand, can we care. Only if we care, we will help. Only if we help, we shall be saved.”
2002: “The greatest danger to our future is apathy.”
2002: “Lasting change is a series of compromises. And compromise is all right, as long as your values don’t change.”
2003: “Every individual matters. Every individual has a role to play. Every individual makes a difference.”
2014: “Only when our clever brain and our human heart work together in harmony can we achieve our true potential.”
2018: “We can have a world of peace… where we live in harmony with nature… with each other.”
2020: “It is our disregard for nature and our disrespect of the animals we should share the planet with that has caused this pandemic.”
2021: “What you do makes a difference, and you have to decide what kind of difference you want to make.”
2025: “I urge everyone to treat every day of the year as Earth Day.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/10/02
How do UN Special Procedures experts view Ukraine’s actions against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, including citizenship revocations and Law 3894-IX, in light of ICCPR Article 18 protections for freedom of religion?
A group of UN Special Procedures experts on October 1, 2025, expressed grave concern at reports of persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC).
Current measures risk violating international human rights standards. They direct particular attention top the provisions of the ICCPR Article 18 regarding freedom of conscience, religion, and thought. These rights are non-derogable.
The UN Special Procedures experts argue that national security is not a lawful basis for limiting the manifestation of freedom of religion. The experts drew attention to the revocation of Metropolitan Onufriy’s Ukrainian citizenship in July 2025, which was carried out on national security grounds.
On September 30, 2025, a court heard a DESS lawsuit to dissolve the Kyiv Metropolis. The allegations were based on affiliation with the Russian Orthodox Church.
The UN experts also criticized Law 3894-IX, which permits the dissolution of any religious organization linked to the Russian Orthodox Church. They argued that this creates a framework for state control that is incompatible with international standards.
They warned that legal certainty is undermined when justifications rest on vague labels such as “pro-Russian affiliation.” Their concern is the potential risk of criminalizing belief, assembly, and association.
UOC figures and defenders have been facing ongoing prosecutions, including those of Metropolitans Arsenii, Pavlo, Feodosii, Longin, and Father Yevhen Koshelnik. Others include journalist Dmytro Skvortsov and lawyer Svitlana Novytska. The UN experts argue these proceedings appear to amount to collective punishment.
They urged a review of Law 3894-IX and the end of trials and administrative measures against clergy, defenders, and journalists.
Signatories to this call are George Katrougalos, Nazila Ghanea, Nicolas Levrat, Ben Saul, and Gina Romero — independent UN mandate-holders serving in their personal capacities.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2016–2025: No on-record public statements attributable to Flora Gunn.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2022–2025: No on-record public statements attributable to Robert Stravens.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2023: “Qual a fonte que os presidentes da América Latina têm sobre essa informação? Eu mostrei aqui, claramente, que quem controla a informação que sai de Gaza [é o Hamas].”
2023: “Eles estão mal-informados sobre o que está acontecendo.”
2023: “Israel não está lutando só contra o Hamas, Israel está lutando contra o Irã.”
2023: “Israel está chamando todos os civis para saírem da zona de conflito e de guerra. Israel está dando condições para eles receberem ajuda humanitária. O objetivo [de Israel] é o Hamas.”
2023: “Israel não vai permanecer em Gaza quando a guerra acabar.”
2024: “É um erro comum pensar que a guerra era contra o Hamas. A guerra é contra o Irã, e o Irã e todos os seus proxies. Israel está enfrentando sete exércitos, todos conduzidos pelo Irã.”
2024: “Não há nenhum conflito entre Israel e as pessoas que se descrevem como palestinas. Israel ofereceu o Estado palestino no passado, por quatro vezes…”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2023: “This is the time to stand with Israel as we face a merciless enemy.”
2023: “The first thing that needs to be put out there is that Israel will defend itself and will respond to this outrageous barbaric attack with whatever means it has at its disposal.”
2023: “This is evil.”
2024: “We are appalled, but not surprised, at the attempt by a handful of pro-Hamas rioters to violently compromise our ability to operate as a diplomatic mission. They will not succeed… turning city council meetings into despicable spectacles of antisemitism and mass-atrocity denial.”
2025: “People are afraid to display Jewish symbols. You see this hostage pin? I cannot wear it outside for fear I may be attacked.”
2025: “From the amount of tweets and publications by the UN regarding aid for Gaza, you’d think 99% of the aid is from the UN. It is not.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2024: “We, the Jewish people, prefer peace.”
2024: “We will not be in Gaza once the hostages are released and once we are sure that there are no more terrorists or arsenal of terrorists.”
2024: “We weren’t in Gaza prior to October 7, there was a ceasefire. We didn’t start the fire, they did.”
2024: “The Palestinian Authority further escalated its conflict with Israel by ramming forward a troubling resolution… this resolution deserves condemnation by anyone who actually desires Middle East peace.”
2024: “Endorsing this one-sided Palestinian effort now, less than a year after October 7th, only emboldens terrorists and terror supporters.”
2024: “They are not pro-Palestinians. They are pro-terror organizations because they are waving the flags of Hezbollah, Hamas.”
2025: “I can assure you that… if they release the 48 hostages and Hamas terrorists — not the Gazans — will leave Gaza, that will be the last day of the war. We don’t want this war in Gaza.”
2025: “The return of the 48 hostages and the complete removal of Hamas from Gaza are the necessary conditions for ending this war.”
2025: “Those who choose to criticize or condemn Israel for defending ourselves… are serving as enablers of Hamas.”
2025: “Qatar and Hamas are responsible for the safety of our hostages… We must continue to pressure both to release everyone — and now.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2023: “If you really care about Palestinians, you need to rally to help Israel topple Hamas.”
2023: “This is not about territory; this is about terrorism.”
2023: “Phase №1 is to eradicate Hamas period. We first need to take the cancer out, and then let the healing process begin.”
2024: “Eventually Israel needs to ‘defend itself, by itself’.”
2025: “We’re not going to stay silent.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2023: “They murdered in cold blood — men, women, children, the elderly and the disabled.”
2023: “This is Israel’s 9/11.”
2023: “Let there be no confusion. This is not about politics. This is about the murder of Jews, simply because they are Jews.”
2023: “So right now there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.”
2023: “Words matter and we need to be accurate. There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza.”
2023: “Hamas is ISIS. The essence is the same.”
2023: “There is nothing, nothing that could justify the atrocities we have been seeing.”
2023: “Our goal right now is very clear: to dismantle the Hamas terrorist infrastructure.”
2023: “A lot can be said about the Oct. 7 trauma, but tonight is dedicated to 239 men, women, children, elderly, babies that have been stolen, kept in darkness, without knowing how they are doing.”
2024: “As Consul General, I will continue to participate and engage in meaningful dialogue with every single group.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/30
2023: “One of the worst atrocities for Jews since the Holocaust.”
2023: “We don’t want war; we didn’t go to war for the sake of war.”
2023: “We must destroy Hamas before any ceasefire.”
2023: “We will not allow the citizens of Israel to live under this threat anymore.”
2023: “This isn’t a war against Palestinians. This is a fight between good and evil.”
2024: “Securing our nation has been a persistent challenge… including the recent intense and gruesome war with Hamas.”
2024: “It’s time that the world wakes up.”
2024: “We will do whatever it takes with partners or alone.”
2025: “It’s become increasingly clear — even among Palestinians — that Hamas must be eliminated.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2023: “They were killed in a very brutal and barbaric way… It was slaughter by Hamas terrorists in their homes.”
2023: “We’re not fighting against the Palestinian people… we’re fighting a terrorist, a vicious, cruel terrorist organization.”
2023: “If it looks like pro-Hamas, walks like pro-Hamas and quacks like pro-Hamas, then it just may be pro-Hamas. And antisemitic.”
2024: “This resolution goes against the position of the Biden administration, the International Court of Justice, and the overwhelming majority of the American people.”
2024: “What’s a genocide? … There is definitely a politically motivated overuse of this word, and what’s happening in Gaza is a war.”
2025: “Defeating Hamas militarily should only be the first stage… The next phase must involve a sustained process of de-radicalization.”
2025: “We are devastated and heartbroken by this senseless killing… What happened last night in Washington, D.C., could have happened here in Chicago.”
2023: “I am relieved to see Natalie back home in Chicago… While we’re celebrating Natalie’s return, we remember the 239 hostages… still held by Hamas in Gaza.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2024: “Oct. 7 is for many Jewish people akin to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on US soil. ‘Each and every Israeli knows where’ they were on Oct. 7.”
2024: “The most important thing for Israel is to make sure Oct. 7 is never repeated again.”
2025: “Hamas started this war. Hamas is prolonging it. And Hamas could end it — today — if it chose peace over power, people over propaganda, and life over death.”
2025: “If Israel will just leave Gaza tomorrow, the war will not come to an end, the hostages will not be released immediately, and Hamas definitely is not going to leave Gaza.”
2025: “Recognizing a non-existent Palestinian state now… empowers Hamas. This is rewarding Hamas and its terrorist act.”
2025: “There is no future at all for the people of Gaza as long as Hamas is there… now is the time to do that [take Hamas out of the equation].”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2025: “You’re giving a prize to terror because you’re listening to these liars.”
2025: “The Palestinians living in Gaza are victims of their own leadership.”
2025: “Hamas vows to repeat the October 7 massacres again and again. This is the terror Israel and the free world must confront.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2016–2025: No on-record public statements attributable to Gregorio Goldstein Isaacson.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2019–2025: No on-record public statements attributable to Miguel Otto Schwarz.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2023: “Imposible negociar con Hamás porque o es la existencia de ellos o es la de Israel y los judíos. Se están definiendo los objetivos militares de esta guerra, pero lograrlos, cualesquiera que sean, no va a ser una guerra de corto plazo.”
“Impossible to negotiate with Hamas because it is either their existence or that of Israel and the Jews. The military objectives of this war are being defined, but achieving them — whatever they are — will not be a short war.”
2023: “Pide la eventual creación de un estado islámico en Palestina, en lugar de Israel y los Territorios Palestinos y la obliteración o disolución de Israel.”
“It [Hamas’s charter] calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories, and for the obliteration or dissolution of Israel.”
2023: “El Ejército israelí manda avisos y llama por teléfono a los miembros de la sociedad civil donde viven miembros de Hamás… ‘hoy a las 11 de la noche vamos a destruir el edificio, salgan’…”
“The Israeli army sends warnings and calls civilians in places where Hamas members live… ‘today at 11 p.m. we are going to destroy the building, leave’…”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2017–2025: No on-record public statements attributable to Edoardo Gurgo Salice.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2023: “Tragic news: Vivian Silver, the Canadian-Israeli peace activist previously thought to be taken hostage, has been confirmed dead, murdered by Hamas in Kibbutz Be’eri. Our hearts go out to her family and friends. May her memory be a blessing.”
2024: “The relationship between Israel and Canada is at an all-time low. Canada, according to many, has abandoned Israel, the only democratic ally they have in the region.”
2024: “Most Canadians can understand that … we didn’t choose this war. We are fighting a war for our survival, for the survival of the only Jewish democracy and country in the world. And now we understand more than ever the need for a safe haven for Jews.”
2024: “The hostages are the utmost priority, releasing the ones who are alive and returning the bodies of those who are not.”
2025: “PR perfume on institutional moral rot.”
2025: “When terrorists thank you, you’re in the wrong. Hamas’ own press release refers to today’s recognition of Palestine as a ‘reward’ and thanks our governments.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
No on-record public statements attributable to Eliaz Luf.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2011: “I hope it can only encourage and improve the relationship.”
2012: “It was a ‘very convivial meeting’.”
2014: “It’s a simple statement of fact. I don’t see anything wrong with it.”
2014: “What he said is correct — we’re not responsible for what happens in Israel. Scottish and British Jewry is not responsible for anything that Israel does.”
2016: “I saw ‘a couple of dozen protesters’ before kick-off.”
2016: “There was a flurry of Palestinian flags inside the ground just as the game started, but absolutely no trouble at all.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2018: “Насильство не припиняється… світова громадськість фактично мовчить, тоді як бойовики ХАМАСу цькують безневинних громадян.”
“The violence does not stop… the international public is effectively silent while Hamas militants hound innocent civilians.”
“Лідери терористів повинні зрозуміти, що їх ідеї, методи і дії огидні… вони не залишаться непокараними!”
“Terrorist leaders must understand that their ideas, methods, and actions are vile… they will not go unpunished!”
2021: “Їхня унікальна самаритянська ідентичність… дозволяє пристосуватися до умов ізраїльсько-палестинської війни.”
“Their unique Samaritan identity… allows them to adapt to the conditions of the Israeli-Palestinian war.”
2022: “Перемога — це не завжди кінець війни, а перемир’я — це не мир.”
“Victory isn’t always the end of war, and a ceasefire is not peace.”
2023: “Полномасштабное нападение на север может перенапрячь Израиль… большинство его сил сфокусированы на возможном наземном наступлении в Газе.”
“A full-scale attack in the north could overstretch Israel… most of its forces are focused on a possible ground offensive in Gaza.”
2024: “Ці заяви є не лише перебільшеними, а й такими, що маніпулюють фактами.”
“These claims are not only exaggerated; they also manipulate the facts.”
2025: “Для багатьох держав це виглядає як ‘мирний крок’, але для Ізраїлю… це — не про мир, а про легітимізацію загрози.”
“For many states this looks like a ‘peaceful step,’ but for Israel… it’s not about peace; it’s the legitimization of a threat.”
“Ізраїль хоче ‘тотальної перемоги’ над ХАМАСом.”
“Israel seeks ‘total victory’ over Hamas.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2019: “Первоначальная позиция была такова: два государства для двух народов, а по факту получается три государства для двух народов… В такой ситуации вести переговоры не представляется возможным.”
“The original position was two states for two peoples, but in fact it has become three entities for two peoples… In such a situation, negotiations are not possible.”
2019: “На данный момент влияние, которое просматривается на руководство Газы, я бы сказала, исходит из Ирана. Спонсорами также являются Катар… Предполагаю, что свой вес имеет влияние Египта на ХАМАС.”
“At the moment, the influence we see over Gaza’s leadership, I would say, comes from Iran. Qatar is also a sponsor… I assume Egypt’s influence on Hamas carries weight.”
2019: “В ‘Сделке века’ скорее всего не будет ничего о каком-то палестинском государстве, а скорее обещание автономии и преференции в области экономики.”
“In the ‘Deal of the Century’ there is likely nothing about a Palestinian state — rather a promise of autonomy and economic preferences.”
2019: “В течение последнего года сильно видны усилия палестинцев показать, что у евреев нет абсолютно никакой связи с Иерусалимом… Признание Соединёнными Штатами [Иерусалима] очень важно.”
“Over the past year there have been strong efforts by the Palestinians to show that Jews have no connection whatsoever to Jerusalem… Recognition by the United States [of Jerusalem] is very important.”
2021: “ХАМАС выпустил 1000 ракет по Израилю… ХАМАС — вот кто угрожает Сектору Газа.”
“Hamas fired 1,000 rockets at Israel… Hamas is the one that threatens the Gaza Strip.” (official consulate post)
2021: “Идеология ХАМАСа сочетает кровавый террор, военные преступления и наглую ложь.”
“Hamas’s ideology combines bloody terror, war crimes, and brazen lies.” (official consulate post)
2021: “Несмотря на массированные ракетные атаки террористов ХАМАСа, система ПРО ‘Железный купол’ продолжает эффективно защищать безопасность мирных жителей.”
“Despite Hamas’s massive rocket attacks, the Iron Dome missile-defense system continues to effectively protect civilians.” (official consulate post)
2021: “Что такое дети Газы для кровавого режима ХАМАСа? Восполняемый ресурс терроризма, который они цинично готовы послать…”
“What are Gaza’s children to Hamas’s bloody regime? A replenishable resource for terrorism that they cynically send…” (official consulate post)
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2023: “Hierbei handelt es sich nicht um Pro-Palästinensische-Demonstrationen, sondern um Pro-Terror-Demonstrationen.”
“These are not pro-Palestinian demonstrations, but pro-terror demonstrations.”
2023: “Wir Israelis brauchen die Unterstützung der westlichen Welt.”
“We Israelis need the support of the Western world.”
2024: “Discussions should be dialogs where every participant can speak in a secure setting and, most importantly, can listen to one another.”
“Discussions should be dialogs where every participant can speak in a secure setting and, most importantly, can listen to one another.”
2024: “Anyone who forgets, suppresses the memory of, or denies this horrific massacre [of October 7] is reversing the positions of perpetrator and victim.”
“Anyone who forgets, suppresses the memory of, or denies this horrific massacre [of October 7] is reversing the positions of perpetrator and victim.”
2024: “Es gibt keinen Genozid in Gaza.”
“There is no genocide in Gaza.”
2025: “Ein Deal mit der Hamas wäre ein Pakt mit dem Teufel.”
“A deal with Hamas would be a pact with the devil.”
2025: “Wenn die Hamas alle Geiseln freilässt, wird sich auch die gesamte Situation in Gaza zum Positiven verändern.”
“If Hamas releases all the hostages, the entire situation in Gaza will improve.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2006: “Iisraelil on õigus enesekaitseks!”
“Israel has the right to self-defense!”
2023: “Ma kardan, et õhulöökide järel on Iisraeli armee sunnitud Gazasse sisenema. See toob kaasa muidugi mõlemale poolele ohvreid, aga ma ei näe praegu mitte mingisuguseid muid võimalusi.”
“I fear that after the airstrikes the Israeli army will be forced to enter Gaza. That will, of course, bring casualties on both sides, but at the moment I don’t see any other options.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/29
2017–2025: No on-record public statements attributable to Honorary Consul Adamos A. Varnava on the Israeli–Palestinians.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishingcontent—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: “We are very grateful to the United Arab Emirates for its stance supporting Israel.”
2023: “#ITUWRC conference in Dubai today. We will keep telling the stories of the 239 people who are still being held hostage in Gaza under #Hamas.”
2023: “Would you agree to keep living this kind of a reality in your own country? #HamasislSIS”
2023: “Incubators, baby food, and medical supplies brought by the @IDF from Israel have successfully reached the #Shifahospital.”
2024: “Today is October 7, 2024. But for 101 hostages, and the whole nation of Israel, today is still October 7, 2023. Hamas kidnapped 251 hostages …”
2025: “Although there are disagreements, dialogue gives influence and it also allows humanitarian aid in Gaza to continue flowing.”
2025: “We saw on Oct. 7 that radical forces like Iran and proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas are trying to hurt the expansion of ties between Israel and the Arab world.”
2025: “700 days have passed since October 7th, when Hamas terrorists murdered, raped, and abducted innocent civilians. 48 hostages remain in captivity.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: “Bölgedeki tüm ülkeler ABD’nin yaptığı gibi teröre ve Hamas terör örgütünün barbarca eylemlerine karşı çıkmalı ve bunları kınamalıdır. İsrailli üst düzey yetkililer düzenli olarak Türk yetkililerle konuşuyor ve onları durum hakkında bilgilendiriyor, bunu yapmaya devam edecekler.”
“All countries in the region, as the U.S. has done, should oppose and condemn terrorism and the barbaric acts of the Hamas terrorist organization. Israeli senior officials are in regular contact with Turkish officials, briefing them on the situation, and will continue to do so.”
2023: “İran’ın şeytani rejimi tarafından desteklenen Hamas ve Filistin İslami Cihad terör örgütlerinin terör altyapılarının yok edilmesini ve Gazze’den İsrail vatandaşlarına ve devletine yönelik tehdidin ortadan kaldırılmasını sağlamak için gerekli tüm adımları atacağız.”
“We will take all necessary steps to destroy the terror infrastructures of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad — supported by Iran’s evil regime — and to eliminate the threat from Gaza to Israel’s citizens and state.”
2023: “Şimdi Hamas terör örgütü tarafından rehin alınan vatandaşlarımızı kurtarmaya ve terör altyapısını yok etmeye odaklanma zamanı.”
“Now is the time to focus on rescuing our citizens held hostage by the Hamas terrorist organization and on destroying the terror infrastructure.”
2023: “Hamas ve Filistin İslami Cihad terör örgütleri Filistin halkını rehin alıyor, İsrail ordusu ise sivilleri korumak için elinden geleni yapıyor ve yapmaya devam edecek.”
“Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are holding the Palestinian people hostage, and the Israeli army is doing — and will continue to do — everything it can to protect civilians.”
2023: “İsrail ordusu sadece Hamas ve Filistin İslami Cihad’ın terör altyapısını hedef almaktadır.”
“The Israeli army targets only the terror infrastructure of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
You cannot expect the abused to be the same after;
They were abused.
Duh.
What they do with that, after enough time,
it’s up to them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: “They are not only terrorists, but animals on two legs. They will pay a price that they cannot even imagine.”
2024: “Hamas will not have any military capability.”
2024: “We only targeted military bases, not civilians.”
2025: “Ceasefire is not a solution — it’s only a temporary pause.”
2025: “We do care about the Palestinians. We don’t have anything against them.”
2025: “We are never going to lose the war.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2024: “Israel is doing everything to protect its citizens. Israel will attack anyone who is a threat.”
2024: “Hamas can end the war by releasing the hostages.”
2025: “Hamas brutally invaded Israel while slaughtering, raping, and killing women, children, and babies.”
2025: “After more than 471 days in Gaza, we are finally seeing a situation where the first three women were sent home… We are happy that they are home and we are hoping that all the rest of the hostages still left in Gaza will be able to make it home soon.”
2025: “There is not a dry eye left in Israel seeing these images.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2024: “自10月7日哈马斯野蛮袭击以色列社区以来……这是一场它从来不想要的战争。”
“Since Hamas’s brutal attack on Israeli communities on Oct 7… Israel found itself in a war it never wanted.”
2024: “战争的目标从一开始就很明确：……彻底消除哈马斯的军事能力；……释放我们的人质。”
“The war’s aims were clear from the outset: … to completely eliminate Hamas’s military capabilities; … and to free our hostages.”
2024: “我们的目标不是夺回并控制加沙地带……无论如何，以色列都不会控制加沙地带。”
“Our goal is not to retake and control the Gaza Strip… In any case, Israel will not control the Gaza Strip.”
2024: “不幸的是，哈马斯在酒店、清真寺和学校内设置了指挥中心、火箭发射器和地道。”
“Unfortunately, Hamas established command centers, rocket launchers and tunnels inside hotels, mosques and schools.”
2024: “以色列国防军分发了数百万份传单、发送数百万条短信，并打了数十万通电话……”
“The IDF distributed millions of leaflets, sent millions of text messages, and made hundreds of thousands of calls…”
2024: “事实上，巴勒斯坦从来没有一个‘巴勒斯坦国’，以色列也从来没有占领过巴勒斯坦领土。”
“In fact, there has never been a ‘State of Palestine,’ and Israel has never occupied ‘Palestinian territory.’”
2024: “每个国家的政府都有责任保护其公民，即使这需要使用武力。”
“Every government has a responsibility to protect its citizens, even if this requires the use of force.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: “Hamas started this war, and Israel is preparing for a prolonged military response … to restore full control … as well as crashing the terrorist infrastructure of Hamas.”
2023: “Hamas are ‘bloodthirsty terrorists’ who ‘are devoid of any moral inhibitions’ … ‘Israel will act to free the hostages … and to reach a situation in which no terrorist group in Gaza will be able to harm Israeli citizens again.’”
2024: “Genocide? Israel is fighting a just war against a terrorist organisation … The atrocities of October 7 cannot be allowed to happen again.”
2024: “現在尚有101名人質身處加沙地下隧道，受著極不人道的對待。……唯一可以達至中東和平的方法只有是溫和派之間的和平共存。”
“There are still 101 captives in the brutal Gaza tunnels, suffering the most inhumane conditions. … The only viable solution in the Middle East is peace and co-existence between moderate parties.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: “#超40万巴勒斯坦人离开加沙的家园##以色列# 看看哈马斯在加沙地区是怎么利用无辜平民的！”
“‘#Over 400,000 Palestinians have left their homes in Gaza##Israel# Look at how Hamas exploits innocent civilians in Gaza!’ (official Guangzhou Consulate Weibo).”
“我们有证据表明，哈马斯正在设置路障，阻止巴勒斯坦平民从加沙北部向南部撤离！”
“‘We have evidence that Hamas is setting up roadblocks to stop Palestinian civilians from evacuating from northern to southern Gaza!’ (reported from the Guangzhou Consulate’s Weibo).”
“哈马斯以将平民置于危险境地而自豪，他们要对每一个平民伤亡负责。”
“‘Hamas prides itself on putting civilians in danger; they are responsible for every civilian casualty.’ (reported from the Guangzhou Consulate’s Weibo).”
“As an Israeli diplomat, I want to emphasize that Israel is fighting terrorist groups in the Gaza Strip. A war we did not start.”
“This was a brutal attack on civilians and was very similar to ISIS’s modus operandi.”
2024: “自去年10月7日以来，所有以色列人都记得哈马斯对以色列进行的袭击，以色列人不会忘记还有125名人质还被哈马斯扣押在加沙。他们被绑架到加沙已经两百多天了，我们没有任何他们的消息，甚至不知道他们是否还活着。”
“‘Since October 7 last year, all Israelis remember Hamas’s attack on Israel. We will not forget that 125 hostages are still held by Hamas in Gaza. They were abducted to Gaza more than 200 days ago; we have no information about them and don’t even know if they are still alive.’ (Independence Day remarks in Guangzhou).”
“We remember the victims and stand with the families of the hostages who are enduring this unimaginable pain. We pray that the hostages will return home safely as soon as possible.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: “近日，我们收到了一封陌生中国朋友的来信。”
“Recently, we received a letter from an unfamiliar Chinese friend.”
2023: “网络虚假信息众多，建议多元信息渠道交叉验证，尽量避免轻信偏听。”
“There is a lot of misinformation online; we recommend cross-checking via multiple sources and avoiding one-sided credulity.”
2024: “The charges of genocide brought by South Africa against Israel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague are false, outrageous and morally repugnant.”
2024: “Key UN agencies have spread misleading information and applied double standards when addressing Israel’s actions and the broader conflict.”
2025: “In a joint IDF-ISA operation, the bodies of abducted hostages Idan Shtivi and Ilan Weiss were located in the Gaza Strip and returned to Israel.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2023: «لا نستغرب هذه الوقفة الإنسانية من صاحب السموّ الشيخ محمد بن زايد، وصاحب السموّ الشيخ محمد بن راشد. وهذه المبادرات امتداد لنهج المغفور له الشيخ زايد بن سلطان آل نهيان، في دعم الفلسطينيين في كل الأحوال.»
“We do not find this humanitarian stance by Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed and Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid surprising; these initiatives extend the late Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan’s approach of supporting Palestinians in all circumstances.”
2023: «المشهد الذي تابعناه من الإقبال الواسع على المشاركة بالعمل التطوعي أو تقديم التبرعات، يجسد واحدة من الصور الإنسانية في مجتمع الإمارات، الذي يدعو للسلام والمحبة والتآخي.»
“The scene we witnessed — of widespread volunteering and donations — embodies one of the human faces of the UAE community, which calls for peace, compassion, and fraternity.”
2023: «نشكر مساعي وجهود دائرة الشؤون الإسلامية والعمل الخيري بدبي، ومؤسسة وطني الإمارات، على الإشراف والتنظيم المميز اليوم على إقامة الحملة في دبي وعلى تقديم الدعم والمساعدة للأشقاء في فلسطين.»
“We thank the efforts of the Islamic Affairs and Charitable Activities Department in Dubai and Watani Al Emarat for superbly organizing today’s campaign in Dubai, and for providing support and assistance to our brothers in Palestine.”
2023: «كما أشكر مساعي دولة الإمارات العربية المتحدة، فهي دائماً دولة سبّاقة في عمل الخير على الصعيد العالمي، وسبّاقة في الوقوف بجانب الشعب الفلسطيني في كافة الظروف، وأتمنى التوفيق لهذه البلد المعطاءة على وقفتها الأخوية الصادقة مع الشعب الفلسطيني.»
“I also thank the efforts of the United Arab Emirates, always at the forefront of global charity and of standing by the Palestinian people in all circumstances; I wish continued success to this generous country for its sincere fraternal stance with the Palestinian people.”
2024: «تواجدُ الكلّ الفلسطيني في هذا المحفل رسالةٌ كبيرة للعالم في ظلّ الظروف الصعبة التي يعيشها شعبُنا الفلسطيني، وأتمنى التوفيق والنجاح للجميع.»
“The presence of all Palestinians together at this forum is a powerful message to the world given the difficult circumstances our people are living through; I wish everyone success.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2022: «كُنّا على يقينٍ تامٍّ بفوزِ المغربِ وتأهله إلى نصفِ النهائي، نظرًا للأداءِ الجيد الذي قدَّمه أسودُ الأطلس طيلة أطوارِ هذا المونديال.»
“We were absolutely certain Morocco would reach the semifinals, given the quality the Atlas Lions showed throughout the tournament.”
2022: «نحن سعداءُ جدًّا بهذا النصر؛ إنّه نصرٌ لكلِّ العالمِ العربيّ والإسلاميّ، ونحنُ فخورون بأسودِ الأطلس ونتمنّى لهم تحقيقَ فوزٍ جديد.»
“We are very happy with this victory; it is a win for the entire Arab and Islamic worlds. We are proud of the Atlas Lions and wish them further success.”
2023: «Bu direniş doğal bir sonuçtur… zulmün ve katliamların durması için toplu intifada dışında bir seçim hakkımız olmadı.»
“This resistance is a natural result… faced with oppression and massacres, we had no option but a mass intifada.”
2023: «Her türlü silahı, yasaklı fosfor bombalarını kullanarak evlerini başlarının üzerine yıkmaktadır…»
“They are using every kind of weapon — including banned white phosphorus — bringing homes crashing down on people.”
2023: «Filistin yönetiminin bu vahşetin durması için yaptığı çağrılara Batı camiası ve uluslararası kuruluşlar dilsiz ve sağır kalmışlardır.»
“The Western community and international organizations have been mute and deaf to the Palestinian Authority’s appeals to end this brutality.”
2023: «Türk ve Filistin halkı arasındaki ilişki tarihidir… Türk milletinin ve hükümetinin Filistin ile dayanışmasını sürdürmesini istiyoruz.»
“The relationship between the Turkish and Palestinian peoples is historic… we ask the Turkish nation and government to continue their solidarity with Palestine.”
2023: «Tüm milletler gibi biz de hür ve egemen yaşamak istiyoruz.»
“Like all peoples, we too want to live free and sovereign.”
2023: «Rusya, Çin, Türkiye ve Arap ülkelerinden… sivillerin korunmasını istiyoruz… başkenti Kudüs olan bağımsız Filistin devletinin inşası için desteklerini bekliyoruz.»
“From Russia, China, Turkey and the Arab countries… we ask for the protection of civilians… and support for building an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2016: «تُناشِدُ القيادةُ الفلسطينيةُ المجتمعَ الدوليَّ، ولا سيما مجلسَ الأمن، الاضطلاعَ بالتزاماته إزاءَ احترامِ وضمانِ احترامِ القانونِ الدولي لوقفِ الانتهاكاتِ والجرائمِ الإسرائيلية واستردادِ جميعِ حقوقِنا المشروعة، بما فيها قيامُ الدولةِ المستقلةِ وعاصمتُها القدسُ الشريف.
“The Palestinian leadership continually urges the international community, especially the Security Council, to shoulder its responsibilities to respect and ensure respect for international law, to halt Israeli violations and crimes, and to restore all our legitimate rights, including the establishment of the independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.”
2016: «عددُ الجاليةِ الفلسطينيةِ في المملكةِ نحوَ نصفِ مليونِ لاجئ.»
“The Palestinian community in the Kingdom numbers around half a million refugees.”
2016: «تظلُّ مواقفُ المملكةِ العربيةِ السعوديةِ ثابتةً وراسخةً تجاهَ القضيةِ الفلسطينية، وتؤكِّدُ دائمًا حقَّ الشعبِ الفلسطينيِّ في قيامِ دولتِه المستقلةِ وعاصمتُها القدس.»
“Saudi Arabia’s positions remain firm and steadfast toward the Palestinian cause, consistently affirming the Palestinian people’s right to an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.”
2025: «جَدَّدَ عدمَ استسلامِ الشعبِ الفلسطينيِّ للمخططاتِ الاستعمارية.»
“He reiterated that the Palestinian people will not surrender to colonial schemes.”
2025: «إنَّ هذه المناسبةَ تتزامنُ مع نكبةٍ وحربِ إبادةٍ جماعيةٍ ممنهجةٍ تشنُّها إسرائيلُ على شعبِنا في غزة، وعدوانِها التدميريِّ في الضفةِ الغربية، ومخططِها لتهويدِ القدسِ ومصادرةِ الأراضي.»
“This occasion coincides with a Nakba and a systematic genocide waged by Israel against our people in Gaza, its destructive aggression in the West Bank, and its scheme to Judaize Jerusalem and seize land.”
2025: «هذا المخطّطُ الاستعماريُّ الجديدُ–القديمُ لن يمرَّ بفضلِ وعيِ وصمودِ ورباطِ المواطنِ الفلسطينيِّ رغمَ الحصارِ والقتلِ والتجويعِ والعطشِ وفقدانِ العلاجِ والدواءِ.»
“This old–new colonial scheme will not pass thanks to the awareness, steadfastness, and fortitude of the Palestinian citizen despite siege, killing, starvation, thirst, and the lack of treatment and medicine.”
2025: «المملكةُ تسيرُ بخطى ثابتةٍ نحوَ مستقبلٍ مزدهرٍ لأبنائها… حتى أضحت منارةً للإنسانيةِ في هذا العصر.»
“The Kingdom is moving steadily toward a prosperous future for its people… having become a beacon for humanity in this era.”
2025: «شكرًا للمملكةِ شكرًا لسموِّ وليِّ العهدِ، وإن شاءَ الله نلتقي في القدسِ عاصمةِ فلسطينَ المستقلة.»
“Thank you to the Kingdom and to His Royal Highness the Crown Prince; God willing, we will meet in Jerusalem, the capital of an independent Palestine.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2025: «النكبة ليست مجرد ذكرى نحيّيها فحسب، بل صرخةٌ في الضمير الإنساني لحقّ شعبنا في العودة والحرية والسلام…» — “The Nakba is not merely an anniversary we mark; it is a cry in the human conscience for our people’s right to return, freedom, and peace…”.
2025: «ما يجري يمثّل انتهاكًا صارخًا للقانون الدولي الإنساني.» — “What is happening is a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law.”
2025: «أولويةُ القيادة تكمن في وقفِ العدوان وإدخالِ المساعدات الإنسانية العاجلة إلى قطاع غزة.» — “The leadership’s priority is to halt the aggression and bring urgent humanitarian aid into Gaza.”
2025: «هذا القرارُ التاريخيّ يعكسُ التزامَ فرنسا بتحقيقِ حلٍّ سياسيّ للصراع وفقَ القانون الدوليّ ومبدأ حلِّ الدولتين.» — “This historic decision reflects France’s commitment to a political solution to the conflict, consistent with international law and the two-state principle.”
2025: «نثمّنُ العلاقاتِ التاريخيةَ التي تربطُ الشعبينِ الفلسطينيّ والكرديّ، ونسعى لتعزيزِ التعاون في الثقافةِ والتعليمِ والاستثمار.» — “We value the historical ties between the Palestinian and Kurdish peoples, and we seek to strengthen cooperation in culture, education, and investment.”
2025: «إلى جانبِ توطيدِ علاقاتِنا مع إقليمِ كوردستان، عملْنا على تطويرِ العلاقات بين جامعاتِ كوردستان وجامعاتِ فلسطين.» — “Besides making our relations stronger with the Kurdistan Region, we worked to improve the relations between universities of Kurdistan and universities of Palestine.”
2025: «…اتخاذُ خطواتٍ عمليّةٍ لتنفيذِ حلِّ الدولتين، باعتبارهِ الطريقَ الوحيدَ لتحقيقِ السلامِ والاستقرار في المنطقة.» — “…taking practical steps to implement the two-state solution, as it is the only path to achieving peace and stability in the region.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/28
2024: وأكّد القنصلُ العام وفيق أبو سيدو في كلمته، دورَ المرأةِ الفلسطينيةِ التاريخيَّ المهمَّ والفعّالَ في القضية الفلسطينية سابقًا وحاليًا ومستقبلًا.
“He stressed the historic, important, and active role of Palestinian women in our cause — past, present, and future.”
2025: نُقَدِّرُ حِكمةَ مصرَ والسعوديةِ والأردنِ في دعمِ دولةِ فلسطين، ونؤكّدُ انفتاحَنا على التعاونِ مع قطاعِ الأعمالِ في مصر.
“We value the wisdom of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan in supporting the State of Palestine, and we’re open to cooperation with Egypt’s business sector.”
2025: مكتبةُ الإسكندريةِ صرحٌ عالميّ، وشرفٌ لنا أن نكون مشاركينَ في معرضِها الدوليِّ للكتاب.
“The Bibliotheca Alexandrina is a global institution, and it’s an honor for us to take part in its International Book Fair.”
2025: مشاركتُنا في المعرضِ رمزيةٌ تُعبِّرُ عن وجودِ فلسطين… آملًا إنهاءَ الاحتلالِ وإقامةَ الدولةِ الفلسطينيةِ في القريبِ العاجل.
“Our participation is symbolic of Palestine’s presence… hoping for an end to the occupation and the establishment of the Palestinian state in the near future.”
2025: تشاركُ القنصليةُ العامةُ لدولةِ فلسطينَ بجناحٍ خاصٍّ يُبرزُ تراثَنا وصمودَ شعبِنا.
“The Consulate General of the State of Palestine is participating with a special pavilion that highlights our heritage and our people’s steadfastness.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/27
2015: “Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. Both are unacceptable. We will not sit with those who espouse hatred against the Jewish people. Period.”
2017: “If we’re not vigilant about the rights that we have and the privilege we enjoy, we shouldn’t expect to keep them.”
2017: “Glad @POTUS blasted violence but long overdue for moral ldrshp that condemns the agents of #hate: #WhiteSupremacists, #NeoNazis…”
2018: “We have our own domestic terrorists in the United States: white supremacists.”
2020: “Without a doubt, right-wing extremist violence is currently the greatest domestic terrorism threat to everyone in this country.”
2021: “A number of online forums and platforms host what amounts to a 24/7 extremist rally.”
2022: “Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.”
2024: “When people chant ‘From the river to the sea,’ it’s eliminationist language and contributes directly to a climate of hatred and violence.”
2025: “We stopped playing defense and have moved to offense… In the past 12 months, ADL’s filed more lawsuits than in the prior 112 years — against extremist groups, elite universities, public companies, school districts, and state sponsors of terror… We’ve launched innovative products to intercept antisemitism before it takes root, whether in the boardroom or in chat rooms, large language models or academic associations, in Wikipedia entries or WhatsApp chats.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/27
His voice carries the woes of every bar goin’ man I knew when I was a janitor and basic dish labour at the local one.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/26
Breathe.
If,
you have a choice,
If,
you have emotions,
If,
you are hurt,
by someone,
If,
you can,
breathe,
If,
you feel hurt and choose to breathe,
then you can choose different emotions.
Do your future self and future relations this gift,
choose a gift of an emotion different than that felt.
Then breathe,
again.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/25
Playfulness,
affection,
gratitude,
positive regard,
they come more naturally for me, as with most people — as I am like them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/25
Global surveys (UNESCO–ICFJ) show that 73% of women journalists have faced online violence, with 25% receiving physical threats, 18% sexual threats, and 20% experiencing abuse that spilled offline. Attacks are most often linked to coverage of gender (47%), politics/elections (44%), and human rights/social policy (31%). Perpetrators are usually anonymous mobs, followed closely by political actors.
41% report facing coordinated disinformation. Meta (Facebook) is rated the least safe platform, with 48% of users having received unwanted direct messages. The impact is profound: 30% self-censor, 20% withdraw from online interaction, 11% miss work, 4% quit their jobs, and 2% leave journalism altogether. The heaviest toll is on mental health.
Only 25% of women journalists report incidents to their employers, and only 53% report them anywhere at all — suggesting the real rates are far higher.
An IFJ survey across 50 countries found 48% suffered gender-based violence at work, with 44% reporting online abuse. Forms included verbal (63%), psychological (41%), sexual harassment (37%), economic (21%), and physical (≈11%). Perpetrators included sources, politicians, or audiences (45%), as well as bosses or supervisors (38%).
Carceral repression adds to the threat. Reporters Without Borders reports that as of early 2024, 12.7% of imprisoned journalists are women, but they received 55% of the longest sentences since January 2023 — a stark disproportion. CPJ recorded 361 jailed worldwide as of December 1, 2024, near a historic high. Women Press Freedom counted 92 women journalists in prison on May 3, 2024, and 951 violations in 2024, including 37 detentions.
The dangers also turn deadly. The IFJ recorded 122 journalists and media workers killed in 2024, including 14 women. Impunity remains the rule: ~85% of journalist killings go unpunished, according to UNESCO.
Women journalists want to report the news for the public’s right to know. These are the contemporary risks they live with every day.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/25
It’s important to double- and triple-check the qualifications in a few regards.
Is the credential real?
Is the institution accredited?
Is it a relevant discipline to the claimed expertise?
Is the thesis subject matter relevant to the claimed expertise?
Has the program earned recognition for producing credible experts?
Does the level of training demonstrate sufficient rigour and peer review to justify the authority?
Are the person’s broader academic and professional outputs consistent with the credential and aligned with the standards of recognized experts?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/25
Some pains have no salve,
only time,
and it’s only a bandage.
That’s just how some things work in life.
And you don’t get to pick them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/22
There is a growing minority post-New Atheism,
of a cynicism or a bad faith skepticism,
within select secular communities.
This has to be reasoned out,
and re-vectored.
We have bigger fish to fry at the moment.
If you condemn those who share 95% of your views,
fair enough, however:
What about those who not only disagree with 85%,
but also want you to be extinguished from any motion towards equality,
or even the public space?
Know your allies,
pick your fights.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/24
Gentleness: a paradoxical reason for loss, because it’s a preventative from life being nothing but loss.
The Stoics.
The Confucians.
The Christians (praus).
The Buddhists (Ahimsa).
Hell, even Machiavelli, a greater stabilizer than brute force.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/24
How does Charlie Kirk’s assassination spotlight the void in U.S. domestic-terrorism law (defined at 18 U.S.C. § 2331(5) but no standalone crime) and, per DHS/GAO data from 2010–2021, what patterns in motives, weapons, and targets — alongside a 357% surge in FBI cases — should policymakers confront?
The assassination of Charlie Kirk highlights the broader issues, not of faith but, of the domestic terrorism within the United States. Kirk’s murder should not have happened for expression of views, for demeanour, for beliefs, or stature in American society.
U.S. law does define “domestic terrorism” (18 U.S.C. § 2331(5)). However, no federal crime with this title exists as a standalone. Agencies track incidents using agency systems. They investigate using internal systems, too. Therefore, gaps will exist, because no mandatory local reporting to the FBI. FBI and DHS use different datasets.
DHS incident tracker counted 231 domestic terrorism incidents with known offenders between 2010 and 2021. 145 deaths were in the period, peaking in 2015 and 2019. 80 were racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, 73 were anti-government or anti-authority violent extremists, 53 were mixed or personalized messages, and 15 were animal rights or environmental extremism. Therefore, racially motivated events were the most prominent of the categories.
Firearms were implicated in 92 incidents and responsible for 132 of 145 deaths. IEDs were used in 38 incidents with few or no deaths implicated. Therefore, armed assault is the workhorse with 98 incidents and 139 deaths while arson is 45 incidents with rare deaths.
Most attacks or plots were against specific civilians. Law enforcement was the second most targeted group. California had the most incidents. Several states recorded none in the aforementioned time period.
DHS’s Homeland Threat Assessment 2025 explains incidents from U.S.-based violent extremists remain high. These are largely driven by lone offenders and small cells. Those animated by racial motives, as well as anti-government, gender-related, and mixed motives. Many geopolitical events, e.g., elections of the Middle East conflicts, catalyze these events, too.
FBI open domestic terrorism cases, the investigative workload and not the incidents, between 2013 and 2021 increased by 357%. Baseline concern has increased, in other words.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/24
Be very, very careful,
in taking a trip,
and taking this for the reality,
or taking this for the reality,
in just taking a trip.
and taking this for the.
or taking this for the.
Get the point? Don’t ruminate.
They may be a lie.
The experience itself too,
not just the memory.
And maybe not.
Many times,
you never know;
you never knew;
you never will.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/24
Information from best available data circa September 21, 2025.*
Charlie Kirk was murdered.
On September 10th, 2025, at an outdoor Turning Point USA event at Utah Valley University (UVU), Orem, Utah, with approximately 3,000 people in attendance, Kirk was struck by a bullet in the neck/throat while on stage.
The shot was fired from a sniper rifle from estimated ranges of more than 100 yards to about 200 yards. Kirk was transported to a nearby hospital and then pronounced dead. ABC on-scene reporting and officials stated no metal detectors or bag checks were present. The courtyard is bowl-shaped and ringed by buildings. UVU police coordinated with Kirk’s private security.
The rifle used to assassinate Kirk was the Mauser Model 98, .30–06 bolt-action with scope, which was recovered wrapped in a towel off-campus. Ammunition allegedly contained engravings or etchings with phrases. The spent round read ““NoTices Bulge OWO What’s This?” The suspect allegedly called the engravings “mostly a big meme.”
The evidence for a single shot was no shell casings on the roof and only one spent/three unspent rounds inside the rifle, as cited by prosecutors to support a single shot. The suspect of the assassination was Tyler James Robinson, aged 22.
Robinson’s family recognized him based on the released images. After speaking with a retired deputy sheriff, Robinson surrendered. Officials reported a time lapse between the murder and the acquisition of Robinson into custody was about 33 hours.
Robinson was held without bail. His first hearing: He appeared by video. The next hearing is scheduled for September 29, 2025. Some reports indicate a special watch or suicide-prevention smock while in jail.
The criminal charges filed in Utah are aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, obstruction of justice (multiple), violent offence in the presence of a child, and witness tampering (multiple).
Prosecutors seek the death penalty. Alleged aggravators are political targeting and the presence of children. Prosecutors cited texts from a roommate:
“I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”
A purported note is cited beneath a personal keyboard stating, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.” In addition, allegations include Discord messages citing Robinson confessing before the arrest, therefore, after the murder and before custody approximately 33 hours later.
Prosecutors cited an unusual gait purportedly consistent with the concealment of a rifle, movements to and from a rooftop, plus later retrieval attempts of the Mauser Model 98. DNA on the trigger linked to Robinson.
There was a public appeal reward up to 100,00USD with the FBI asking for public photos and videos from the event. Authorities allege political targeting on prior statements. Final motive is unadjudicated.
George Zinn, 71, was arrested for obstruction after a false confession amid the chaos; later charged in a separate child-sex-abuse-material case following a phone search — no link to the homicide.
Following the shooting, UVU shut down for several days then with a phased reopening. Classes resumed the following week. Full resumption September 17, 2025. UVU says its security posture and emergency alerts are under review.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/23
The rapidity with which we want to attribute the full spectrum of attributes of category “human” for “human rights” to machines tells less about the veracity of the affirmation or the negation, but more about the degree to which global culture already has priors set for dehumanization of other human beings in the first place.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/21
What for most of us,
is a normal human behaviour,
in so many domains of life,
some public Christian American communities exalt,
as if requiring supernatural heft to be a regular person.
‘The Laws of Nature must change for me to forgive,’
is the implication.
Why does common humility and compassion require a Saviour?
It is — literally — moral stunting.
The scammers and grifters are flying in, too,
to fleece the flock.
One can see this in the reverse as well:
“Why did that specific clergy member rape that nun?”
“Uh, the Devil made him do it. Uhm, demons tempted him.”
Happy to see it happen, wish it didn’t require the unfortunate murder of one of their heroes.
By the way, the Fall is here.
Fun season.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/21
2011: “Human beings make and sustain meaning for themselves.”
2013: “Meaning is created in life by human beings, not written into the universe waiting to be discovered.”
2015: “Nothing is exempt from human question.”
2018: “A non-religious approach to questions of value, meaning, and truth.”
2020: “I settle on saying that it is an approach to life.”
2020: “Humanists are all about confronting reality, finding solutions to problems through reason and evidence, and applying those solutions through cooperation.”
2021: “Humanists embrace science as the most effective tool in understanding our reality.”
2021: “Life is finite, death is the end of it. You will not be aware of it because you will not be.”
2021: “Spirituality for humanists… is not something in any way connected to anything outside of this physical universe.”
2022: “The humanist approach is about being free to live a happy and fulfilling life for ourselves and supporting others to do the same.”
2025: “Humanism, to me, is simply the best idea in the world.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/21
Memories are a funny thing.
They are, indeed, as if skin tattoos.
They are a meaning mark.
They fade with time,
but:
Eventually, they leave a wrinkle.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/21
Sex with someone with narcissistic tendencies in relations,
is ‘sex’ with a stranger.
Yuck.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/21
I’m not saying she’s a lazy dog, but I am saying she does a good impression.
All day.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/21
1998 “Like the physical universe, the moral universe is governed by unforgiving laws that we do not have the power to alter.”
1998 “All moral positions impose values… even the moral position that you should not impose values on others does just that.”
2009 “I spoke of the five main lines of scientific evidence — denoted by the acronym SURGE — that point to the definite beginning of the space-time continuum.”
2009 “Because there was no nature and there were no natural forces ontologically prior to the Big Bang — nature itself was created at the Big Bang.”
2013 “Every law has a law giver… there is an objective moral law… therefore there’s an objective moral law giver.”
2015 “To say that a scientist can disprove God is like saying a mechanic can disprove Henry Ford.”
2015 “Theism makes doing science possible because it provides the foundation for the very tools of science.”
2022 “If someone says ‘there is no truth,’ ask: ‘Is that true?’”
2022 “Science doesn’t say anything. Scientists do.”
2025 “I believe in the Big Bang. I just know who banged it.”
2025 “Truth is whatever corresponds to the real (to reality).”
2025 “The greatest miracle in the Bible is the first verse… If that verse is true, every other verse is at least possible.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/20
2014
“The world’s smartest rabbit is still a rabbit.”
2014
“Not figuring things out faster makes me feel dumb.”
2014
“I’ve taken way, way too many IQ tests — more than 30.”
2015
“The only brain drug with an indisputable, immediate effect is coffee.”
2016
“We live in an information space.”
2016
“By the year 2100, earth’s AI population could be a trillion.”
2016
“We need a cabinet-level Department of the Future.”
2016
“Enduring spirituality won’t deny fact. Our era’s deniers of fact will be remembered — vaguely — as minor villains.”
2016
“Not being a clown show: We need to be pro-science and pro-smartness.”
2017
“We will argue about politics. I am your standard Hollywood Liberal.”
2020
“For something to exist, it has to exist for a non-zero amount of time.”
2022
“Now, almost anything can be a subject for comedy.”
2022
“Comedy often serves to communicate taboo information in ways that are more palatable.”
2023
“Lazy voodoo physics is my term for crappy metaphysical theorizing.”
2023
“Thanks to quantum mechanics, we know that the world isn’t pre-determined.”
2024
“Adults who talk about their IQs are weirdos.”
2024
“It’s just IQ.”
2024
“IQ is a lousy way to measure intelligence once you look at every other possible way.”
2024
“People demonstrate their intelligence as adults by succeeding or not in the world.”
2024
“I’d say the driver is that you need a lack of contradiction; you need self-consistency to exist.”
2024
“Democracies have been declining… Authoritarian forms of government are becoming more popular… Much of it is fueled by nonsense.”
2024
“The world is full of good news (while the news is full of bad news).”
2025
“People conflate analytical power with agency.”
2025
“The danger is not that AI becomes evil; it becomes hyper-competent with goals that diverge from ours.”
2025
“Right now, we have smart AI but no meaningful agency.”
2025
“It will not be the end of everything, but might be the end of enjoyable humanity.”
2025
“The jokes that hurt the world the most were probably the ones made about Donald Trump.”
2025
“The Daily Show has a political slant.”
2025
“I believe quantum mechanics is the mathematical embodiment of the principle of non-contradiction.”
2025
“Within a few hundred years, we’ll likely live in a world of transferable consciousness. The main activity of existence will be information processing.”
2025
“We’re not designed to be happy. We’re designed to pursue happiness.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/20
Is financial security a source of security or insecurity?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/20
Of what, is this a symptom?
No race riots.
No civilizational collapse.
Therefore, it’s a superminority appeal.
Is it the “radical left”?
Nope.
Otherwise, it would be nationwide, as per Left versus Right.
It’s conservative versus far-Right.
Centrists and Leftwing are the commentariat in this murder.
Conservatives and far-Right brought their internal ‘spiritual’ battle to reality somewhere between a neck and a throat: Groper v. Groypers.
Repeat: Will this continue to be the nation of the blind?
God did not answer the prayers for mercy, ask Frank Turek.
Indeed, if murder was the answer, what was the question?
One more wishing to be alike in Christ;
someone who has done exactly as Christ has done, too:
Kirk stayed dead.
Does this get a Rise out of you, too?
A Knight for Christ, finding eternal night.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/20
2006
“Taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75 percent of their targets — that feels like a conspiracy theory.”
2011
“You can’t process me with a normal brain.”
“I am on a drug, it’s called Charlie Sheen… If you try it once, you will die. Your face will melt off and your children will weep over your exploded body.”
“I was banging seven-gram rocks and finishing them, because that’s how I roll. I have one speed. I have one gear: go.”
“I’m not bipolar — I’m bi-winning. I win here and I win there. Now what?”
“I got tiger blood, man.”
“I’m an F-18, bro. And I will destroy you in the air. I will deploy my ordnance to the ground.”
“We’re high priests, Vatican assassin warlocks. Boom. Print that.”
“I’m tired of pretending like I’m not bitchin’ — a total frickin’ rock star from Mars.”
“I tried marriage. I’m 0 for 3 with the marriage thing… I’m not going 0 for 4. I’m not wearing a golden sombrero.”
“Dying’s for fools.”
“Can’t is the cancer of happen.”
“I blinked and I cured my brain.”
“Borrow my brain for five seconds and just be like, ‘Dude, can’t handle it, unplug this.’”
“I expose people to magic.”
“Here’s your first pee test; next one goes in your mouth — no, you won’t get high.”
2015
“I’m here to admit I am, in fact, HIV-positive.”
“It’s a hard three letters to absorb.”
2016
“There was a stretch where I didn’t drink for 11 years. No cocaine, no booze for 11 years.”
2017
“I was not just coming up with stuff about 9/11. I was parroting those a lot smarter and a lot more experienced than myself.”
2021
“There were 55 different ways for me to handle that situation, and I chose number 56.”
“I’m so glad that I traded early retirement for a f — ing hashtag.”
2023
“Next month I’ll be six years sober.”
2025
“I still get what I call the ‘shame shivers.’”
“It felt like the biggest betrayal you could possibly endure.”
“Drinking just… it softened the edges. It gave me just freedom of speech.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/20
Sean Paul,
born of a ‘demonic’ fusion between a DJ Booth and a piñata,
makes great music for Latin Clubs for great dancing,
he makes no sense in any other context.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/19
When working with, even being intimate with, the truly traumatized, and if an inappropriate characterization manifests itself, as happens often and unbeknownst to them even as they deliver their cuts, particularly after an attempt at a boundary or a request for mutual respect becoming re-established; your immediate sensibility and indeed feeling, if sober of mind and foresight, will be mourning, as their tongue, actions, or both, have become scimitars, where even coming with beautiful curves are, fundamentally, swords with intent to harm: You have been dehumanized — have the wherewithal to leave, with dignity intact for both parties.
To have been acted upon badly in a life does not excuse acting badly in a life.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/19
When you say it right, you’re heard for a lifetime.
When you say it really right, you’re heard for lifetimes.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/19
Certainly, transcendentalist sentimentalism from European so-called ‘Classical’ Music does tap into something akin to a dis-ease of the mind. That style of structured vibration and higher harmonic puts this to use to create an addiction upon whole lives and musical cultures are formed and fed.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/19
The demarcation between subjectivities and the Object Universe seems clear, though mutually reflective, and thin. No structural independence completely exists between them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/17
And the moon,
the moon,
it falls asunder,
standing in water,
falling into the sky,
unto the earth;
and the moon,
the moon,
it gives me grace too.
And the moon,
the moon,
it fell ass under,
dancing on water,
thrilling the sky,
onto the earth;
and the moon,
the moon,
it gives me two grace.
And the moon,
the moon,
it flies as if under,
prancing in water,
lilting it, sky,
through the earth;
and the moon,
the moon,
as asunder side Sun down,
and moon up.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/11
Sour grapes,
become sour gripes.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/09
In politics, what do we say across the world?
The emotions matter.
An appeal to the emotions works more than rational policy.
Curious.
What matters more in interpersonal interactions?
Emotions.
Therefore, interpersonal interactions are political.
Truly, “the [inter-]personal is political.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/10
You see the world in red.
You see the world, in red.
You see, the world in red.
If the world is red,
if you perceive it as red,
is it out there or in you?
Is the rum in sentiment or in the wind?
Nasruddin:
Have you lost your donkey again?
Master, why is the grass red now, not green anymore?
It looks like you lost a hand, try clapping,
I guess.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/11
If murder is the answer,
what was the question?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/11
See us,
be us,
see us be us,
will this continue to be the nation of the blind?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/10
I am still.
I am quiet.
I am an umbrella,
turned against itself.
Under Heaven,
I, am quiet;
I, am still.
I am an umbrella,
turned for Heaven.
Under Heaven,
I am,
still.
I am,
quiet.
Under Heaven,
turned against myself,
turned for Heaven,
a cup,
I am all,
under Heaven.
So, I am,
Heaven.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/09
Most is done as part of a dance.
Yet, we primarily look outside.
Self-censorship is still censorship.
Press enter or click to view image in full size
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/09
1986
“The surest way to be misled is to trust someone just because they’re in charge.”
1990
“Truth isn’t owned by anyone — it’s discovered through persistent questioning.”
1992
“Most mistakes come from assuming too much, not from questioning too much.”
1993
“Faith is what you have when you don’t have proof, but it’s no substitute for evidence when evidence is available.”
1996
“I think that if it had been a religion that first maintained the notion that all the matter in the entire universe had once been contained in an area smaller than the point of a pin, scientists probably would have laughed at the idea.”
“Feelings are the source of inspiration for hypotheses, but only careful observation and testing can help us approach the truth.”
1997
“Science gives us probabilities, not certainties. Even the best theories are only our best guesses based on what we know now.”
1998
“You don’t need a rulebook to be good — just a conscience and a willingness to act on it.”
1999
“If you cannot, welcome to the world of faith. You’re accepting what you’ve been told by those you respect.”
“That’s what creationists do — they just respect different folks.”
2000
“Science thrives because humans are curious enough to challenge what they’re told and humble enough to admit what they don’t know.”
2001
“Right and wrong aren’t written in the stars. They’re decisions we make based on what we think does the most good or the least harm.”
2003
“Proofs are excellent lessons in reasoning. Without logic and reasoning, you are dependent on jumping to conclusions — or worse — having empty opinions.”
2005
“Science doesn’t compete with belief — it complements it by explaining what we can test and leaving the rest to us.”
2006
“Science can tell us how the universe works, but it’s silent on what it all means. That’s a question for each of us to answer.”
2008
“Goodness isn’t about obeying a higher power; it’s about choosing to do what’s right because it makes the world better.”
2010
“The term Jewish refers to a religion, but it also refers to a heritage.”
2011
“The best measure of a person’s morality is how much they contribute to the well-being of others, not how loudly they proclaim their virtue.”
2012
“Believing something without evidence is like building a house on sand. It might stand for a while, but it won’t last.”
2013
“If you believe in evolution … the egg came first.”
2014
“Science can describe what is, but it often can’t explain why it is. That’s where philosophy and sometimes religion come in.”
“Morality isn’t about following rules; it’s about weighing consequences and choosing what helps more than it hurts.”
“Officials are either ignorant of medical science or hiding the truth when they assure us that Ebola is not easy to catch. Obviously, it is.”
2016
“An egg holding a chicken is a ‘chicken egg,’ no matter what laid it.”
“I’d say it’s the egg.”
“It depends on your spiritual beliefs. If you have a religion, it provides the answer. But if you don’t believe in a god, the question contradicts your thinking. Having a reason implies having a purpose, which indicates an intelligent being for cognitive power with intent. That’s what people call a god. So if you don’t believe a god exists, you can’t believe a reason exists. You must settle for assuming we got here through some natural processes and that’s that.”
“I would make rational decisions based on the facts rather than on pressure, including the media, or religion.”
“I would nominate … justices [who] would interpret the Constitution without political or religious bias.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/08
International metrics indicate abuse patterns of males and females. Sex asymmetries exist in these contexts of violence, whether physical violence, sexual assault, emotional/psychological maltreatment, financial/economic control, or abuse within institutions.
Both men and women can be perpetrators of these forms of abuse. Global research shows significant gender asymmetries in prevalence, in severity, and even in context. Many societies show that men commit a disproportionate amount of severe physical and sexual abuse.
Women’s perpetration tends to occur in different patterns or contexts. 90% of the homicide perpetrators worldwide are male, based on UNODC data. Males commit most of the non-lethal assaults and violent crimes. Males mostly perpetrate physical domestic violence. 1 in 3 women and 1 in 10 men experience physical violence in the United States.
Females suffer more severe injuries and repeated assaults, with most of the intimate partner homicides committed by males. A partner kills 38% of female murder victims compared to 5% of male victims. Males are the majority of the perpetrators of physical aggression in other contexts.
The frequency and lethality of physical abuse skew male. However, this is a false basis for blanket stereotyping of males. Women can and do inflict physical harm. Sexual violence is the most gender-disparate form of abuse. No matter the place in the world. Men perpetrate the majority of sexual assaults and rapes.
The U.S. Department of Justice indicates that nearly 99% of persons who commit rape or sexual assault are male. Women and girls are more often victims of sexual abuse. The World Health Organization reports that 1 in 3 women has been subjected to physical and/or sexual violence in their lifetime.
The male lifetime risk of sexual victimization is lower. In the U.S., ~1 in 14 men report being “made to penetrate” or sexually coerced at some point. Female perpetration of sexual abuse does occur, particularly by authority figures abusing minors. Studies on child sexual abuse indicate 75–90% of offenders are male, while 10–25% are female.
Female offenders tend to target boys. Male offenders tend to target girls. Sexual abuse by women is under-detected due to stereotypes. Therefore, the rates of abuse by females are higher than the known reported estimates. Sexual abuse is a highly gendered crime.
Emotional and psychological abuse are common. Both sexes engage in emotional abuse, psychological manipulation, and verbal harassment at significant rates. In the U.S., 48.4% of women and 48.8% of men report psychological aggression.
These behaviours of abuse include belittling, controlling, insults, intimidation, isolation, threats, and more. Males and females employ these in different ways. Women are as or more likely to engage in verbal aggression than men, including yelling, name-calling, and more.
Males tend to incorporate threats of violence with verbal aggression—a pattern of domination, in the form of a sustained pattern of control. Females tend to engage in relational aggression using social exclusion, guilt-tripping, or emotional manipulation, e.g., belittle their partner’s masculinity or use passive-aggressive tactics.
Financial or economic abuse is controlling a victim’s employment, money, or resources. Males tend to be the perpetrators of financial abuse in patriarchal contexts. An environment in which the male has significant authority over financial decisions in the home. Elder abuse is common among males and females via exploitation of the elderly.
Institutional abuse is maltreatment within systems of care or power. Males and females are perpetrators. In nursing homes and long-term care facilities, two-thirds of staff members admit to committing abuse of older persons in the past year.
Frontline caregivers for elders tend to be women. Women figure prominently and significantly among institutional abusers in elder care. Egregious institutional abuse scandals involve predominantly male perpetrators taking advantage of authority.
Institutional abuse is less about the gender of the perpetrator. It is more about power imbalances. Those in charge, male or female, may abuse vulnerable dependents. Styles of abuse mirror broader gender patterns: male staff tend to be implicated in sexual violence, whereas female staff tend to be implicated in neglect or emotional abuse. Experts emphasize that both women and men can be guilty of severe abuse in institutional settings.
Male perpetrators of violence show more antisocial personality disorder or narcissistic personality. Female perpetrators show more borderline personality traits. Institutional biases and stereotypes can lead to female abusers not being held accountable. Female victims often face disbelief.
The further questions in either case of the significant minorities of females and males who abuse are the impacts, motivations, or patterns.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/08
For such love-generating communities,
there seems to be a lot of tacit fear of non-religious people,
abused by community speaking out.
So, is it love or coercive influence within a controlling system,
accepted as legitimate because of broad spread of the practice?
After a while, candy can taste less sweet, too.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/08
Thirsty, for sure.
Sweaty, definitely.
The facts may, in fact,
indicate the opposite,
or a para-consistent reason.
The questions while jogging matter.
Where, exactly, do you think you’re going?
More importantly, why go?
Love says, “I’m just a person.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
Dust, sand, and shisha.
How can this person know my views if they’ve barely heard mine, stereotyped me, and gone on lengthy soliloquies?
Did they want to hear my views, for consideration?
Or did they want an excuse to hear their air?
Again and again and again.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
First: It is not new.
Second: It is simple, directly.
Third: It is complex, derivatively.
Fourth: It is amplified with communications technologies.
Fifth: It is, therefore — To frame oneself as both the Hero and the Victim in the same story, as if the center of the world, wherever one travels until the end of one’s time.
Sixth: Hence, it is a zero-sum approach in game theoretic terms, with a twist, in which one is the perpetual loser, while everyone must lose with you.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
I have never seen group hatred, or simply veiled academic animosity, quite as stringent and predictable as differing men proclaiming themselves as a representative of the one true God.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
Mr. Congreve, I must, respectfully, disagree.
Every human interaction harbours units.
Interactions between those units.
Those in time.
Finite interactions of finite units in finite time.
Therefore, human inter-operational complexes are:
Finite — full stop.
Further, therefore, these can be mapped to some fidelity,
traced, and so maneuvered,
including the purportedly “woman scorned.”
It’s not that bad,
just get to know an old woman,
or few.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
When the whisper is a scream,
the singular factor apart from the noise,
the singular signal is temporality:
Time.
When the silence is a ‘scream’:
Time means urgency.
There is a goal.
What is the nature of this individual’s urgency?
What needs does it serve, them?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
There are, indeed, connoisseurs of the product,
as corresponding masters of the craft,
to this day,
in the unlikeliest of places.
Very intriguing months of work,
to produce a single item by hand.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/06
By outcome? No difference.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/06
For pretty much everyone,
a sufficiently unpleasant present,
far surpasses thoughts of forever.
Therefore, subjectively, now is forever.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/06
“May this tusk root out the lice of the hair and the beard.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/06
Try ignorance.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/03
Try as you might,
dig the trench,
fill the mote,
build the wall,
draw the bridge,
anchor the tower,
lock the doors,
closed in the highest chamber,
the harp still plays,
and the golden string,
it appears intact:
uh-oh.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/03
There is one class of people,
for whom death is:
Release,
reprieve.
They want it.
Who are we to give it to them?
Who are we not to give it to them?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/03
If you want to see who kills you now,
look outside;
if who killed who you were,
look inside.
Press enter or click to view image in full size
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/03
Careful.
I get that a lot,
got that a lot,
more than you know.
Am I heard?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/03
“What did the Brooklyn Jewish guy call his gentile girlfriend?”
Goy-lfriend.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/03
He has a weird habit,
of ‘appointing’ self-appointed males,
to do His bidding by their hermeneutic.
“The other lies, though, about working for God.”
Does he work for the Devil?
Weird, he said that about you, too.
Men on men on men, amen.
It reminds me.
We know evolution via natural selection happened.
My old local Evangelical university.
They had a dialogue-debate.
One corner is an Old Earth Creationist.
The other is a Young earth Creationist.
A debate where either side would win,
while both would be objectively wrong.
Men on men on men, amen.
Thy Will be done.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/02
You want more?
What makes you so special, so great?
The downright uptrodden.
The wrongful unrighteousness.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/02
Everywhere, all the time,
eventually.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/02
You think they’ll look where you intended?
They’ll look wherever they damn please.
they’re people, now laugh.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/02
Don’t be cool,
be you,
that’s ice enough.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/02
I have known several suicidal people,
often quite intimately,
too much so.
What is one to do there?
Consider:
Life from their point of view.
Life not as something visual,
but life as a sentiment inside.
What is that feeling for them?
Enter the ‘skin’ of the other,
not too long, not a fun place.
The feeling for them, immense:
“Pain swells as the future closes.”
“I am ruined beyond repair.”
“Alone, unwanted, and a burden.”
“Body screams, then goes numb.”
“Mind tunnels; choices vanish fast.”
“Fear fades; action feels impossible.”
“Storm rises, control slips away.”
“Sudden calm hides imminent danger.”
Ruined, unwanted, numb, tunnel,
fear, storm, slip, calm, danger,
immanence.
What is one to do there?
Often,
your presence,
to their immanence,
is all you can do,
for them.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/01
I wanted to kiss you,
but I was waiting,
for you to stop the high horse,
of criminal law and superiority;
Waiting for you,
to hold your breath,
so I could, maybe, ‘take it away.’
C’est la vie.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/31
Sometimes,
the stars are brighter in the day.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/31
1990
“Music accompanies everything in my culture… This music is not dead; it will never die.”
1996
“You need to go further beyond expectation.”
“My idea of being an artist is… a musical identity.”
“Third world artists are criticised… This is a double standard that is no longer acceptable to many of us.”
“My music comes from my heart… I want to be universal.”
2016
“I couldn’t continue living for all these years with the deep wound I left Uganda with.”
“I would like to close the sad chapter and start a new beginning.”
“From today, I want to make Uganda and France meet because they are both very important to me.”
2017
“That moment to me was like ‘life is an onion,’ because sometimes when you peel off the layers of an onion, it makes you weep.”
“Music and karaté played vital roles to help close those dark chapters.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/30
Excluding the rest of the world,
to understand,
and whether you or others are kidding,
is there a peace to be made,
with ourselves,
when all that’s left to contemplate is ourselves,
and our contents?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/30
You are given two hands in your life.
Each has a set of cards.
You start and play one hand,
at once.
One palm exposed.
That’s your finity.
You play the other hand over time.
New cards get added to that hand, sometimes.
Time is the deck on the table.
If you lay the second hand fully,
then you have two palms exposed.
The second palm is forever.
So, you get one finity and one forever,
in life.
Your forever is the most valuable,
while valued only within finity.
Forever palm gives finity palm value,
urgency,
finity palm gives forever palm value,
limitation.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/30
When you break up with a man,
do not make them a type,
acknowledge the reality of the love,
as it is,
rather,
as it was,
every conditionality has comparative rhymes,
sits individually on its own terms.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/30
Skip.
I used to walk down the sidewalks as a kid.
Skip.
In Fort Langley.
Skip.
Seeing the concrete.
Skip.
Watching my step.
Skip.
And the lines were drawn.
Skip.
When the sidewalks were made.
Skip.
On my way to BJs.
Skip.
Or IGA.
Skip.
Or Veggie Bob’s.
Skip.
Sometimes not knowing where.
Skip.
Just going out and seeing.
Skip.
Where my legs would take me.
Skip.
Rarely.
Skip.
I’d reflect.
Skip.
Why am I jumping the gaps?
Skip.
Makes no sense.
Skip.
Same either way.
Skip.
Negligible loss.
Skip.
So I would walk.
In the crack line.
Nothing happened.
My mind would skip. (Skip.)
It’d jump for me. (Skip.)
Then I’d forget.
Skip.
But I wonder.
Skip.
What is the jump gap?
Skip.
For you.
Skip.
In your life.
Skip.
Inside your head.
Skip.
And you miss out on a part of your part of life.
Skip.
You skip it without physically skipping it.
Skip.
It’s just a moment in reflection.
Skip.
I missed out.
Skip.
I made a.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/30
To understand the core Christian point of view,
what Christianity is, to them,
who Christ is, for them,
when they speak of Christ being killed,
and asking who are individuals culpable for this,
who is responsible,
imagine them speaking this,
not to you,
but into a mirror,
human sin makes the Passion necessary, to them.
It’s in all the language:
“My Saviour.”
“Theosis.”
“Our Lord and Saviour.”
“Propitiation.”
“Our Lord Jesus Christ.”
“Expiation.”
“Our Lord and Savior.”
“Atonement.”
“My Redeemer.”
“Sanctification.”
“My Shepherd.”
“Repentance.”
“Redemption.”
“New Creation.”
“Agnus Dei.”
“Paschal Mystery.”
“Absolution.”
“Suffering Servant.”
“Kyrie eleison.”
“Lamb of God.”
“King of kings.”
“Lord of lords.”
“Great High Priest.”
“Light of the World.”
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/30
Be gentle with them,
as you may misapprehend them,
silence, a bit, your inner voice,
reality is never quite so loud,
if you’re all bad to them,
perhaps,
then they need a break too,
from you.
Rarely, but at times, though,
a permanent break is necessary,
if they split you now,
apart from many positive sentiments before.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/28
This ‘East’ and ‘West’ dichotomy is framed for the narrowminded,
to produce the narrow minds.
The science is clear.
It is the same species.
No gods necessary.
We do not need morality plays of Us vs. Them.
We do not need revolutionary paradigms.
We merely need an evidentiarily attuned view.
We are more each other than not, than we realize.
Therefore, inasmuch as possible,
we belong to ourselves,
and to one another.
No magic necessary,
and unity.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/28
Still’d space,
interiority,
spaced still,
exteriority,
my insides all out,
inversion,
our outsides all in,
recursion,
Until when?
Who ‘til?
I see what seems as infinity,
before me.
Blind to appearances,
behind me.
Who ‘til?
Until when?
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/27
Everything hinges on women’s bodies, then women’s choices over the former with ‘fetal personhood’ as a false fulcrum to garner leverage over women’s destinies.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Medium (Personal)
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/08/26
Remember the old woman admiring the owl in excitement?
She didn’t do this for every fantastic backyard moment,
flower or bird,
or moment alone when a good phrase was said.
Love’s a little bit like that.
Some are only for a moment.
Not all are admired,
and many, possibly most,
aren’t even noticed,
by you, at times,
or them, at other times.
The owl had other plans, too.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website):
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/07
How do AI systems and rare earth supply chains tied to East Turkistan enable China’s surveillance architecture—and what strategic response should the United States and its allies adopt?
Salih Hudayar is the Foreign Minister of the East Turkistan Government-in-Exile and a leading advocate for the rights of the Uyghur and Turkic peoples. Born in East Turkestan and raised in exile, he has dedicated his career to exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s repression, including mass surveillance, internment camps, forced sterilizations, and resource exploitation. Hudayar studied International Studies and Political Science in the United States before entering public service. He frequently testifies before the U.S. Congress and international bodies, urging recognition of the Uyghur genocide and calling for support of East Turkistan’s independence as a path to both justice and global security.
In this 2-part conversation, Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Hudayar discuss U.S.-China trade tensions, rare earth supply chains, and population decline within the context of Uyghur repression. Hudayar details how AI and surveillance technologies—powered by minerals extracted from East Turkestan—are used to control Uyghurs through predictive policing, biometric data, and forced assimilation. He argues that China’s demographic engineering, including sterilizations, coerced marriages, and organ harvesting, aims to suppress Uyghur growth while exploiting resources. Hudayar calls on the United States and its allies to treat East Turkestan strategically, not just as a human rights issue, emphasizing independence as essential to countering China’s influence.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, once again, we are here with Salih Hudayar. We will be discussing outsourcing in the rare earths industry, tariffs, and population decline. The sources today are The Washington Post, Reuters, and AP.
Let us start with rare earths. Trump has been stating that the U.S. will be obtaining rare earths from China, and tariffs on Chinese goods will total 55%, which is a significant amount. From your point of view, you have seen the back and forth about the importance of rare earths for semiconductors, AI hardware, and infrastructure. We may not yet know the full potential of the technology, but we already know it will be significant. What are your thoughts on that, either from a political perspective or from an oilier interest perspective?
Salih Hudayar: Regarding AI, from our perspective, it has not been used in a positive way in Xinjiang (which we call East Turkestan). Chinese authorities have deployed an expansive surveillance regime there, including so-called “predictive policing,” where data about everyday behaviour is analyzed to flag people for questioning or detention. This is documented in reports about the Integrated Joint Operations Platform (IJOP), which aggregates personal data and issues alerts that can lead to arbitrary detention.
The targets are primarily Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslim minorities—who are Chinese citizens—not simply “non-Chinese people.” Factors that can trigger scrutiny include religious practices, cultural expressions, travel histories, language use, or even lawful behaviours that authorities label as “suspicious.” Since late 2016, credible estimates have found large-scale arbitrary detentions alongside political indoctrination, movement restrictions, and religious repression.
To make this concrete: I had a relative who received a lengthy prison sentence labelled “extremism” after encouraging local youths not to smoke, framing it as unhealthy and against our religious values. This kind of ordinary advice has been treated as evidence of “extremism” within the broader repression that rights groups have documented.
Religious life is tightly controlled. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is officially atheist and forbids its members from religious affiliation, while the state recognizes a limited set of religions under strict oversight. In practice, policy in Xinjiang has entailed coercive “de-radicalization” targeting religious expression.
On the technology side, companies tied to China’s surveillance build-out—including Hikvision—have been reported to market or develop analytics that can detect Uyghurs or “ethnicity” as a category, and U.S. authorities have sanctioned several Chinese firms for supporting biometric surveillance of minorities. This illustrates how AI and camera networks have been weaponized for authoritarian control—and exported abroad via Chinese vendors.
Meanwhile, in the West, AI is typically used for routine tasks like drafting emails or information retrieval, though abuses are possible anywhere. The difference in Xinjiang is scale, intent, and integration with state coercion—surveillance tools feed into detention and social control, as multiple investigations and human-rights assessments have shown.
At the same time, we want countries that have ethnic, cultural, and linguistic ties to the people of East Turkestan to support us. We want the United States to pressure those countries to stop helping China crack down on our diaspora communities. Ultimately, what we want is for the United States to cut economic ties with China and instead support East Turkestan’s independence. Our homeland contains many critical minerals, and we would gladly provide them to the United States at steep discounts—cheaper than they could obtain elsewhere—because China is stealing our resources every day. They are extracting hundreds, if not thousands, of tons of our resources daily, using them to fuel their economy, strengthen their military, and oppress us. That poses not only an existential threat to us, but also a strategic threat to the international community, including the United States, which China openly positions as its primary rival. Replacing the U.S. is China’s endgame.
From that perspective, we have been advising both Congress and other American officials that America needs to start viewing East Turkestan through a strategic lens, not just a human rights lens. At the end of the day, genocide does not stop itself. You cannot name a genocide in history that suddenly ended on its own. Stopping the genocide is impossible while China continues colonizing and occupying East Turkestan. Supporting our independence is the only way forward—both from a humanitarian perspective, ending the genocide, and from a strategic perspective, countering China’s expansion.
This is why we have been arguing so strongly. Returning to U.S. trade policy, part of the deal has been access to critical minerals. In exchange, the U.S.—even though it had previously banned exports of high-tech video chips to China—is now allowing China access to some of those chips. Moreover, what is China doing with them? They are building massive AI data centers in the deserts of East Turkestan, essentially constructing an entire miniature city dedicated to AI infrastructure. Bloomberg and other outlets have reported on this.
From that perspective, these new AI facilities will not only be used against the people of East Turkestan, but could also be leveraged against the international community. Whether you look at it from the humanitarian front, the economic front, or the security front, it is in the U.S. national interest to support East Turkestan in regaining its independence.
Jacobsen: To the expansion of the Chinese state, let me check my notes here. I pulled up information on the surveillance of Uyghurs. The system is called IJOP, the Integrated Joint Operations Platform. It compiles massive amounts of data. What is included are phone surveillance, checkpoints, cameras, Wi-Fi monitoring, and even information fed by neighbours. Is that incentivized in some way—the snitching?
Hudayar: Yes, of course. It is incentivized. People can be given financial rewards, better job opportunities, and a more favourable lifestyle. In other words, collaborators can enjoy more freedom than others.
Jacobsen: Police also collect DNA, fingerprints, iris scans, and voice samples. Neighbourhoods are carved into units so local officials can maintain tighter surveillance.
Even on the phone side, in East Turkestan, the government forces people to download mandatory government apps. These apps have access to all the data on the phone. For example, if you receive a call from someone the government deems suspicious, or if you get a call from overseas, the app automatically alerts the nearest police station. Police then summon you for questioning.
If you have photos, videos, texts—anything remotely religious, cultural, or political—the same thing happens: the app alerts the police, and you are picked up. People cannot refuse these apps; without downloading them, you cannot even get a SIM card, since phone numbers require registration with your national ID. So nearly everyone has one of these apps, which constantly monitors all activity.
Many believe that even if you turn off your phone, authorities can still listen to your voice and track your movements. That means there is no privacy, not even in your own home. People live in constant fear: “What if I say something wrong? What if someone sends me the wrong message?” The fear of being flagged is pervasive.
Jacobsen: People can be flagged as suspicious and sent to camps. What we discussed years ago—mass internment, forced labour, political indoctrination—continues, and the leaks we have seen describe camp rules as harsh as “shoot to kill” for those who try to escape. The UN has said these may constitute crimes against humanity. “May” seems like an understatement, but it tracks with the UN’s cautious style and the slow pace at which it often acts. Do you see the Uyghur population as a test case for how these tools might be deployed against an entire population?
Hudayar: Yes, China has been using East Turkestan as a testing ground for virtually everything—from nuclear weapons to conventional weapons, and now the latest surveillance and AI technologies. The so-called “vocational training centers,” which are in fact internment camps, were first established in these areas. Then they began separating our children from their families, forcing them into boarding schools where they are required to learn Chinese and undergo indoctrination. Now Beijing has extended similar policies into Tibet, because what worked in East Turkestan is being rolled out elsewhere. The international community, beyond issuing statements of condemnation and concern, has done little to stop it. Seeing that no one acted decisively, China is repeating the same strategies in Tibet.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Bishop Accountability
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/23
How does Joelle Casteix explain coordinated Catholic clergy abuse, why settlements vary, and what reforms are needed for real accountability?
Joelle Casteix is a leading advocate, author, and educator on child sexual abuse prevention and institutional accountability. A survivor of abuse at a Catholic high school in Southern California, she became a spokesperson and Western Regional Director with SNAP, supporting survivors and exposing cover-ups. Her book, The Well-Armoured Child(River Grove Books, 2015), equips parents to recognize grooming, build safeguards, and empower children without fear. A former journalist, Casteix lectures widely, consults on safeguarding policies, and writes about transparency, restitution, and reform. She champions evidence-based, survivor-centred change through public education, media engagement, and practical, accessible tools for families and institutions.
In this discussion with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Casteix explains coordinated Catholic clergy abuse through Orange County cases involving Eleuterio Ramos, Siegfried Widera, and Michael A. Harris, detailing settlements including $10 million to a single survivor in 2024 and prior awards of $5.2 million in 2001 and $3.5 million in 2024. She outlines why outcomes vary—evidence of diocesan knowledge, scope of abuse, and victim impact—and describes the 2004 $100 million global settlement’s grid for allocating compensation. Casteix exposes institutional gaslighting, misogynistic binaries, strategic transfers, and opaque data practices, while acknowledging limited reforms. Her central point: only transparency, external oversight, and survivor validation can counter reputational protectionism.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is an example of a coordinated clergy abuse case?
Joelle Casteix: One of the coordinated clergy abuse cases in Orange County involved a priest named Eleuterio Ramos, who was accused of sexually abusing children. His abuse led to multiple civil settlements; most recently, a California case involving Ramos and Siegfried Widera resulted in a $10 million settlement to a single survivor in 2024. Another set of cases involving Michael A. Harris—a former principal at Mater Dei High School and later founding principal at Santa Margarita Catholic High School—produced a $5.2 million settlement in 2001 to Ryan DiMaria and, separately, a $3.5 million settlement in 2024.
Jacobsen: Why such differences in outcomes?
Casteix: Because the cases are still under protective orders, we do not know the full details. But generally, a higher settlement or verdict usually means there was much more evidence showing that the diocese knew—or should have known—about the abuse and failed to act. It can also depend on the extent of the abuse or the number of victims.
When the Diocese of Orange reached the $100 million global settlement in 2004, one of the most challenging tasks the attorneys faced was dividing the money among survivors. The diocese said, “Here is the money—now you figure out how to split it.” That is when they used the grid: How many instances of abuse occurred? What were the damages? How has each survivor been affected?
It is harrowing work. Unfortunately, our civil justice system has only one real form of punishment for wrongdoing—money. It is not a perfect system, but it gives survivors something tangible. Many have never been able to live their lives to their full potential. They have hospital bills, addiction issues, and decades of trauma. These settlements at least help them begin to rebuild.
Just as importantly, the process gives survivors validation. It provides proof—official documents and depositions confirming: “Yes, this happened. Yes, it was covered up. No, it was not your fault. Yes, it was illegal.” That acknowledgment is the most healing part.https://ff512a195178562804b09bc8af479180.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.html
If you ask many survivors, they will tell you, “I would not have settled. I did not want the money—I just wanted them to admit what they did.” The Church often denies it, even to your face. They will tell you, “It never happened,” or “You are crazy.” But when you have hundreds of pages of documents showing the truth, you finally have something undeniable.
Jacobsen: How does the Church internally frame these cases?
Casteix: As short-term liabilities. And this is just my opinion. The Catholic Church operates on what I call “geological time.” It thinks in centuries. It is run by men who have never had to feed a family or pay bills. Their understanding of money is limited to what appears on a ledger.
For most of its history—until maybe eight or nine years ago—the Church saw abuse survivors as temporary problems. The thinking was: “Yes, the kid was abused, but now the kid is a mess, a drug addict, a liar.” So they wrote that child off. Their loyalty lay with the priest, not the victim, because the Church had already invested heavily in that priest’s education, housing, and lifelong support. It was easier to protect him than to face accountability.
And priests are not exactly employable outside the Church. They cannot simply become plumbers or lawyers. So the institution doubles down on protecting them. Survivors, meanwhile, are treated as disposable—people to be vilified, marginalized, or discredited. The goal is to run out the statute of limitations, label them as enemies of the Church or even of Jesus himself, and move on.
Jacobsen: When the Church treats survivors as short-term liabilities, part of that seems to involve institutional gaslighting—essentially trying to convince victims that they are misremembering or exaggerating what happened. By “gaslighting,” do you mean that in the institutional sense?
Casteix: Yes, absolutely. Institutional gaslighting. The Church tells survivors things like, “You’re the only one,” or, “We found no evidence that anything happened.” I once had an attorney for the Diocese of Orange look me directly in the eye and say, “I went through your file—there was no evidence whatsoever that anything happened to you. I’m so sorry you feel that this happened.” That was the language: I’m sorry you feel that way, instead of I’m sorry for what we did.
They frame it as, “Let bygones be bygones,” or, “Things happened in the past, but let’s move forward.” It is a way to erase accountability. The gaslighting is intense, and they have done an equally effective job conditioning ordinary Catholics to believe that speaking out about abuse is wrong or disloyal to the Church.
When I came forward in 2003, other Catholics—even people I knew—wrote to me saying, “Joelle, how dare you do this? Are you even sure it happened?” Years later, some of those same people admitted, “The reason I was so mad at you is because I was ashamed about what happened to me. You made me face it.” The gaslighting operates on multiple levels: it isolates the survivor, controls the community’s perception, and protects the institution.Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
Jacobsen: In my research on evangelical denominations, I have noticed some of the exact mechanisms—pastors or leaders using coded theological language to stigmatize victims. For instance, a woman who speaks out against abuse might be labelled a “Jezebel” or referred to as “that woman,” which in their community is shorthand for someone deceitful or morally corrupt. To outsiders, it doesn’t sound very sensible, but within that theology, it signals that she should be shunned. Does something similar occur in Catholic settings?
Casteix: Yes. Absolutely. In the Catholic Church, women are stereotypically placed into one of two categories: the virgin or the whore. You are either the saintly mother or the fallen woman. There is no middle ground.
When it comes to abuse, this mindset becomes devastating. If you have seen The Keepers on Netflix—a six-part documentary—you know that many of those young women were sexually abused by priests in high school. But the Church did not see them as victims. It saw them as temptresses.
Abuse of boys was treated as abhorrent and sinful. Still, abuse of girls was rationalized—”at least he’s not abusing boys.” That is the mindset. I believe that there are far more female survivors in the Catholic Church than have ever come forward, precisely because they were conditioned to believe it was their fault all along.
Women are not empowered in the Catholic Church. They are not taught that they are equal or that their voices matter. So when abuse happens, it is easy for them to internalize blame: “The priest is the embodiment of God on Earth; if he sinned, I must have caused it.” That is the underlying theology that enables silence.
Women in this system are trapped in a binary—the virgin or the whore—and both categories serve to keep them powerless. It is not an easy place to be a female survivor of abuse in the Catholic Church.
Jacobsen: Not in the negative evaluation, the negative balance of “whore,” although certainly that is within the implication. Also, in popular culture in the United States, I am aware of the Madonna–whore complex that is colloquially discussed. But in terms of what women are supposed to be within the theology—and therefore the social gender roles derived from it—it is Mother Mary or Virgin Mary.
Casteix: Yes, right. A great point, yes.
Jacobsen: That duality. Then another might be the barren woman, the inverse of the mother.
Casteix: The Catholic Church—although they do not emphasize it as much now—has a long tradition of consecrated virgins. These are women who, and I had not even heard of this until I was an adult and visited Rome, dedicate their lives to God through a formal consecration ceremony. They are not nuns; they are everyday women who have jobs and lead normal lives, but they take vows of perpetual virginity. It fits neatly into that same mould of idealized femininity.Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
Jacobsen: I do not suspect that they are Ceausescu’s henchmen going in to check on whether or not they are having sex—or how do you confirm this label?
Casteix: It is a vow. You cannot confirm the celibacy of any person who has taken such a vow. You cannot verify it for men either.
Jacobsen: That is right. From the research with which I am familiar—for instance, Pokrov was active, and then Prosopon Healing compiled data to build a database further from them—there is enough evidence for a rough four-quadrant analysis. Anyone can be a victim, but statistically, based on verified cases and legal filings, pedophilic assaults tend to involve boys, while sexual assaults against adults are more often against women. Does that align with your understanding of how things have played out?
Casteix: I do not think there is sufficiently reliable data on that, because within the Catholic Church, there is such a repressed view of sexuality that priests will never be forthcoming about their relationships with adults. For example, there was a bishop in Santa Rosa, G. Patrick Ziemann, who was accused of coercing adult men into sexual relationships. One of them sued him, and all of them were adults.
Some studies suggest that around 80% of priests are not celibate. Still, many of them are engaging in consensual relationships with adults, so they are not committing crimes. Historically, the priesthood also became a refuge for closeted gay men. When I graduated from high school in 1988, I had three male friends who were gay but had not come out. They went to their priests for guidance, and the priests told them, “You should join the priesthood because you have to be celibate there.” So these poor kids were funnelled into that life. Two of them became priests and later left.
Once you are inside that culture, there is a kind of quid pro quo—it is “everybody’s doing it.” So I do not think we will ever have reliable data on whether men or women are victimized more in the adult sphere.
In the case of children, we have seen many different kinds of perpetrators. Some were what I would call omnisexual. Take Oliver O’Grady, for instance—he sexually assaulted boys and girls alike. Also, he had relationships with women to gain access to their children. He did not care about gender or age. Michael Baker did something similar: he groomed mothers to get close to their sons. That was how he cultivated access and control.
There’s another priest in the Bay Area who did the same thing. That pattern was familiar. You see these priests who are what I call the “omnisexual” types—they do not have a specific preference. Others, however, have a clear pattern or “type” and build entire communities around that access.
For example, in Orange County, we had Richard Coughlin, who abused prepubescent boys. To gain access, he founded a boys’ choir that operated for more than thirty years. The chorus still exists today, which is astonishing to me—people still send their sons there. And we are now seeing more survivors come forward, including women who were abused as little girls.
Especially in Southern California, where there is a large Latino Catholic population, the culture has made it even harder for girls to speak out. If a girl came forward and said, “Father so-and-so did something to me,” her mother might slap her across the face and say, “You’re sinful.” If a boy said something, the family might at least sense that something was wrong. So the reaction toward girls was very different.
That is why I do not think we have good enough data. We probably never will, because the people we would need data from—the Church hierarchy—are not honest brokers. It is not that they are insane; it is that no one in that system is going to fill out a form saying, “Yes, I prefer prepubescent boys,” or “Yes, I assault adult women.”
We regularly see cases of adults being sexually assaulted as well. There was a case in San Diego, where he invited a nineteen- or twenty-year-old woman to his rectory on New Year’s Eve and violently raped her. She went to the police and filed a report. The priest claimed, “There were lots of people there; I just patted her on the back.” Then he organized parishioners to protest the victim’s mother’s Bible study classes and had her brother expelled from the church. The District Attorney tried to prosecute, but the victim withdrew, even though the evidence was strong.
A few years later, I received an email from someone in Oklahoma City who said, “Hey, this priest is at our parish—we think it’s the same guy.” And it was. The Church had quietly transferred him out of San Diego and hidden him in Oklahoma. The bishop in Oklahoma City was reportedly furious—he had not been told the truth. The priest went on to assault women there as well and was eventually arrested.
The Church did not see it as a problem. Suppose the perpetrator had abused children or stolen money. In that case, they might have acted quickly to remove him or bury the story. But when the victims were women, it was not treated as seriously.
Jacobsen: Within the Catholic Church, the pattern is distinct and, in a way, easier to classify than in the Eastern Orthodox case. In Orthodoxy, even though Patriarch Bartholomew is considered “first among equals,” the churches are self-governing, decentralized, and more complex to map institutionally. The Catholic Church, by contrast, is pyramidal—hierarchical, centralized, and global.
Suppose an order comes from the top to conceal wrongdoing. In that case, the system ensures that the cover-up continues for decades, three, sometimes four generations of leadership. Much of this traces back to the era of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI), who led the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which handled abuse cases.
So, let’s say hypothetically that five out of every hundred priests commit acts of sexual abuse. If Church policy then transfers each of those priests to four new parishes, the apparent rate—based on observed incidents—would inflate to twenty out of every hundred priests, even though the actual number of abusers remains five. The institutional practice of relocation multiplies the harm and distorts the statistics.
If the Church had implemented meaningful canonical reforms and mandated external reporting—say, to independent civil authorities rather than internal ecclesiastical channels—it could have contained the crisis decades ago. Instead, its secrecy policy perpetuated systemic abuse and compounded the suffering of survivors.
Jacobsen: Is that basically what generally happened?
Casteix: So, I am not a data person. There are two people you should talk to about the data: one is Patrick Wall, and the other—ironically—is my husband. He was responsible for compiling a lot of that information.
The main data set comes from the John Jay College Study, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. They compiled and cross-referenced lists of known priest perpetrators and reports from dioceses across the country. At its peak, the study found that roughly four percent of priests had credible accusations of abuse. But when survivor networks and advocates expanded the dataset through lawsuits and archives, that number—based on identifiable, named individuals—rose to closer to 20% in certain dioceses. These were not anonymous complaints; these were named priests or priests flagged by their superiors as known problems.
The pattern of movement is one of the most evident warning signs. When a priest is ordained, there is usually a predictable career trajectory: their first parish lasts around five years, their second around seven, their third about fourteen, and so on. If someone deviates sharply from that pattern—say, they move every year or two, take unexplained leaves, or are suddenly transferred to obscure assignments—that is when advocates start to pay attention.
Survivors and watchdog groups often use the Official Catholic Directory—that enormous annual publication listing clergy assignments—to track these movements. It is now online, which makes it easier to map a priest’s history. Most priests follow a steady pattern: seven years here, fourteen there, maybe a short sabbatical. But then you will find the outliers—priests who bounce around erratically. That pattern usually indicates one of two things: they are either on the fast track to the Vatican or they are a problem being quietly moved.
So that irregular trajectory often tells us who the Church itself has identified as a risk. We cannot say with certainty, “This person is a perpetrator,” just by looking at the record—but we can say, “The Church clearly thought something was wrong.” Those men are often sent away to remote places—Guam, an Indian reservation, or Alaska—or quietly retired to isolated communities like San Dimas, with restrictions on being around children.
The data we have is not inflated. In fact, they are almost certainly underreported. When the first wave of cases came to light in the early 2000s, the peak appeared to be in the 1980s. But that was only because it takes survivors an average of thirty years to come forward. As time passes, the bell curve shifts—now the data show higher peaks in the 1990s and early 2000s. The Church tried to argue that the problem was unique to “the crazy eighties,” but that is simply false.
So yes, the actual numbers are higher. This is one of the most underreported crimes in existence, mainly because of complications with order priests versus diocesan priests.
Diocesan priests belong to a specific diocese and report to a bishop. Order priests—such as Jesuits, Franciscans, or Oblates—belong to religious orders with distinct chains of command and international mobility. That makes accountability harder. Survivors often only know a priest by his first name—”Father Mike” or “Father Steve.” If there are nineteen “Father Mikes,” identifying the right one can be nearly impossible.
So, the numbers are likely far higher than what is reported. The apparent decline in cases does not necessarily reflect fewer perpetrators—it reflects fewer priests. The pipeline has collapsed.
Not my generation, but the one before—those men were entering seminary at thirteen. That is part of a larger shift. Christianity itself is in decline, and the priesthood is no longer attracting young men. Those who do enter are often older, sometimes second-career seminarians. But yes, abuse still happens. The difference is that the pool of priests is smaller, and the institution’s capacity for cover-up—while not gone—has shrunk along with it.
Jacobsen: In religious organizations, is abuse increasing or decreasing?
Casteix: I do not know. I do some work with evangelical churches—the Southern Baptist Convention, for instance—and I can tell you this: anytime you have a hierarchical structure combined with a charismatic personality, you are prone to abuse. People often accuse me of being “anti-church.” I am not. Churches themselves do not make bad people.
Bad people are attracted to churches because those institutions provide instant credibility, instant access, and instant cover. The same applies to other environments. When people say, “Oh, there are teachers abusing children,” it is not because public schools are bad—it is because people with predatory inclinations seek out environments where they can access vulnerable populations. A person who wants to abuse children might think, “You know what would give me access? Becoming a gym teacher.”
So the real issue is not the church or the school—it is about training institutions to identify problematic personalities early and remove them before they cause harm.
The Catholic Church, oddly enough, has been forced to do this somewhat effectively simply because fewer people are entering the priesthood. The seminaries are empty; it is no longer a sustainable lifestyle. Many of the priests now being ordained are from Africa and Vietnam, where vocations are still growing. Even so, the Church is losing ground in Latin America, where large portions of the population are turning to evangelical Christianity.
So, the institution is changing, but problems persist—especially with volunteers, choir directors, and teachers within Catholic settings. They are protected by the same internal systems that once shielded priests.
For example, I was not abused by a priest. I was abused by a choir teacher at my Catholic high school, which was under the Diocese of Orange. He was protected by the exact mechanisms that protected priests—the same kind of confidential file, the same pattern of documentation, and the same layers of institutional silence. The only real difference between his file and a priest’s file was that the diocese withheld taxes from his paycheck. That was it.
Jacobsen: Where has the Catholic Church done well in addressing these issues—aside from what we already know they did wrong?
Casteix: That is a fair question. I do not know if I would call it “doing well.” Still, the Catholic Church was the first large organization to be placed under such intense public scrutiny. The scope of exposure forced them into a kind of institutional reckoning. Many people in the Church—perpetrators, enablers, and even those who were simply negligent—were exposed for committing terrible acts or making disastrous decisions.
As a result, other organizations under similar scrutiny, such as the Boy Scouts of America, have learned from those mistakes. They have studied both the Church’s best and worst practices to improve their own responses.
Jacobsen: Has the Church learned from this?
Casteix: In some ways, yes. They now have policies and procedures designed to keep children safer than before. Programs like Virtus—which focus on awareness and prevention—exist to educate clergy, staff, and volunteers. But the Church remains deeply insular. They rarely invite outside experts or organizations to review their procedures or offer oversight.
I work with organizations that enter evangelical churches to teach practical safeguards—how to conduct background checks, design safe environments, and recognize red flags. The Catholic Church, by contrast, keeps these efforts in-house. If they opened the doors to outside professionals and allowed absolute transparency, not only would they become safer, but they would also rebuild trust with their communities.
So, the reluctance to let outsiders in—despite having improved internal mechanisms—is still part of the culture of secrecy. The Church could be a model for institutional reform, but only if it learned to share what it has learned—and to let others look honestly at the cracks still left in the walls.
Unfortunately, the Church is still litigating aggressively against survivors. I understand they have a fiduciary duty—a financial responsibility to protect Church assets—but they also claim to be a moral institution. You cannot claim moral authority while simultaneously re-traumatizing people you know were abused.
They are more open now, yes, more transparent—but that is a relative statement. They are better than they were twenty years ago, but I would still never feel comfortable sending my own child to a Catholic school or camp. They have not implemented the most basic safety protocols that any responsible institution should have in place.
If you walk into a well-run organization and ask, “What are your policies and procedures for protecting children from sexual abuse?”, the person in charge should be able to respond instantly: Here they are. They’re posted here, here, and here. Staff are trained regularly, and here’s the number to call if you suspect abuse. You can ask a teacher: Do you know the policy? And they’ll say yes.
But in Catholic schools, that infrastructure is often missing. Ask about reporting, and you’ll get, “Just come to me—I’m the principal.” It’s as if they’re still running on dial-up—metaphorically pulling out the old AOL disk and waiting for the connection. The culture is decades behind.
Will they make the pivot they need to make? Not anytime soon. But to be fair, we have come a long way since 2002, when the Boston Globe’s Spotlight investigation blew this open. Twenty-three years later, I never would have imagined we’d see even this level of exposure and reform. So progress exists—but it is slow, inconsistent, and far from enough.
Jacobsen: Let’s connect this to a broader question. If you look at the Larry Nassar cases, the #MeToo movement, lots of Hollywood cases, and the Catholic Church scandals—and even similar problems in the professional class of the handful of atheist organizations—what structural through-lines do you see?
Casteix: You always see the same architecture: a hierarchical system that prioritizes the charismatic personality over the welfare of the people it serves. Whether it is a priest, pastor, coach, or professor, the institution invests its energy in protecting that individual and the organization’s image, not the victims.
These organizations behave like corporations that only care about shareholders. But in this analogy, the shareholders are not the public—they are the institution itself and its power holders: the priest, the pastor, the principal, the president. Protecting reputation comes before protecting people.
You also see an ingrained belief that transparency is a flaw. Discussing abuse publicly terrifies these institutions because it risks exposure. So they suppress conversation, which allows the abuse to continue. You see fear, intimidation, and retaliation against survivors who speak up.
There’s also a hierarchical culture among children and young people in these systems. Look at the Nassar case: if you wanted to be a top gymnast, you learned not to complain. Speaking up meant losing your career. In Catholic schools, the student who complains is punished. In evangelical settings, the child who speaks up is told they are disobedient or unfaithful. Religious children often internalize this to mean, “If I complain, God will not love me.”
In secular institutions, the barrier is bureaucracy and the human tendency to avoid confrontation. People do not want to believe that someone they know—”Mike,” for example—could be a predator. So when a complaint comes in, the administrator says, “Mike, don’t do that again,” and Mike says, “Okay, I won’t.” And then, inevitably, Mike does it again.
It’s a universal human flaw: our wish to believe the best in others. In public schools, this dynamic has been devastating—principals not wanting to confront teachers, afraid of the fallout. They settle for a weak warning instead of accountability. “Don’t do it anymore,” they say. But without real consequences, the cycle repeats.
Jacobsen: So across sacred and secular spaces, the pattern is the same—hierarchy protecting hierarchy, and good intentions shielding evil.
Casteix: Until institutions start valuing truth and accountability over image and authority, this pattern will keep repeating—just with different uniforms. And then they think, “Okay, I’ll stop—or at least I’ll hide it better.” Those are the through-lines I keep seeing.
Jacobsen: Understood. Thank you so much for your time and expertise.
Jacobsen: Excellent. Thanks so much, Joelle.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Bishop Accountability
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/23
Why must the Vatican adopt a universal zero tolerance canon law to protect children and restore accountability?
Timothy D. Law is a Catholic advocate for survivors and accountability. A founding leader with Ending Clergy Abuse, he campaigns for a universal zero-tolerance canon law that permanently removes abusers from ministry. Law helped advance clergy mandatory reporting legislation in Washington State and has worked alongside Ugandan and Kenyan communities for decades. He and advocates met Pope Leo to press for enforceable reforms after years of Vatican resistance. Sanctioned by his archbishop for supporting reform, Law continues to serve at the parish level while challenging hierarchical impunity. His approach combines legal strategy, media engagement, and collaboration with survivor leaders.
In this interview with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Timothy D. Law traces the clergy abuse reckoning from the 1984–85 Gauthe case and Boston’s 2002 Spotlight exposé to UN scrutiny in 2014 and the 2018–19 crisis that forced a Vatican summit. He argues that policies without sanctions produce “no there there,” urging a universal canon law mandating permanent removal of abusive clergy. Law describes Vatican resistance, especially from parts of Africa and Asia, and recounts meeting Pope Le, who acknowledged “great resistance.” He outlines poverty, church–state entanglement, and weak mandates as barriers, praises parish-level service, and champions transparency, civil investigations, and survivor-centred reforms, including Washington State’s clergy reporting push.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What is the history of your work?
Timothy D. Law: The first significant date is 1984–1985, when the Gilbert Gauthe case in Louisiana became the first widely publicized criminal trial of a U.S. Catholic priest for child sexual abuse; civil suits followed, and the scandal broke into national view.
The Church initially framed the abuse as the work of “a few bad apples.” The next major year is 2002, when The Boston Globe’s Spotlight reporting exposed systemic cover-ups in the Archdiocese of Boston and beyond.
Rome first minimized this as an “American problem.” However, one concrete result was that U.S. bishops adopted the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People and companion Essential Norms—effectively a zero-tolerance policy in U.S. canon law for clergy who abuse a minor, requiring permanent removal from ministry. The Holy See granted formal recognition to those Norms in December 2002. To date, the Vatican has not mandated a universal zero-tolerance law; advocates continue to push for it.
After 2002, the next major year is 2014. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Committee against Torture (CAT) reviewed the Holy See. Both committees criticized the Holy See for prioritizing institutional reputation over child protection and issued recommendations that included: ending impunity for abusers and for cover-ups, mandatory reporting to civil authorities, greater access to files, and reparations. As a state party, the Vatican is expected to report periodically; another CRC report was due in 2017, and advocacy groups later complained about the lack of follow-through.
The next pivotal year is 2018, a perfect storm: Pope Francis’ troubled trip to Chile amid a national abuse crisis there; the Pennsylvania grand jury report detailing decades of abuse and cover-ups; and the Theodore McCarrick revelations that led to his removal from ministry in 2018 and laicization in 2019. These events prompted Francis to convene a global summit on the protection of minors in February 2019, which brought together about 190 participants, including the presidents of 114 bishops’ conferences. Survivor advocates were not official participants in the closed-door sessions, though survivor testimonies were presented to the assembly.https://db2d6925c9150ac345bc49b511cdcebf.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.html
Two primary outcomes followed. First, on December 17, 2019, Francis abolished the “pontifical secret” for cases of clergy sexual abuse of minors, sexual violence, and child pornography offences—intended to allow cooperation with civil authorities and improve transparency. Observers welcomed the step but noted that other forms of canonical confidentiality still limit practical access to files in many places.
Second, Vos Estis Lux Mundi (May 2019, made permanent and expanded in 2023) established universal procedures for receiving and investigating allegations against bishops and religious superiors, and for handling reporting and case management. It is a procedural framework, not a universal zero-tolerance penalty law, and its effectiveness has varied from country to country.
Jacobsen: When these policies and announcements are made, what usually happens next?
Law: They make a big show of these things, and at the moment they sound terrific—full of potential.
Jacobsen: I really love that phrase, “at the moment.”
Law: Because when the smoke clears, there’s no there there. The bishops face no real accountability. They can choose whether to follow the procedures, and there are no sanctions if they don’t.
There was no zero-tolerance law made part of this, so it was a toothless public relations effort.
Jacobsen: If there’s no there there, then when our time comes, there’s no here here.
Law: Pope Francis is beloved by much of the world community, and people think he’s doing a great job. He talks about zero tolerance, but he wasn’t a canon lawyer—he’s more of a theologian, someone who gives statements and guidance. The current officials in charge of canon law could, in theory, put those principles into legal form, but they haven’t.
The Vatican often co-opts our language. They start using phrases like “zero tolerance” and other terms we use, but they don’t translate them into enforceable law.
Our goal has been to get inside the tent—to be part of the conversation and push for real change. We managed to get our foot in the door a year ago, in November, when we were invited into the Dicastery for Legislative Texts. I believe there are eight major dicasteries in the Vatican, and this one handles canon law.
We met with the president of the Dicastery and asked him directly: why no zero-tolerance law? They gave several responses, often contradictory. Some said, “We already have enough laws; we just need to enforce the ones we have.” Others said, “It’s cultural. We can’t have one law that fits the entire world. We’re a global Church.”https://db2d6925c9150ac345bc49b511cdcebf.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.htmlDon’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
We pointed out that the Church does, in fact, enforce universal laws on issues like abortion or the death penalty.
Jacobsen: Religion is a transnational movement.
Law: That’s true—but consistency should apply to protecting children as well.
They said that in some places, such as parts of Africa, attitudes toward sexuality differ. But one of our board members, Janet Aguti from Uganda, who runs a remarkable sexual violence awareness program there, told the Holy Father directly: “There is nowhere in the world where sexual abuse of children is culturally acceptable.”
The next significant milestone was our meeting with the Pope in October. We were genuinely surprised to receive the invitation. It was the first time in history that a Pope had met with a survivor activist organization. Usually, the Vatican arranges meetings only with hand-picked individual victims.
Jacobsen: What was the significance of your meeting with the Pope?
Law: Normally, the Vatican arranges private, emotional meetings between the Pope and individual survivors—what we call “kiss and cry sessions.” They generate much publicity but little systemic change. For a Pope to meet with a group like ours was different. More than half of our delegation are survivors of abuse, but we approached it as a professional meeting. We weren’t there to recount our trauma; we were there to say, “We need to be part of the solution. We need to be part of the conversation.”
We began by saying the Church must adopt a zero-tolerance policy. The Pope told us there is excellent resistance to such a law. That was new—previously, Vatican officials had claimed it wasn’t necessary. We knew the real issue was resistance, especially from bishops in Africa and Asia.
Jacobsen: That’s an interesting nuance. Why the resistance from those regions?
Law: The Pope acknowledged that Africa poses a serious challenge. He said many bishops there deny they have a problem, though he added, “I know better.” He told us that the days when he could sign a decree were over. He could, technically, do it, he said, but because of social media, if those under his authority aren’t willing to follow it, they’ll ignore it.
We understood that as an admission of a fundamental structural problem. Still, we said, if you can’t sign a universal zero-tolerance law now, then let us be in the room to help remove that resistance. Survivors and advocates have expertise that can help address cultural or institutional objections. The Pope agreed to that in principle.
What form that collaboration will take is yet to be seen. The question now is whether he meant it sincerely or was deflecting. He mentioned that we should meet with the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, and I thought to myself, “That’s a toothless commission.” If he’s relegating us to that body, it means he’s punting on the real issue.https://db2d6925c9150ac345bc49b511cdcebf.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-45/html/container.htmlDon’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad free
That said, he seemed straightforward. He told us, “I won’t promise what I can’t do, but I hear you. Let’s try to work together.”
Notably, he also revealed something we hadn’t expected: he didn’t know that the U.S. bishops’ zero-tolerance policy had been formally recognized as canon law. He believed it was just a voluntary initiative by the American bishops. I said, “No, Holy Father—it’s an essential norm approved by the Vatican.” That was news to him.
The significance of that moment is enormous. It shows we’re not asking for something new or impossible. The U.S. has had this in place since 2002. For all our ongoing problems, the United States is probably the safest place in the world for children within the Church because of those protocols and the zero-tolerance policy. Our question to him was simple: if it works here, why not make it universal?
He said again that there’s strong resistance to that. Our reply was: “Let us help you remove it.”
Jacobsen: Do you have any further reflections on why Asia and Africa are regions of acute concern regarding clerical abuse and institutional resistance?
Law: Yes, and it’s essential to understand the historical pattern. This crisis has moved in waves. It began in the United States, then spread to Western Europe, and then to Australia. Now we’re seeing it emerge in South America, though resistance remains strong in Asia and Africa. Their time will come.
The main reason for resistance is the tight interconnection between Church and State in those regions. They protect one another. For over thirty years, I’ve been travelling to Uganda and Kenya. I first became involved through a group of Ugandan Catholic nuns I met by chance three decades ago, and since then I’ve worked with them on various community projects.
The faith of the people there is firm, and their bond with the Church is almost inseparable. The bishops are deeply intertwined with the government. Corruption runs deep. When abuse occurs, even if it causes an uproar locally, it’s quickly suppressed. The people don’t want to believe their priests or bishops could commit abuse, and civil authorities protect the Church. Cracks are forming, but the reckoning hasn’t yet arrived.
Jacobsen: Why do laypeople remain in denial? Why do secular institutions of the state protect religious institutions complicit in systemic or individual crimes?
Law: Poverty is the central factor. When I visit every other year, even for a few weeks, I see how profound it is. For many people, faith is their only constant. They literally depend on it to survive. If that faith were shaken, they feel they would have nothing left. They wake up thanking God they’re alive. A bowl of food is a miracle. The Church often provides that food, and that charity cements loyalty.
But the tragedy is that this dependency prevents systemic change. People won’t fight for functioning economies, infrastructure, or accountability. I’ve seen regions where farmers all grow tomatoes but have no roads to transport them elsewhere. If they had decent infrastructure, they could sell to markets beyond their village. Deep poverty, in that sense, serves both the Church and the State very well. It maintains control. It’s heartbreaking.
At the same time, I see how meaningful faith is to them, and I feel conflicted about challenging it. When I stay in village rectories, I see firsthand how priests live and work. Africa is overwhelmingly young—about 75-80% of the population is under 30. It’s a continent of children and youth. Priests there are overwhelmed by poverty. A single priest may serve 15,000 to 30,000 parishioners, all of them struggling. He has limited resources but access to some aid. That dynamic—scarcity and power—creates a dangerous imbalance.
Many priests in Africa are also principals of schools. Their parishioners’ children will do anything to get an education—literally anything. Some even resort to prostitution to pay school fees. With that kind of power and pressure, it’s not hard to imagine how widespread abuse can become in a system like that.
These are good people, compassionate people, but when you’re living under immense pressure and poverty, people cope however they can—through alcohol, drugs, sex. Abuse grows out of that environment. I believe that when the truth eventually comes to light, the scope of abuse in Africa will be ten times worse than anywhere else in the world.
That’s why the bishops are so resistant. Deep down, they know that if a universal zero-tolerance law were implemented, they would lose much of their power—and many of their own.
Jacobsen: On a broader level, this brings us to international ethics. There’s only one real place where nations have agreed—at least formally—to play by the same moral rules: the United Nations, through its human rights framework. That principle of universalism means the same ethical standards apply everywhere. You’re calling for a universal zero-tolerance law. Why is it crucial that such a standard exist?
Law: It’s essential to call it a law, not a policy. The Church keeps saying it has a “zero tolerance policy.” But a policy is optional—it can be ignored. A law is binding. A law means that if you sexually abuse a child, you must be permanently removed from ministry. No exceptions.
That removes discretion from the bishops and shifts power toward the victims. That’s the fundamental struggle here—who holds power.
Of course, even if the Pope were to sign such a law, that wouldn’t be the end. It’s not a cure-all. It would still have to be enforced. But it would be the critical first step—the Achilles’ heel. Once that domino falls, everything else follows: full disclosure, independent review, perhaps even a truth and reconciliation commission. That’s why they’re so afraid of it.
When we met with the Pope, he was caught off guard. We were scheduled for a 20-minute meeting—it lasted about an hour. We began with a statement explaining who we were and what we were asking for, then introduced ourselves. The Pope was warm and personable, and the tone throughout was professional and respectful on both sides.
We got the Pope’s commitment to work with us. As the meeting was wrapping up, I debated whether to ask one last, pointed question. Finally, I did. I said, “Holy Father, you don’t have to answer this, but I must ask: why can’t the U.S. zero-tolerance law be made universal throughout the Church?”
He hesitated, fumbled a bit, and then said there was “great resistance” to it. That’s when he made the statements I mentioned earlier—the ones acknowledging the opposition, particularly from Africa and Asia. His response revealed just how aware Church leadership is of the potential consequences such a law would have for them.
Jacobsen: You were, shall we say, rather bold in asking that. It got right to the heart of the issue—universalizing a law that already exists in America.
Law: Yes, and his acknowledgment of resistance was significant news. From that moment, we decided to focus our efforts laser-like on this single goal: establishing a universal zero-tolerance law. We believe it’s the one thread that, once pulled, could unravel a culture of impunity.
Jacobsen: The slow progress raises a question. Is this delay simply because the Catholic Church is vast and bureaucratic—a 2,000-year-old institution with layers of canon law to navigate? Or is it more self-serving—an attempt to shield itself from exposure? Could it even stem from lay resistance or people protecting their own crimes under the cover of faith? What’s really driving the inertia?
Law: That’s a complex question. In one sense, things haven’t moved slowly at all. If you look at the last forty years, child sexual abuse wasn’t even a topic of public conversation. Now it’s part of global discourse. The clergy abuse crisis in the Catholic Church helped catalyze broader social awareness. Movements like #MeToo and increased attention to institutional accountability all owe something to the exposure of these crimes.
We now have a safer Church in many regions, and many other organizations—religious and secular alike—have adopted safeguarding protocols inspired by these reforms. So, in that respect, progress has been real. Every time we speak about this, every time you interview this one, it has a ripple effect. It makes the world a bit safer.
That said, we’re dealing with an institution that instinctively protects itself. It’s a self-preserving organism, and no one likes to confront such horror within something they love. Many good people have left the Church over this, leaving behind those who prefer to look away or trust that the hierarchy has it under control.
I may be the only person in our organization who still actively practices Catholicism. I still attend the same parish where I was baptized seventy-six years ago. I love the Church. I believe deeply in its spiritual message. But the hierarchy—since its earliest days—has always been susceptible to corruption. Power is intoxicating, and it corrupts. It always has, and it always will.
This issue affects different parts of the world in various ways. In Africa, for example, the people are not demanding accountability from their bishops. So yes, it’s both leadership and laity that allow the system to persist. It takes a few activists—people willing to keep pushing, to keep prodding the institution—to create a movement. Change happens, but it tends to occur in bursts rather than gradually.
We’ve seen this pattern before: 1985, 2002, 2018—each year marking a significant crisis or revelation that forced the Church to respond. My view is that if we’re in the room with a “shovel-ready law,” ready to be enacted, then when the next scandal inevitably breaks, they’ll call us. They’ll say, “We have to do something. We’re losing people. Let’s move on to this law.” Unfortunately, it often takes a catastrophe to create momentum. That’s why we have to be present and prepared when that moment comes.
Jacobsen: Why is the movement so catastrophe-driven?
Law: Because the survivors and advocates—people like us—are motivated by conscience, not power. We believe what we’re doing serves the good of both victims and the Church. The hierarchy knows what it must do—be transparent and accountable—but it won’t act voluntarily. It takes public outrage and those catastrophic shocks to jolt them into reform.
A pope would never have convened a global summit on clergy abuse or publicly acknowledged it as a worldwide crisis if not for the convergence of scandals that came to a head in 2018. That was a perfect storm—years of revelations building until he had no choice but to respond. It’s human nature, unfortunately.
Jacobsen: Within the theology itself, shouldn’t they fear God’s wrath for allowing such evil?
Law: I don’t think it works that way. I believe God gave us intelligence to solve our own problems. It’s our responsibility to use that—to act justly and fix what’s broken.
Jacobsen: Where has the Church done well, on the other hand?
Law: Well, credit where it’s due. The Apostle Paul wrote that before God, there is no male or female, rich or poor, that we are all equal in His eyes and share a common humanity. That idea—radical in its time—helped transform the world. It inspired the foundational ideals of equality in the modern era. You see echoes of it in the American Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” That philosophical lineage traces back to Christian thought.
Throughout history, the Church has also founded universities, hospitals, and charitable institutions. The impulse to love, to serve, and to care for humanity is deeply rooted in the Church’s teaching. It’s just that the institution often falls short of its own ideals. The principles are there—the implementation, far less so. But occasionally, we do get it right.
It’s exciting to wake up each morning and work toward justice. We all feel that way. If we didn’t believe that what we’re doing makes a difference, it would be unbearable. That drive—to seek truth and justice—comes, in part, from the very moral teachings we grew up with in our churches, across all faith traditions.
Jacobsen: You’ve supported the civil investigation in Washington State. What lessons from that effort could apply nationally or even internationally?
Law: What we’re doing in Washington is really a microcosm of what needs to happen around the world. We’ve asked the bishops of Washington State to enter into a truth and reconciliation process with us—to grant access to their files, to protect victims, of course, but above all, to put all the cards on the table. We need to understand why the abuse happened, how it happened, and how to prevent it from ever happening again.
This has to be a partnership between the people and the Church leadership. It can’t be a self-contained, internal process. That’s what needs to happen locally, and it’s also what must happen internationally. I do believe it will, eventually.
Each U.S. state has different laws governing access to Church records. Some, like Pennsylvania, allow grand jury investigations with broad powers. That’s how the Pennsylvania grand jury was able to force the Church to release decades of internal files, exposing systemic abuse. Washington State’s laws aren’t as clear.
So, we initiated a process with the state attorney general’s office to gain access to those files. We lost the first round in the trial court, but the case is now on appeal. The briefs are filed, the hearings are done, and we’re awaiting a decision on whether the attorney general has the authority to access those records.
Jacobsen: The argument for transparency seems foundational—what’s at stake in that decision?
Law: Full disclosure is essential. The Church, especially when dealing with children, cannot be above the law. It must be accountable to parents, to grandparents, to the public. We have a right to know. Those abuse files belong, in a moral sense, to the victims. They’re not the Church’s property—they’re the stories and the pain of human beings.
There are two reasons we want access. One is informational: we need to understand the scope and details of what happened. But the second is preventative. If the Church knows the public has a right to access its records, that knowledge itself acts as accountability. It’s a safeguard against future cover-ups.
Jacobsen: Survivors have sought justice through various paths—such as independent compensation funds, civil litigation, or hybrid models. While each case is individual, what tends to feel most like justice for survivors?
Law: The biggest thing is acknowledgment. Survivors want the Church to publicly admit that the abuse happened and that it was allowed to happen. Many survivors were told for years, “You’re the only one,” or “We didn’t know.” Then they discover that the Church had known for decades that there were thick files documenting the same abuser harming child after child.
That revelation—that they were lied to, that the institution they trusted knew and did nothing—is devastating. So when the Church finally acknowledges the truth, it validates survivors’ pain and their humanity. It’s not about money first—it’s about being believed.
When they acknowledge to the victim, “We hurt you. We did wrong,” that’s huge. That’s validating. The financial part—settlements and compensation—is good, but it’s not deeply satisfying. It doesn’t make anyone whole. No matter the size of the settlement, nobody feels whole afterward. Their soul have been shattered, and they can never be restored to what it was. That can’t be undone.
But it is accountability. When the Church has to sell off property to make funds available for compensation, that’s a form of justice. Unfortunately, they’ve begun using bankruptcy strategically—to limit compensation and to block access to the files. So, the accurate measure of justice is holding them accountable: making them pay, where possible, and forcing them to acknowledge wrongdoing.
Jacobsen: How realistic are transnational bodies—like UN treaty committees or regional courts—as avenues for action on behalf of survivors?
Law: It has to be a multi-pronged approach. No single system will fix it. Over time, you build a patchwork of solutions—legal, moral, and social. The United Nations and similar institutions can’t enforce much; they don’t have legal power over sovereign or religious entities. But they do have moral authority—what’s sometimes called “moral suasion.”
That matters. Speaking out always has an effect. Silence is never neutral. Every voice adds pressure. So we keep saying something, always. It’s a long game.
We have a board member named Janet Aguti—she’s 32. I’m 76. That gives you a sense of the timeline. There’s no quick fix, no “kill shot.” This work will outlast us. Independent lay groups like ours are new, both in civil society and within the Church’s context. That’s historic in itself.
Our existence must be permanent. These groups need to keep watch—to monitor, to hold the institution accountable. Centuries ago, the Church functioned as a law unto itself. That era has to end. We’re part of a movement meant to ensure it does, permanently.
Jacobsen: Many people—whether victims, advocates, or simply believers learning these truths—have struggled with their faith. How did you process this personally? Did you ever question your faith? Once? Several times? How did that reconciliation unfold?
Law: Yes, I’ve questioned it—more than once. I still do, sometimes. I don’t really know why I have faith—it’s a mystery, something larger than logic.
Until about 2014, I was oblivious to the depth of this issue. I’m relatively new to it. I knew about the 2002 Boston Globe investigation, of course, but I believed the bishops had solved the problem afterward with their so-called “safe environment” programs. I lived in a kind of bubble, thinking the crisis was over. I was wrong.
I lived in a lovely little religious bubble. Then local events here in Seattle burst that bubble, and I could no longer see my faith in quite the same way.
Jacobsen: What do you mean by that?
Law: The comfort I used to draw from ritual—from the daily Mass, from the rhythm of it all—was shattered. I went to Mass every day. Some of my best friends were priests and bishops. Some still are. But when I discovered that several of them were complicit in covering up abuse, that sense of comfort dissolved.
Even so, other experiences have convinced me there’s something rather than nothing—something divine, something loving. I believe there is a God of love. I realized that faith has been part of me since childhood.
When I was seven years old, I had a terrible experience with a nun in first grade. She called me up to read in front of a class of sixty children. I stumbled over a word, and she told me to stick out my tongue—then she punched me in the jaw. It wasn’t discipline; it was terrorism. Later, I started to recall how often she struck other children, too.
That was the start of understanding that there’s both good and evil within the Church’s ranks. My parents were people of deep faith, and I suppose I inherited that from them. The priests and nuns I knew—some were kind, others cruel—but none of them destroyed my belief in God.
The real challenge was this: I can believe, but why do I still belong to the institution? I had to decide. I remain a member of the parish where I grew up. These are my people. They do good work—serving the poor, fighting for justice. At the ground level, in local parishes, the Church can be a dynamic, life-giving community.
But once you move up the hierarchy, that’s where everything breaks down. Leaders seem to be chosen not for moral courage, but for their willingness to protect their fellow bishops. That creates and perpetuates a culture of corruption at the top.
Another reason I stay in the Church—and in my parish—is that it’s more effective to work from the inside. I get to educate people on the issues and, frankly, disturb their peace a little bit. Recently, I lobbied for and helped pass a bill in the Washington State Legislature to make clergy mandatory reporters, even when they learn of abuse in a confessional setting. That specific confessional clause was later set aside, but the law itself passed.
There’s a photo of my wife and me standing beside the governor as he signed the bill. Because of my public support, my archbishop sanctioned me—told me there were specific duties I could no longer perform in my parish. Ironically, that only amplified the story. Rolling Stone even covered it, and my grandkids now think I’m pretty cool.
This institution—the Catholic Church—has been around for two thousand years and will probably be around for thousands more. It’s 1.3 billion people strong and operates across national borders. That means it has an enormous responsibility to clean up its act. That’s what we’re working toward: reform from within.
Jacobsen: What about the push to vet cardinals’ abuse records and monitor the next papal election? I believe that’s connected to the Conclave Watch effort.
Law: Yes, that’s right. Peter Isely and Sarah Pearson led that project. They were both part of Ending Clergy Abuse (ECA) until last year—Peter was actually our public spokesperson. He’s an incredibly talented guy. They later moved to SNAP—the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests—and took a more confrontational approach.
SNAP has always been bold and direct. Without SNAP, our movement wouldn’t exist in its current form. Their confrontation created space for us to take a complementary role—to work the inside track while they maintain external pressure.
Jacobsen: The classic “good cop, bad cop” dynamic?
Law: Exactly. We need each other. The Pope never would have met with us if we had taken SNAP’s approach. It was risky for both sides—for him to meet with us, and for us to accept the meeting. It brought us a lot of attention and goodwill, but also the danger of being co-opted.
We’re aware of that. Now we have to use the opportunity to push our advantage—to secure a genuine seat at the table. And if we don’t, we must be ready to call it out publicly: “You promised change. Where is it?”
The Pope took a real risk by meeting with us. I’m sure many bishops were furious—his own advisors have long argued the best way to handle us is to ignore us entirely, to deny our existence, to give us no oxygen. So for the Pope to acknowledge us was huge—for him and for us.
And now, after years of effort, the media finally understands what we’ve been saying: that the Church doesn’t need another policy on zero tolerance—it needs a law. For five years, reporters weren’t getting it. Now, they’re asking those questions themselves: “Where’s the zero-tolerance law?” That shift in understanding is a breakthrough.
That breakthrough with the press has created real momentum—momentum that can carry forward beyond us.
Jacobsen: You’re essentially talking about making accountability legally independent of bishops—canonically and jurisdictionally separate?
Law: Canon law is the Church’s internal legal system—its code of conduct and operating manual. It’s already there. What we’re proposing is quite simple: a canon law stating that if a clergy member sexually abuses a child, they must be permanently removed from ministry.
We’ve worked with canon lawyers to draft a version of that law that the Pope could sign tomorrow. It’s ready. It could become part of the Church’s binding legal framework immediately.
Right now, the Vatican’s approach borrows from the U.S. model—not a perfect fit, since it doesn’t hold bishops accountable for cover-ups. It focuses only on priests, not bishops. But even that—making permanent removal mandatory for any priest who abuses a child—would be a dramatic first step if formally enacted into canon law.
Jacobsen: You and Mary Dispenza have engaged major media outlets. What’s your advice for journalists or communications professionals trying to cover these issues with both sensitivity and firmness—enough pressure to get accountability, but without retraumatizing survivors?
Law: That’s a great question. We don’t have an institutional platform like the Pope does. We depend entirely on the press to carry our message. Without journalists, our work doesn’t reach anyone. So we need you—plain and simple.
The media landscape has changed. It used to be that if The New York Times or Associated Press covered you, that was it—you’d reached the world. Now, social media often carries more weight. We’ve had to adapt to that reality.
The Church says it isn’t a democratic organization, but in truth, every institution responds to pressure. Some do it formally through votes or policy, while others do it informally through reputation and visibility. What we’re doing—organizing, lobbying, forming alliances—is the same process I used in the Washington State Legislature to get the clergy-reporting law passed.
We lobby. We find allies. We look for people inside the Vatican who are quietly sympathetic. The organizational chart doesn’t show where the real power lies. The Pope surrounds himself with advisors he actually listens to—so our task is to find those people.
It takes time, energy, and persistence. Every time we’re in Rome, we try to meet with someone significant. On our last trip, in October, we met with someone extremely influential.
This person we met in Rome doesn’t have a big title, but he has real influence—and he knows exactly who the real power players are. Building those kinds of relationships is crucial to moving things forward.
Jacobsen: Any final thoughts on the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors after your October 20th meetings?
Law: The commission was established with limited power and funding. It was a brilliant public relations move by Pope Francis. The problem is that it doesn’t have a real mandate. There are a lot of good people on it—people who genuinely care—but several have resigned out of frustration once they realized there’s “no there there.”
If we could work with the commission to make its recommendations more direct—more pointed—toward the Pope, that could have value. Right now, they issue reports but rarely challenge the Vatican to act. They should be the ones pushing for a zero-tolerance law. They were close to doing that last year, but then they backed away.
Because it’s a papal commission, they’d essentially have to go rogue to demand a zero-tolerance law. And of course, if they did, the Pope could dissolve the commission altogether—which, honestly, might not be a bad thing if it led to something more substantial and more independent.
Jacobsen: Tim, are there any other areas we should explore today, or does that cover the main ground?
Law: I could talk about this all day, but I think we’ve covered much territory. I appreciate your time. Thank you for listening and for what you’re doing. It’s essential work. Keep it up.
Jacobsen: Thank you. Cheers.
Law: Bye now.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): Cascade Institute
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/11/20
Cascade Institute Director Thomas Homer-Dixon discusses how complexity science can help us make sense of today’s interconnected global challenges in this recent interview with In-Sight Publishing editor Scott Douglas Jacobsen. The two discuss how small shifts in complex systems can lead to major social and political change, and how understanding those dynamics can help us steer toward more resilient futures.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: I’m grateful you could join me today—it means a lot. To start us off, how can complexity science help us make sense of immense global challenges like man-made climate change and widespread economic instability, and what tools does it give us to confront them more effectively?
Thomas Homer-Dixon: Right, you’re getting straight to the point. That’s a terrific question.
As most people do, I came to complex systems science somewhat indirectly. However, within my discipline—political science, conflict studies, and international relations—the conventional ways of thinking about causation didn’t help me untangle what was happening in my study areas. They didn’t adequately explain the underlying causal dynamics.
Over about 15 years, I transitioned into complexity science and developed a much clearer understanding.
At its core, complexity science helps us understand non-linear phenomena—situations where relatively small changes in a system, whether in an economy, climate, geopolitical structure, or ecological system, can lead to significant and sometimes unexpected consequences. Conversely, it also helps us understand why, in some cases, considerable interventions appear to have little or no impact.
The proportionality of the relationship between cause and effect in complex systems breaks down. In our everyday world, we think of small changes causing minor effects, small causes having minor effects, and significant modifications producing significant effects. So, there’s a proportionality.
But in complex systems, that breaks down. This means that complex systems—again, we’re talking about everything from ecologies to economies to the climate system to even the way the human brain works—have the capacity to flip from one state to another, from one equilibrium or stability zone to another, often in quite unpredictable ways.
The business of complexity science is identifying the various possible stability zones, what configuration of an economy or a political system will be stable, and what factors can reduce that stability and cause it to flip to another state.
To give a contemporary example, we’ve just seen a flip in the United States political system—a reconfiguration—from one equilibrium to something else yet to be determined. Mr. Trump generates enormous uncertainty, so the nature of that new equilibrium isn’t entirely clear yet. We have some ideas, but that is a classic example of non-linearity.
In an ecological system, a non-linearity would be something like the cod fishery collapse off the east coast of Canada in the late 1980s and early 1990s. That was one of the most productive ecosystems in the world, and it has wholly reconfigured itself. It will never return to its previous level of productivity, which was incredibly abundant in biomass production.
The 2008–2009 financial crisis was another example of non-linearity. Complexity science aims to identify the factors that produce these sudden changes—these flips—and anticipate them. However, the other side of this work is that once we understand those connections and causal relationships better, we may be able to induce changes in a positive direction.
We might be able to cause positive flips—positive in a value sense—good flips instead of bad ones. At the Cascade Institute, we divide our work into two areas. One focuses on anticipating pernicious cascades or harmful non-linearities, and the other on triggering virtuous cascades that benefit humankind. We then drill down in these areas to identify threats and opportunities using complexity science.
Top view of Highway road junctions at night. The Intersecting freeway road overpass the eastern outer ring road of Bangkok, Thailand. Adobe Stock.
Jacobsen: Around the world, ideological polarization seems to be intensifying, not only in the United States during the Trump years but across a range of societies. Complexity science suggests that when several tipping points are reached—whether all at once or in succession—they can unleash powerful non-linear effects. Do you see today’s deepening polarization as one of those moments, where competing ideologies could drive us into a new wave of unpredictable, destabilizing dynamics beyond the recent election?
Homer-Dixon: Yes. So, part of the framing of complexity science—and it’s almost inherent in complexity itself—is the recognition that a lot is happening. Within conventional social science, or even conventional science, there’s a strong emphasis on parsimony—identifying relatively straightforward relationships between causes and effects.
Within complexity science, there’s less emphasis on parsimony. There’s an initial recognition that the world is complex, with numerous factors operating and interacting in ways that are, at least at first, difficult to understand. You won’t develop a good understanding by focusing on single variables or isolated factors. You have to examine multiple elements simultaneously. That is the foundation of all complex systems work.
Frankly, that’s what initially attracted me to complexity science. I was grappling with the broader issue of the relationship between environmental stress and violent conflict. As I studied factors like water scarcity, forest degradation, and soil depletion—and how they interacted with conflict—it became clear that multiple causal pathways were involved. Many interconnected factors had to be taken into account. So, I needed a different framework rather than a simplistic approach that looked at single causes and effects.
That’s the background. Now, you can find more details on polarization on the Cascade Institute website. We have developed a set of hypotheses about the factors driving social polarization and deepening social divisions—factors that are far more complex than standard analyses suggest. We use a four-pathway model to explain polarization. The first pathway consists of economic factors—rising inequality and economic precarity- fueling polarization.
The second pathway involves social and managerial factors, precisely the decreasing capacity of societies to address complex problems. Our technocratic elites and experts are increasingly perceived as incompetent in handling crises, whether related to healthcare, climate change, or managing the pandemic. This leads to a delegitimization of expertise and expert governance—a growing rejection of specialists and institutions.
The third pathway is connected to our information ecosystem—social media, information overload, and how these influence communication. These dynamics amplify emotional negativity, making people more inclined to engage only with those who share their views rather than those who think differently.
The fourth pathway is more fundamental: epistemic fragmentation. People increasingly live in their knowledge bubbles, developing their versions of reality and dismissing alternative perspectives on truth. This fragmentation fuels a breakdown in shared understanding.
We have four distinct pathways and are studying how they interact. These interactions can create precisely what you suggest—tipping points in people’s attitudes.
However, these four pathways can be considered underlying stresses in our social systems. Over time, these economic, managerial, cognitive, informational, and epistemic factors make our social systems less resilient. They make people angrier, more afraid, and more distrustful of institutions.
Many of these changes can occur gradually, but then suddenly, you get a significant event—like the political shift in the United States—where the institutional arrangement of an election triggers a system-wide flip.
The best way to think about these polarization processes is that they have drained resilience from our social systems, making them more vulnerable to abrupt shifts that ultimately harm people. In this case, the flip was an institutional one. However, the long-term changes in people’s attitudes, ideologies, and belief systems haven’t been so much a flip as a gradual erosion of resilience.
That erosion manifests in institutions where a radical right-wing regime comes into power in the United States. This is a clear example of non-linearity—where long-term trends, or stresses, accumulate relatively linearly over time, much like tectonic pressure before an earthquake. Once they reach a certain threshold—bang—you get the quake, and the system flips to another state. In this case, that flip was a shift in control of federal institutions in the United States.
Jacobsen: Let me put this in two parts. First, do you think President Trump will go down as one of the most consequential presidents in American history? Second, there’s now a massive nine-figure investment on the table for artificial intelligence.
AI has moved well past being just a trendy buzzword—it’s become a driving force for high-tech firms, major investors, software development, and breakthrough innovation. Do you see these areas steering the development of AI, or is it more accurate to say that AI will end up reshaping them instead?
Homer-Dixon: Yes, 100%. These are related but distinct questions. Let’s talk about Trump first.
The answer is clearly yes—he is already one of the most consequential presidents in American history, alongside Lincoln and Washington. In a recent piece in The Globe and Mail, I argued that he would also be one of the most consequential figures in human history, and I laid out the reasons for that.
One reason is that he is one of the most influential individuals in the world—perhaps alongside Elon Musk. However, he and many people around him are profoundly ignorant of how global and national systems function, even at a basic level.
For example, he doesn’t understand how tariffs work or their economic consequences. That ignorance is deeply consequential because there will be moments when deep system knowledge and strategic intelligence are needed to navigate an acute crisis.
I often point to John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis as an example. He surrounded himself with top experts, forming what he called ExComm, the Executive Committee of the National Security Council, to carefully think through the U.S. response to the Soviet placement of nuclear-capable missiles in Cuba.
I can’t imagine Trump doing anything remotely similar. He has surrounded himself with individuals who are radically ill-equipped to manage the complex systems they now control.
They have their hands on the levers of these systems, yet they are radically ill-equipped to know how to position those levers effectively. So, that’s point one.
Point two is that Trump’s relationship with his followers drives him in a more radical direction. I won’t go into all the details, but if he fails to implement his agenda, he will become more radical, not less. He will seek out more enemies, attempt to attack them, and crush and destroy both perceived enemies within the United States and those outside it.
Point three is that multiple global systems—climate, geopolitical structures, and more—are already highly stressed and near tipping points. Trump could push them past those thresholds in various ways. One prominent example is climate change. He is actively rolling back climate action.
Essentially, his policies amount to humankind giving up on addressing the climate crisis. That alone could change the trajectory of human history and civilization.
If he escalates tensions into a nuclear conflict, which his actions significantly increase the risk of, that too would mark a defining inflection point for humankind. So, when you take these three factors together—his radicalization, the fragility of global systems, and the existential risks he exacerbates—Trump is among the most consequential figures in human history.
That’s a controversial position, but it was interesting to see the response to my article, published three days before his inauguration; three weeks later, people are already reassessing and saying, “No, that view wasn’t exaggerated.”
Now, on artificial intelligence, which is equally relevant, AI dramatically accelerates what we call epistemic fragmentation. It enables the creation of multiple contradictory realities and allows for the substantiation of false narratives. People can manufacture evidence at will using AI, making it difficult—if not impossible—to discern whether information has any real-world grounding.
This is all part of the more significant shift toward anti-realism. Increasingly, people live in massively multiplayer game-like realities, and AI enhances the ability to generate convincing but completely false realities. Worse, these fabricated narratives can be weaponized against groups or political opponents.
So, regarding your point on AI, I am deeply concerned. I have been in contact with many experts who are central to this debate and the development of AI itself. One of the fundamental issues with our world today is that we don’t know. Due to the inherent complexity of our systems, we are witnessing an explosion in possible futures.
Take, for example, DeepSeek, a breakthrough that dramatically changed AI energy consumption estimates overnight. We previously assumed AI required massive energy and material inputs into server farms, but suddenly, DeepSeek cut those estimates by 90%.
Yet, despite these developments, we don’t fully understand the pathways AI will take. There are still enormous unknowns across technological, political, and social dimensions. This uncertainty offers some potential for hope. Within that very uncertainty, there will be positive outcomes—opportunities we can’t see yet, even from AI.
However, I am profoundly concerned about AI’s ability to exacerbate epistemic fragmentation, further entrenching the creation of multiple conflicting realities. These alternative realities will not only shape the way people see the world but will also be weaponized against one another. AI is likely to worsen polarization rather than help us overcome it.
Jacobsen: Your comments call to mind the perspectives of two intellectual figures who represent strikingly different traditions of thought—Margaret Atwood, the Canadian novelist, and Noam Chomsky, the American linguist. Each has reflected on the relationship between ignorance and intelligence, and Atwood once distilled her view with a stark observation: “Stupidity is the same as evil if you judge by the results.”
Homer-Dixon: That’s very good. That’s true.
Jacobsen: I’ve been thinking about the points you’ve made so far, and they bring me back to a question that Chomsky once raised—though it actually traces to Ernst Mayr. He suggested that “intelligence is a kind of lethal mutation.” It’s an unsettling thought when you consider that beetles and bacteria are thriving quite well without it. So when we look at AI and its implications, the question still lingers: could intelligence itself prove to be a lethal mutation?
Homer-Dixon: Yes, we are modifying our environment to such an extent that we may ultimately cause extinction. You’ve encountered this in your discussions—the famous estimate regarding the longevity of intelligent life in the universe, which is embedded in the Drake Equation.
Frank Drake was the head of SETI—the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. I once visited the SETI offices in the Bay Area. At least at one point, Drake had a custom license plate that read something like “IL = L,” “Intelligent Life = Longevity.”
In his equation, Drake included a series of factors that could contribute to the development of life: the size of planets, their distance from their stars, whether water exists on Earth, and other standard variables.
But the final factor, L, stood for longevity—essentially, the question of whether intelligent life would survive long enough to reach a stable and enduring state. That factor dominated everything else for him because intelligence might ultimately destroy itself.
I don’t think they are.
Human beings—and this is where I have a soft spot for accelerationism, people like Thiel and Musk—are extraordinarily creative, especially in moments of crisis and extreme stress. Things don’t look real right now, particularly existential problems like climate change.
The Peter Principle by Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull was published in 1969.
The basic idea is that within bureaucracies and organizations, people get promoted to their level of incompetence—they rise until they reach a position where they can no longer do their job effectively, and then they stop advancing.
What we may be witnessing with problems like climate change is that humanity has reached its level of incompetence. We have solved everything up to this point. Still, eventually, we will face a challenge too complex to overcome.
It’s an open question.
I’m not prepared to count humankind out yet. I have two kids—one is 19, the other 16—and they are very worried. But I keep returning to this: the world is so complex that we don’t know its game.
There may be an explosion of possibilities, but we can’t see the adjacent possible. These could be technological, institutional, ideological, or belief-system shifts. We don’t know. That is precisely why the Cascade Institute exists. We are trying to identify those possibilities and which ones can be leveraged.
Jacobsen: Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. It was nice to meet you.
Homer-Dixon: Great questions.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Keywords: Ed Hirs, U.S. education, energy economics, global trade, energy policy
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
In-Sight Publishing, Fort Langley, British Columbia, Canada
Correspondence: Scott Douglas Jacobsen (Email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com)
Received: May 29, 2025
Accepted: November 8, 2025
Published: November 8, 2025
Abstract
This interview with energy economist Ed Hirs, an Energy Fellow at the University of Houston and Yale alumnus, provides a sweeping economic and policy analysis of contemporary American education, manufacturing, and global trade. Hirs discusses the decline of U.S. public education funding since the 1980s, linking it to weakened workforce development, rising tuition, and overreliance on international students. He examines the limitations of protectionist policies and reshoring efforts, arguing that sustainable growth depends on renewed investment in STEM education, vocational training, and academic freedom. The dialogue also addresses the role of university endowments, ideological pressures in academia, and broader issues of global capital flow and trade. Drawing from decades of professional and academic experience, Hirs presents a data-driven, historically informed critique of U.S. policy trends and their long-term consequences for innovation and civic stability.
Keywords: Academic Freedom, Education Funding, Energy Economics, Higher Education Policy, Protectionism, Reshoring Manufacturing, STEM Workforce, Trade Deficits, University Endowments, U.S. Economic Policy
Introduction
The conversation between Ed Hirs and Scott Douglas Jacobsen situates the current challenges in U.S. education and manufacturing policy within a historical and global context. Hirs, a respected economist and educator, traces the erosion of public investment in education from the post-Sputnik boom to the austerity politics of the late twentieth century. His analysis exposes how ideological shifts have reshaped universities into financially strained institutions reliant on tuition revenue and international enrollment. Beyond economics, Hirs engages the cultural and political consequences of protectionism and academic polarization, noting that both phenomena distort long-term innovation and free inquiry. The discussion moves fluidly from the National Defense Education Act to the Trump administration’s trade policies, from the moral function of academia to debates about free speech and donor influence, forming an expansive portrait of a nation at a crossroads between knowledge and ideology.
Main Text (Interview)
Interviewer: Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Interviewee: Ed Hirs
Ed Hirs is a Yale-educated energy economist and an Energy Fellow at the University of Houston, where he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in energy economics. Known for his precise, nonpartisan analysis, he is a trusted voice on energy markets, corporate governance, and public policy. Hirs frequently contributes to national and international media and co-chairs the Yale Alumni in Energy conference, promoting fact-based dialogue on global energy security and sustainable economic strategies. Hirs speaks with Scott Douglas Jacobsen about the decline of U.S. education funding, the challenges of reshoring manufacturing, and the economic impact of protectionist policies. Hirs also explores the financial dynamics of universities, academic freedom, and global trade. Drawing on insights into university endowments, ideological polarization, and real-world experiences in Ukraine, this wide-ranging interview provides a critical examination of American policy, public discourse, and the future of higher education and innovation.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: How would you describe the state of education in the United States today?
Ed Hirs: The U.S. made a significant investment in science and education during the 1950s and 1960s, especially after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik in 1957. That moment spurred the passage of the National Defence Education Act in 1958 and later led to the expansion of public universities and increased federal research funding. There was a national realization that we needed to train the next generation of scientists, engineers, and civic leaders.
That urgency drove public investment in education and innovation. However, beginning in the 1980s, during the Reagan administration, a shift away from this model began to occur. We saw the rise of an anti-intellectual political current that distrusted higher education, particularly elite institutions. Since then, public funding for education—especially at the state level—has stagnated or declined in real terms while tuition has increased. At the same time, ideological movements have sought to divert public education funds to private and religious schools through voucher programs and charter systems.
This shift undermines long-term workforce development and the strength of civic society. One consequence is now visible even to policymakers pushing these changes: amid economic nationalism and trade wars, there is an expectation that major companies—such as Ford, General Motors, Hewlett Packard, and Apple—can rapidly bring manufacturing back to the U.S.
However, that’s not feasible in the short term. It requires a massive investment and a skilled workforce that does not exist at the necessary scale. The U.S. has underinvested in vocational education and STEM training for decades. Workforce development has not been treated as a strategic national priority.
Meanwhile, many leading American universities—such as UT Austin, Texas A&M, the University of Houston, Yale, and Harvard—have become more reliant on international students, particularly at the graduate level, because these students often pay full tuition and help offset budget shortfalls caused by declining public investment. This trend is especially pronounced in STEM fields.
It’s not accidental—it’s a financial survival strategy for universities that face flat or declining state funding.
Jacobsen: And that shifts access away from domestic students?
Hirs: Yes, it can. Countries like China benefit by sending students to U.S. universities rather than building out equivalent institutions at scale. These students often receive state backing and pay full tuition in the U.S. This creates a perverse incentive: American institutions prioritize full-paying international students, while domestic students—especially those from working-class or middle-income families—are increasingly priced out or squeezed by limited slots and inadequate financial aid.
This dynamic erodes the U.S.’s ability to cultivate homegrown talent in science, medicine, and public leadership.
This problem has been acknowledged in academic circles for years, but policy action has been minimal. If we were to attempt a severe course correction, the key questions would be: How quickly could the shift occur, and is there the political, social, and financial will to enact it?
The encouraging part is that such a shift would not be prohibitively expensive. Reinvesting in scholarships, faculty recruitment, and institutional support is relatively affordable compared to other federal spending priorities. It is entirely within reach—if the political will exists.
Jacobsen: How long would it take to build a domestic workforce to manufacture PCs and cell phones?
Hirs: It is likely three to five years to begin meaningful operations, assuming strong political will and substantial investment in training, infrastructure, and supply chains.
Jacobsen: Is there a willingness to do this currently?
Hirs: Not that we have seen—at least, not at scale.
Jacobsen: How would such a shift impact international trade and economics?
Hirs: In the short term, it would not significantly change global trade flows. However, tariffs remain a significant issue. Yes, they can provide temporary protection to domestic industries, but they also raise costs for consumers and disrupt global supply chains.
Jacobsen: How does this relate to the Trump administration’s approach?
Hirs: The Trump administration has promoted protectionist policies that may appear effective on paper—especially if viewed through a nineteenth-century economic lens, reminiscent of mercantilism. Much of what emerges from Project 2025 reflects this outdated thinking. But that is not how the real, globalized economy functions today.
Jacobsen: The U.S. runs trade deficits with many countries, including Canada. Is that a problem?
Hirs: Not inherently. Canada often produces goods more efficiently or inexpensively. The U.S. pays for these goods in U.S. dollars, which foreign trading partners accumulate. Eventually, those dollars return in the form of investments in American assets—such as the stock market, bond market, and real estate.
Jacobsen: So, what happens when trade slows down?
Hirs: With a tariff war slowing global trade, trading partners may begin to divest their U.S. holdings, disrupting this capital recycling. That weakens capital inflow, putting downward pressure on U.S. asset prices. It could deflate markets.
Jacobsen: Has this already started?
Hirs: To some extent. The U.S. stock market has become more volatile. The U.S. dollar index (DXY) has seen fluctuations, and it has dropped more than 10% since President Trump’s inauguration this year. But volatility is evident. Retirees, especially those with 401(k) plans, are feeling it. As tariffs increase costs, domestic producers have also raised prices. It all burdens the consumer as the higher prices are passed through to them..
Jacobsen: Does this raise the risk of recession?
Hirs: Absolutely. The U.S. had a recession in 2020 due to the pandemic, but these protectionist policies could worsen future downturns. Whether the Trump administration is equipped to manage such complexity is uncertain.
Jacobsen: Let’s talk about university endowments. What kind of capital are we dealing with?
Hirs: University of British Columbia: about CAD 2.1 billion. University of Toronto: roughly CAD 3.1 billion. McGill: about CAD 1.8 billion. Harvard University alone: around USD 49 billion as of 2023. These are massive reserves that can be used for research and innovation.
Jacobsen: How much wealth do universities generate?
Hirs: It is hard to quantify precisely. However, through patents, startups, and technology transfer, universities play a central role in the U.S. knowledge economy. According to AUTM data, U.S. universities generate over 1,000 new startups annually and contribute billions of dollars in economic value. May I suggest that you connect with one journalist who covers this well, Janet Lorin of Bloomberg?
Jacobsen: You mentioned Janet Lorin—what does she cover?
Hirs: She’s with Bloomberg and covers higher education. Somebody—I cannot recall who—did a study analyzing the return on investment for MBA tuition. Schools such as Harvard, Wharton, Stanford, and MIT all rank highly in this regard. The top 20 MBA programs generally pay for themselves over time through career earnings.
Jacobsen: And what about programs outside of business?
Hirs: That is more difficult to quantify. How do you define return on investment for an English major, a philosophy major, or even an economics major? What is the metric—salary, intellectual contribution, cultural impact? Someone has done this kind of broader assessment, but I do not remember who. Your point is well-taken.
Jacobsen: That postsecondary education has more than just economic value.
Hirs: Economic outcomes are just one part of it. There are broader social contributions and cultural functions that flow from academia. Universities are fulcrums for public discourse, innovation, and democratic development.
Jacobsen: Any personal stories that bring this to life?
Hirs: I remember meeting alums who had objected to Yale going co-ed in the 1960s. Some were outright dismissive—saying things like “women don’t contribute to society.” And then, of course, their daughters applied to Yale. It was ironic and revealing.
Jacobsen: It becomes personal when it affects them. If you take the most restrictive, least charitable view of women and deny them access to education—as we’re seeing now in Afghanistan under the Taliban—you’re crippling not just women but entire societies. Over the last five years, Afghanistan has consistently ranked at or near the bottom in several major global indexes, including the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report, when reliable data is available. Even if women are primarily in the home, they’re still educating the next generation.
Hirs: Precisely. An educated mother becomes her child’s first teacher. That matters. It was a strong signal of value and foresight—a significant investment.
Jacobsen: Is Buffett stepping down? It marks the end of an era. A whole chapter of American economic history is closing—and the country is changing, too.
Jacobsen: There’s also the influence of figures like Peter Thiel and the broader tech-bro culture. Yes, we do not have to go too deep into that, but there’s a kind of libertarian futurism emerging—especially around projects like Starbase in Texas. It is the seasteading idea transplanted onto land. Libertarian techno-utopia?
That’s the vision. I remember hearing Cory Doctorow speak about this on Democracy Now!—I believe it was during an interview with Amy Goodman. He pointed out that many of these tech leaders—Musk included—have read the speculative literature on techno-futurism but have only absorbed the libertarian aspects of it. They selectively ignored the counterbalancing ethical, social, and political dimensions that round out a responsible vision for the future. So, futurism becomes a one-note ideology.
It’s all acceleration, no accountability. And now we see these increasingly bizarre ideologies being proposed—swearing at astronauts, picking bits and pieces from different belief systems. It’s like: “Take one from here, two from there, three from over there.” It is à la carte. It’s syncretic. Technotheology or something like that.
All right—so let’s shift. Any comments on limitations to academic freedom, whether from students or administration?
Hirs: One of the most noticeable developments is the rise in self-censorship. In specific campus environments, speaking out against the prevailing orthodoxy—whatever it may be—can lead to professional or social punishment. For example, it was difficult in the 1960s to be a professor openly supporting the Vietnam War. Likewise, in the early 2000s, supporting the Iraq War could isolate you. The pendulum swings dramatically in different eras.
Jacobsen: So it’s a function of the prevailing political climate?
Hirs: Exactly. But speaking out does not merit removal. From an institutional perspective, if there is any activity—regardless of ideology—that interferes with the university’s operations, that’s a violation of the code of conduct. Universities enter into contractual relationships with both students and faculty. Breaking those agreements—especially in ways that obstruct university functions—can be grounds for disciplinary action or termination.
Jacobsen: That does not preclude informed or polite discussion, of course.
Hirs: No, not at all. Informed discussion is essential. But physical interference—for example, blocking access to classrooms or facilities—is disruptive and should not be tolerated in any institution of higher learning.
Jacobsen: What about civil demonstration, especially where it involves government interference or international students facing open threats?
Hirs: Peaceful protest in public areas is a legal right. But when demonstrations begin to block entryways, disrupt classes, or interfere with others’ ability to access what they’ve contractually paid for, that crosses a line. Universities have legal obligations to maintain a functioning educational environment.
Jacobsen: And the question of universities accepting money from controversial or political sources?
Hirs: It’s naïve to think universities can accept large sums of money without strings attached. Many university presidents are realizing that now. Whether it’s foreign governments, corporations, or ideologically motivated donors, money often comes with expectations—spoken or unspoken.
Jacobsen: Let’s end with something lighter. What’s controversial to you these days?
Hirs: Pete Rose.
Jacobsen: What’s up with Pete Rose?
Hirs: Well, he’s no longer alive and now his lifetime ban by Major League Baseball has been lifted. I presume that the lifting of the ban makes him eligible for the Baseball Hall of Fame. .
Jacobsen: So, will the Baseball Writers Association finally elect him to the Hall of Fame?
Hirs: I doubt it. He violated baseball’s one inviolable rule, betting on baseball. I don’t think he’ll make it in.
Jacobsen: Who else is on the fence like that?
Hirs: That’s a whole other conversation.
Jacobsen: Larry Summers is back. He’s giving commentaries again.
Hirs: Yes—one of my old professors used to babysit him when he was two years old.
Jacobsen: Were they also grading his thesis back then?
Hirs: Apparently, he has not changed much.
Jacobsen: Even Cornel West has had public spats with him. West considered Summers brilliant—brainy—but perhaps too closely tied to entrenched interests. That’s beyond my area of expertise, however. Chris Hedges chalks it up to a more savant-like focus. That may be fair. These figures—Summers, West, Hedges—are all playing in the same intellectual ballpark. They are brilliant people. But yes, what else? Fundamentally, do you think academic freedom and free speech are under threat? Or is this just another phase of academic rebalancing?
Hirs: I do not think they’re under threat per se. But many people confuse academic freedom or freedom of speech with freedom to disrupt—and those are not the same thing.
Jacobsen: Do you think American academics—students, faculty, and administrators—sometimes confuse the U.S. First Amendment right to free speech with the idea of freedom from consequences?
Hirs: Potentially, yes. Imagine a professor who wants to give a controversial talk. The university provides a room—say, Smith Hall—for an hour. But no one shows up. The professor may feel suppressed, but is that suppression?
Jacobsen: There’s no obligation for others to promote or attend.
Hirs: Exactly. If no one publicizes it or attends, that’s not a violation of free speech. But then the professor might decide to chain themselves to the president’s office doors. That’s not protected expression—that’s disruption. And it restricts others’ freedom of movement. It becomes a form of grandstanding for attention, and from left to right, we see that it is not a productive strategy.
Jacobsen: There have been cases even in Canada—graduate students caught in protracted, unresolved conflicts with administrators.
I recall one such case you might be referring to. If I remember correctly, four different parties—including the university president, the program director, the head of the independent inquiry, and the graduate student’s testimony—all ultimately concluded that the student had done nothing wrong. The institution even issued a public apology.
The controversy dragged on for so long that Ontario changed its provincial policy in 2018–2019 to require universities to conduct an annual free speech review. Most institutions failed the first assessments. Still, the policy remains in place. Ironically, the case that helped create it turned out to be baseless—something made from nothing. It was a complete error that shaped public policy. Do you see similar cases in the U.S.?
Hirs: I am sure they exist, though I have not followed one closely. Yale follows and adheres to the Woodward Report, drafted in 1974 by C. Vann Woodward, the eminent historian. Many universities aspire to uphold its principles.
Jacobsen: What does the Woodward Report emphasize?
Hirs: That people can and should express their opinions, but not at the expense of the university’s core functions. Do not scream fire in a theatre, and do not disrupt the operations of the institution. That’s the short version.
Jacobsen: What’s your take on the cooptation of the term woke—a neologism with roots in African American subcultures nearly a century ago?
Hirs: It is not very easy. The rhetoric surrounding “woke” today is often exaggerated. Some criticisms are legitimate, but much of the discourse is performative. One of my professors was Robert Farris Thompson, a pioneer in African American art history and a founding figure in African American studies in the United States. His approach to cultural interpretation was rooted in depth, not distortion.
Jacobsen: If you’ve been around longer, I get it. That’s the one-time elders—or even younger people—always assert a bit of pride. “Well, I know the person.”
Hirs: Yes, exactly. “I know that guy.” It reminds me of that Woody Allen movie—where someone is talking nonsense, and Allen pulls out Marshall McLuhan.
Jacobsen: That’s right. McLuhan steps in and says, “You know nothing of my work.” I remember that. The guy’s in the movie line, pontificating.
Hirs: As Mark Twain once said, “Nothing ruins a good story like the appearance of an eyewitness.” My freshman English professor once had a run-in with a very self-important student. The student said, “You can’t say that about Faulkner!” So, next class, Lamar Stevens came in with photos of himself drinking and sailing with Bill Faulkner himself.
Jacobsen: That’s excellent. Hey, it’s a pleasure to meet you.
Hirs: Likewise, Scott. Nice to meet you, too.
Discussion
Hirs’ remarks weave together multiple threads: fiscal policy, higher education governance, and civic culture. He identifies the 1980s as a pivotal decade when the U.S. abandoned large-scale public investment in science and education, replacing it with privatization and ideological distrust of intellectual institutions. This shift, he argues, produced cascading effects—undermining STEM capacity, constraining workforce development, and weakening the nation’s ability to reshore industries. In his view, America’s economic resilience is inseparable from educational integrity.
Hirs’ reflections on tariffs and trade provide an economist’s corrective to populist narratives. Protectionist measures, he explains, may offer symbolic satisfaction but impose real costs through inflation, market volatility, and diminished investment. His emphasis on global capital recycling—foreign earnings returning to U.S. assets—frames trade deficits not as national weakness but as functional interdependence. Yet, he warns that sustained policy confusion can erode this balance, risking recessionary pressures and diminished global confidence.
Within academia, Hirs critiques the financialization of universities, exposing how endowments and tuition dependence distort institutional missions. He is particularly alert to the erosion of academic freedom—both from political interference and self-censorship. His invocation of the Woodward Report underscores a principled vision: that intellectual inquiry must coexist with institutional order. Even when addressing cultural issues such as the distortion of “woke” discourse, Hirs maintains a historian’s restraint and a teacher’s curiosity. His humor, whether about baseball or literary anecdotes, punctuates the gravity of his economic insights with human perspective.
Ultimately, the conversation captures an American economist deeply committed to rational discourse amid a turbulent era. Hirs’ argument—that education, innovation, and ethical reasoning are inseparable foundations of democracy—resonates as both critique and call to action.
Methods
The interview was conducted via typed questions—with explicit consent—for review, and curation. This process complied with applicable data protection laws, including the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), and Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), i.e., recordings if any were stored securely, retained only as needed, and deleted upon request, as well in accordance with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Advertising Standards Canada guidelines.
Data Availability
No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current article. All interview content remains the intellectual property of the interviewer and interviewee.
References
(No external academic sources were cited for this interview.)
Journal & Article Details
- Publisher: In-Sight Publishing
- Publisher Founding: March 1, 2014
- Web Domain: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com
- Location: Fort Langley, Township of Langley, British Columbia, Canada
- Journal: In-Sight: Interviews
- Journal Founding: August 2, 2012
- Frequency: Four Times Per Year
- Review Status: Non-Peer-Reviewed
- Access: Electronic/Digital & Open Access
- Fees: None (Free)
- Volume Numbering: 13
- Issue Numbering: 4
- Section: A
- Theme Type: Discipline
- Theme Premise: Economics
- Theme Part: None
- Formal Sub-Theme: None.
- Individual Publication Date: November 8, 2025
- Issue Publication Date: January 1, 2026
- Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
- Word Count: 2,878
- Image Credits: Photo by Matthew Henry on Unsplash
- ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 2369-6885
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges Enos Mafokate for his time, expertise, and valuable contributions. His thoughtful insights and detailed explanations have greatly enhanced the quality and depth of this work, providing a solid foundation for the discussion presented herein.
Author Contributions
S.D.J. conceived the subject matter, conducted the interview, transcribed and edited the conversation, and prepared the manuscript.
Competing Interests
The author declares no competing interests.
License & Copyright
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012–Present.
Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.
Supplementary Information
Below are various citation formats for Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade.
American Medical Association (AMA 11th Edition)
Jacobsen S. Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade. November 2025;13(4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics
American Psychological Association (APA 7th Edition)
Jacobsen, S. (2025, November 8). Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade. In-Sight Publishing, 13(4).
Brazilian National Standards (ABNT)
JACOBSEN, S. Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade. In-Sight: Interviews, Fort Langley, v. 13, n. 4, 2025.
Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (17th Edition)
Jacobsen, Scott. 2025. “Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade.” In-Sight: Interviews 13 (4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics.
Chicago/Turabian, Notes & Bibliography (17th Edition)
Jacobsen, S. “Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade.” In-Sight: Interviews 13, no. 4 (November 2025). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics.
Harvard
Jacobsen, S. (2025) ‘Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade’, In-Sight: Interviews, 13(4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics.
Harvard (Australian)
Jacobsen, S 2025, ‘Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade’, In-Sight: Interviews, vol. 13, no. 4, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics.
Modern Language Association (MLA, 9th Edition)
Jacobsen, Scott. “Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade.” In-Sight: Interviews, vol. 13, no. 4, 2025, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics.
Vancouver/ICMJE
Jacobsen S. Conversation with Ed Hirs on U.S. Education, Energy Economics, and the Future of Global Trade [Internet]. 2025 Nov;13(4). Available from: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/hirs-economics
Note on Formatting
This document follows an adapted Nature research-article format tailored for an interview. Traditional sections such as Methods, Results, and Discussion are replaced with clearly defined parts: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Main Text (Interview), and a concluding Discussion, along with supplementary sections detailing Data Availability, References, and Author Contributions. This structure maintains scholarly rigor while effectively accommodating narrative content.
Share this:
Keywords: Tauya Chinama, philosophy, theodicy, humanist education, Zimbabwe
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
In-Sight Publishing, Fort Langley, British Columbia, Canada
Correspondence: Scott Douglas Jacobsen (Email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com)
Received: September 29, 2025
Accepted: November 8, 2025
Published: November 8, 2025
Abstract
The interview with Tauya Chinama explores the intellectual and emotional trajectory of a Zimbabwean philosopher and humanist who journeyed from theology to freethought. Trained for the priesthood, Chinama’s inquiries into theodicy—the reconciliation of divine justice with human suffering—provoked a philosophical transformation from belief to apatheism. Through critical engagement with theological defenses of evil, such as Augustine’s original sin and free will theories, he found these explanations logically inconsistent and ethically unsatisfying. His story embodies the struggle between inherited faith and emerging reason in postcolonial Africa. The dialogue situates his evolution within the broader humanist movement in Zimbabwe, connecting his critique of religion to his advocacy for indigenous languages and cultural preservation in education.
Keywords: African Humanism, Apatheism, Freethought, Humanism in Zimbabwe, Indigenous Languages, Philosophy of Religion, Problem of Evil, Secular Education, Theodicy, Theology and Logic
Introduction
This conversation documents Tauya Chinama’s philosophical evolution from a theological trainee to a secular humanist and apatheist. Emerging from Zimbabwe’s complex intersection of colonial religious education and indigenous intellectual revival, Chinama represents a new generation of African thinkers reclaiming moral autonomy outside religious dogma. His academic focus on theodicy—the problem of reconciling divine goodness with the existence of evil—became the catalyst for an enduring critique of institutional belief. The interview follows this transformation chronologically, highlighting the tension between inherited spiritual traditions and the pursuit of reasoned ethics. It also underscores Chinama’s belief that education rooted in indigenous languages sustains cultural identity and intellectual authenticity, reflecting his broader humanist commitment to justice, knowledge, and social progress.
Main Text (Interview)
Interviewer: Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Interviewee: Tauya Chinama
Tauya Chinama is a Zimbabwean freethinker, educator, and advocate for human rights and cultural preservation. Trained in philosophy and theology, he transitioned from religious study to humanism, emphasizing intellectual honesty, dialogue, and heritage-based education. As a teacher of heritage studies, he works to integrate indigenous knowledge and languages into learning systems, arguing that language carries culture, history, and identity. Chinama is active in Zimbabwe’s humanist movement, contributing to interfaith dialogues, academic research, and public discourse on secularism, ethics, and education reform. He champions the preservation of Shona and Ndebele while critiquing systemic barriers that weaken local language education.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: When you were doing your training, what was your main specialization? What was the core research question?
Tauya Chinama: I had several questions, but my primary focus was on theodicy: the relationship between the existence of God and the problem of evil.
That was the question that led me to think more deeply. Years ago, I preached about an omniscient, omnipotent, all-good God. But then I looked at the reality: people who are disabled, people dying in natural disasters, people dying from diseases. Why is God not ending all this suffering? Where is he? Is he enjoying it?
The key issue is theodicy. The Greek words are theos (God) and dike (justice). Is it just for God to allow these things to happen? That question pulled me further. I came to feel that I could act more justly as a human being than the God being preached, who supposedly is capable of ending poverty, disease, disability, and natural disasters, but does not. Why should I believe in him? Why should I revere him?
The realization was: we are on our own. We are responsible, and we must act to address what is happening to us. That was the key lesson that pushed me from being a believer to an agnostic, and then to what I now call an apatheist—a person indifferent to God’s existence. Today, I describe myself as an apatheist with a touch of cosmopolitanism.
Jacobsen: For theodicy, what were the standard arguments? How did theologians justify evil, suffering, and pain?
Chinama: A number of them talked about free will. Others leaned on determinism. But this did not make sense to me. If we say that human beings have free will, then it means God is not omniscient—he does not know everything that will happen before it occurs. If he knows it all, then free will does not exist.
On the other hand, if determinism is true, then we are simply victims of a plan. We cannot resist; we can only follow the flow. We are what Martin Heidegger might call Dasein—a being-toward-death. We are thrown into existence, moving toward death, with limited choice. That line of argument, whether from free will or determinism, did not make sense to me.
It could not resolve the harm and suffering I saw in the world. The defences of theologians like St. Augustine of Hippo also did not persuade me. Augustine introduced the doctrine of original sin and linked sexuality to sin, claiming virginity was a higher state. But none of this made sense to me. He had emerged from Manichaean philosophy, which emphasized dualism—light and darkness, good and evil as opposing forces. His framework seemed more like a leftover from dualism than a convincing defence of Christian doctrine.
Jacobsen: Was it the weakness of the theological arguments for God in the face of evil that made you drift away? Or was it the strength of non-religious arguments that convinced you to adopt a non-religious way of looking at life?
Chinama: It was both. When you look at the theological arguments and test them through logic—a branch of philosophy about correct reasoning—you quickly see the conclusions do not follow from the premises. That leaves you confused.
So I moved from being a believer to an agnostic, saying, “Perhaps I am wrong, perhaps I am right.” Over time, you sober up. Sometimes you even become militant, but then you realize militancy does not work. You calm down, or you risk messing things up.
I remember when I was training to be a priest. I confided in a particular Indian priest—I will not give his name—that I was slowly losing my faith. He told me something shocking: that many high-ranking figures in the Catholic Church, including bishops and cardinals, do not actually believe the doctrines they defend.
I was surprised. Here were people defending the Church’s teachings every day, yet privately admitting they did not believe them. He even told me he had gone through the same phase and had never fully recovered his faith. His advice was: “Do not fight it. Just go with the flow.”
But I felt I was too honest to live that way. I could not simply go along with something I did not believe.
Jacobsen: In the end, was your decision to leave a faith-based position and move to a non-religious position more an intellectual exercise, or more about changing how you felt? Or was it a little of both?
Chinama: It was both. Several factors led me to change. It was an intellectual practice, but also an emotional realization that what I thought religion was turned out not to be. The whole motivation collapsed, and I was left with no choice but to withdraw.
I do not regret it, but it was a hard decision. There is stigmatization, ostracism, and other consequences that come with choosing such a path. It is serious—you need to be mentally strong. For me, it was primarily intellectual, but I also required mental resilience to overcome it.
Jacobsen: Thank you for your time today, Tauya.
Discussion
Tauya Chinama’s reflections reveal a deeply introspective yet socially engaged freethinker whose intellectual honesty led him beyond orthodoxy. His interrogation of theodicy exemplifies the enduring philosophical dilemma of faith confronted by empirical reality. While traditional theologians rely on constructs like free will and divine mystery, Chinama dissects these notions through logic, concluding that such reasoning collapses under moral scrutiny. His disillusionment with clerical hypocrisy—priests who privately disbelieve the doctrines they preach—illustrates a crisis of authenticity within institutional religion.
Yet his departure from faith is not marked by bitterness but by clarity. By adopting apatheism—a stance of indifference toward divine existence—Chinama reframes human responsibility as self-generated rather than divinely assigned. His evolution aligns with a broader movement of African secular intellectuals reclaiming ethical discourse from religious monopoly. Parallel to his philosophical journey, his pedagogical work in heritage studies demonstrates that the preservation of indigenous languages like Shona and Ndebele is a moral act of cultural resistance. Language, for him, is not merely communication but a repository of collective memory and ethical orientation.
The dialogue ultimately positions Chinama within Zimbabwe’s emerging secular humanist network, bridging philosophical critique with practical reform in education and human rights. His insistence that moral progress depends on intellectual freedom situates him among Africa’s most reflective voices challenging inherited hierarchies of belief and identity.
Methods
The interview was conducted via typed questions—with explicit consent—for review, and curation. This process complied with applicable data protection laws, including the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), and Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), i.e., recordings if any were stored securely, retained only as needed, and deleted upon request, as well in accordance with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Advertising Standards Canada guidelines.
Data Availability
No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current article. All interview content remains the intellectual property of the interviewer and interviewee.
References
(No external academic sources were cited for this interview.)
Journal & Article Details
- Publisher: In-Sight Publishing
- Publisher Founding: March 1, 2014
- Web Domain: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com
- Location: Fort Langley, Township of Langley, British Columbia, Canada
- Journal: In-Sight: Interviews
- Journal Founding: August 2, 2012
- Frequency: Four Times Per Year
- Review Status: Non-Peer-Reviewed
- Access: Electronic/Digital & Open Access
- Fees: None (Free)
- Volume Numbering: 13
- Issue Numbering: 4
- Section: A
- Theme Type: Discipline
- Theme Premise: Theology
- Theme Part: None
- Formal Sub-Theme: None.
- Individual Publication Date: November 8, 2025
- Issue Publication Date: January 1, 2026
- Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
- Word Count: 944
- Image Credits: Photo by Karsten Winegeart on Unsplash
- ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 2369-6885
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges Enos Mafokate for his time, expertise, and valuable contributions. His thoughtful insights and detailed explanations have greatly enhanced the quality and depth of this work, providing a solid foundation for the discussion presented herein.
Author Contributions
S.D.J. conceived the subject matter, conducted the interview, transcribed and edited the conversation, and prepared the manuscript.
Competing Interests
The author declares no competing interests.
License & Copyright
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012–Present.
Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.
Supplementary Information
Below are various citation formats for Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe.
American Medical Association (AMA 11th Edition)
Jacobsen S. Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe. November 2025;13(4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism
American Psychological Association (APA 7th Edition)
Jacobsen, S. (2025, November 8). Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe. In-Sight Publishing, 13(4).
Brazilian National Standards (ABNT)
JACOBSEN, S. Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe. In-Sight: Interviews, Fort Langley, v. 13, n. 4, 2025.
Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (17th Edition)
Jacobsen, Scott. 2025. “Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe.” In-Sight: Interviews 13 (4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism.
Chicago/Turabian, Notes & Bibliography (17th Edition)
Jacobsen, S. “Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe.” In-Sight: Interviews 13, no. 4 (November 2025). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism.
Harvard
Jacobsen, S. (2025) ‘Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe’, In-Sight: Interviews, 13(4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism.
Harvard (Australian)
Jacobsen, S 2025, ‘Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe’, In-Sight: Interviews, vol. 13, no. 4, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism.
Modern Language Association (MLA, 9th Edition)
Jacobsen, Scott. “Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe.” In-Sight: Interviews, vol. 13, no. 4, 2025, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism.
Vancouver/ICMJE
Jacobsen S. Conversation with Tauya Chinama on Philosophy, Theodicy, and Humanist Education in Zimbabwe [Internet]. 2025 Nov;13(4). Available from: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/chinama-humanism
Note on Formatting
This document follows an adapted Nature research-article format tailored for an interview. Traditional sections such as Methods, Results, and Discussion are replaced with clearly defined parts: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Main Text (Interview), and a concluding Discussion, along with supplementary sections detailing Data Availability, References, and Author Contributions. This structure maintains scholarly rigor while effectively accommodating narrative content.
Share this:
Keywords: Enos Mafokate, equestrian, Alexandra Township, apartheid, South Africa
Scott Douglas Jacobsen
In-Sight Publishing, Fort Langley, British Columbia, Canada
Correspondence: Scott Douglas Jacobsen (Email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com)
Received: July 10, 2025
Accepted: July 13, 2025
Published: November 8, 2025
Abstract
This interview traces the early life of South African equestrian pioneer Eno Mafokate, beginning with his birth on February 15, 1944, in Alexandra Township, Johannesburg. Through a childhood shaped by apartheid segregation and cultural separation within Black communities, Mafokate recalls family cohesion, parental devotion to education, and the contrasting geographies of Alexandra and nearby Rivonia after the family’s 1949 move. He describes the hardship and discipline of farm labor—punctuated by violence and rigid racial etiquette—as well as a formative affinity for animals that drew him away from peer socializing toward hours spent riding a donkey and imagining a horse. The conversation situates everyday experiences—housing, food, access to amenities, and exposure to animals—within the racialized hierarchies that structured life in Gauteng during the 1940s and 1950s. Together, these memories illuminate how love, values, and proximity to animals seeded an enduring vocation while revealing the social architecture that limited opportunity and dignity for Black families. Mafokate’s reflections offer a ground-level view of childhood under segregation and the early stirrings of an equestrian life built from scarcity, resilience, and imagination.
Keywords: Alexandra Township childhood experiences, Apartheid segregation and daily life, Donkey riding as equestrian genesis, Family cohesion love and support, Family move to Rivonia 1949, Farm life hardship and lessons, Gauteng Province 1940s social context, Parental occupations and values education, Racialized access to resources, Rivonia farm animals and environment, Violence and power dynamics farm, Youth identity shaped by animals
Introduction
Eno Mafokate’s childhood begins in Alexandra Township—Johannesburg’s dense, multiracial satellite formed in the early twentieth century—and unfolds under the everyday strictures of apartheid-era separation. Born on February 15, 1944, he grew up in a world mapped by race and, within Black communities, by culture, where family love and a premium on schooling counterbalanced scarcity and social constraint. His parents, Maria, a domestic worker, and Alfeos, a respected builder, modelled patience, moral instruction, and an unambiguous emphasis on education as the route to dignity.
A family move in 1949 from Alexandra to Rivonia marked a shift in material conditions without dissolving the larger racial hierarchy. Life on a farm in Rivonia brought access to amenities—better food, domestic animals, even a swimming pool—alongside the discipline and danger of farm labor, including punishment for breaching racial etiquette. Within this setting, Mafokate’s affinity for animals matured: rather than seek parties and crowds, he chose time with creatures, riding a donkey while imagining a horse, sketching the outline of a vocation decades before it would be recognized.
These formative scenes—domestic solidarity, farm hardship, and the solace of animals—offer a close view of Gauteng in the 1940s and early 1950s. They also prefigure the arc of a life in equestrian sport that began not with privilege but with persistence, joy, and the stubborn exercise of imagination against the limits of a segregated society.
Main Text (Interview)
Interviewer: Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Interviewee: Enos Mafokate
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Starting with 1944, your birth and early childhood on February 15 in Alexandra Township, Johannesburg, South Africa. What was life like in Alexandra Township and the wider Gauteng Province for families in the 1940s?
Eno Mafokate: In 1940’s families were separated by race; Indians, Whites, Blacks and Colored. And within the black community we were also separated according to our different cultures, this naturally made life difficult and challenging.
Jacobsen: What were your parents’ names?
Mafokate: Mother was Maria and Father was Alfeos.
Jacobsen: What was their work and parenting style?
Mafokate: My Father was a well known builder and Mother was a domestic worker. They were loving and patient parents, they focused on teaching us good values and morals and prioritised education over everything.
Jacobsen: They must have been some of the first families in Alexandra, as the township was established in 1912 by H.B. Papenfus, proclaimed a year before the South African 1913 Land Act. Black people could own land there under a freehold title as a result. Notably Hastings Banda, Hugh Masekela, Kgalema Petrus Motlanthe, Nelson Mandela, Samora Machel, Alfred Nzo, and Joe Modise, came from there.
You work growing up on a farm comes with all the great lessons about life and death, and hardship, one finds on a farm. What early memories seem to reflect benign and noteworthy aspects of ordinary farm life?
Mafokate: My memories of farm work are ones of hardship. I remember the farm owner punching me for calling his daughter by her first name as he wanted me to call her Miss.
Jacobsen: What events mark more momentous points of early life?
Mafokate: Instead of going out with friends I always chose and preferred to spend time with animals. Specifically riding a donkey. Choosing this lifestyle over a party lifestyle with friends marked who I would become growing up.
Jacobsen: How close was the family?
Mafokate: Very close, there was lots of love and support.
Jacobsen: How important was family?
Mafokate: Family was a special thing to me. Family showed me that life is non existent without love and support from others.
Jacobsen: Moving from Alexandra to Rivonia in 1949, these are key and formative years. My parents divorced only a little later than this age. Any geographic or family change like that is stressful. How was the transition for you?
Mafokate: My parents never divorced they got separated by death.
Jacobsen: Why did the family move?
Mafokate: Family moved because my Father found a Job as a builder in Rivonia so we had to move closer to his work place.
Jacobsen: Rural has a general character to it, rustic in degrees. How was rural life in Alexandra compared to Rivonia?
Mafokate: Life in Rivonia was more established than Alexandra. In Rivonia we lived at a farm house so we had access to more facilities like swimming pools, we got to play and look after.
domestic pets and we had better food to eat. Life in Rivonia was so much better than the life we lived in Alexander township.
Jacobsen: A historic place with the Rivonia Trial moving the South African dial towards a more universally fair and just society with the removal of Apartheid (1963-64). I love the “I am prepared to die speech,” mostly for the crowd reaction.
Jacobsen: What animals were common in these environments–farms differ?
Mafokate: In Alexander it was common to see dogs and horses that were ridden by police men. In Rivona it was common to see cows, horses, sheep, pigs, chicken, birds, rabbits, snakes. Your typical farm animals. Animals in Rivonia were well kept and fed compared to Alexander.
Jacobsen: Your first introduction to horses was not necessarily a “horse,” but more a ‘horse,’ i.e., a donkey. That’s cute and makes me giggle. How did you feel getting on the donkey? I am reminded of the experiences of Canadian and American show jumping Olympic Silver Medallist Mac Cone describing early experiences. He used what was around him, what was available–much more controlled and regulated environment now. Same style of background, but different culture, different nationality, almost the same cohort, different material deficiencies necessary for a proper, full equestrian experience–a donkey experience, nonetheless. How was the memorable exchange with the white boy?
Mafokate: Being my optimistic self, It is a memory of pure excitement and joy. Nothing else mattered when I was riding that donkey and picturing it being a horse.
Jacobsen: How does this highlight the racial barriers of the time?
Mafokate: It highlighted the different and disadvantaged standards of living based on race. It showed that only white people deserved and could have the finer things in life.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Mr. Mafokate.
Discussion
The conversation with Eno Mafokate illustrates how personal memory functions as social history. His early recollections—marked by separation, labor, and tenderness—compose a child’s‑eye record of apartheid’s structure before the term was institutionalized. Alexandra Township in the 1940s existed as both opportunity and limitation: one of the few areas where Black families could own land under freehold title, yet constrained by the invisible boundaries of race and class. Mafokate’s testimony confirms how these dualities shaped both identity and aspiration. The constant thread of parental guidance—love, moral instruction, and the insistence on education—emerges as a counterweight to social fragmentation.
Equally revealing is the move to Rivonia. It represents more than geography: it embodies a microcosm of South Africa’s social stratification. Access to better food and recreation coexisted with systemic inequality, as a young boy’s act of addressing a white girl by name invited physical punishment. Such experiences etched into Mafokate an awareness of dignity and hierarchy long before he entered public life. Yet rather than curdling into resentment, these lessons transformed into empathy and discipline. His companionship with animals, especially the donkey he imagined as a horse, highlights a psychological escape into imagination—a gesture that later matures into vocation.
This early pattern of substitution—using what was available to reach toward what was denied—anticipates the spirit that would define Mafokate’s equestrian career. It also reframes racial segregation not only as an apparatus of exclusion but as a crucible that forced improvisation and resilience. The donkey, in this sense, becomes a metaphor for the creative repurposing of circumstance: humility turned into mastery.
The discussion therefore extends beyond nostalgia. It underscores how moral formation, aesthetic sensibility, and civic awareness can emerge from constrained environments. Mafokate’s childhood story becomes an anatomy of human development under pressure—how affection within family networks can mitigate systemic violence, and how an affinity for animals can cultivate empathy that resists dehumanization. The interview closes with gratitude, but its quiet revelation is that endurance and imagination are inseparable from justice: the small, steadfast acts of seeing a donkey as a horse forecast the larger transformation of envisioning an equitable society.
Methods
The interview was conducted via typed questions—with explicit consent—for review, and curation. This process complied with applicable data protection laws, including the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), and Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), i.e., recordings if any were stored securely, retained only as needed, and deleted upon request, as well in accordance with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Advertising Standards Canada guidelines.
Data Availability
No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current article. All interview content remains the intellectual property of the interviewer and interviewee.
References
(No external academic sources were cited for this interview.)
Journal & Article Details
- Publisher: In-Sight Publishing
- Publisher Founding: March 1, 2014
- Web Domain: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com
- Location: Fort Langley, Township of Langley, British Columbia, Canada
- Journal: In-Sight: Interviews
- Journal Founding: August 2, 2012
- Frequency: Four Times Per Year
- Review Status: Non-Peer-Reviewed
- Access: Electronic/Digital & Open Access
- Fees: None (Free)
- Volume Numbering: 13
- Issue Numbering: 4
- Section: A
- Theme Type: Theme
- Theme Premise: Global Equestrianism
- Theme Part: 1
- Formal Sub-Theme: None.
- Individual Publication Date: November 8, 2025
- Issue Publication Date: January 1, 2026
- Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
- Word Count: 791
- Image Credits: Photo by Jean van Wyk on Unsplash
- ISSN (International Standard Serial Number): 2369-6885
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges Enos Mafokate for his time, expertise, and valuable contributions. His thoughtful insights and detailed explanations have greatly enhanced the quality and depth of this work, providing a solid foundation for the discussion presented herein.
Author Contributions
S.D.J. conceived the subject matter, conducted the interview, transcribed and edited the conversation, and prepared the manuscript.
Competing Interests
The author declares no competing interests.
License & Copyright
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012–Present.
Unauthorized use or duplication of material without express permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links must use full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with direction to the original content.
Supplementary Information
Below are various citation formats for Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1).
American Medical Association (AMA 11th Edition)
Jacobsen S. Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1). November 2025;13(4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian
American Psychological Association (APA 7th Edition)
Jacobsen, S. (2025, November 8). Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1).In-Sight Publishing, 13(4).
Brazilian National Standards (ABNT)
JACOBSEN, S. Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1). In-Sight: Interviews, Fort Langley, v. 13, n. 4, 2025.
Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (17th Edition)
Jacobsen, Scott. 2025. “Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1).” In-Sight: Interviews 13 (4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian.
Chicago/Turabian, Notes & Bibliography (17th Edition)
Jacobsen, S. “Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1).” In-Sight: Interviews 13, no. 4 (November 2025). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian.
Harvard
Jacobsen, S. (2025) ‘Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1)’, In-Sight: Interviews, 13(4). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian.
Harvard (Australian)
Jacobsen, S 2025, ‘Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1)’, In-Sight: Interviews, vol. 13, no. 4, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian.
Modern Language Association (MLA, 9th Edition)
Jacobsen, Scott. “Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1).” In-Sight: Interviews, vol. 13, no. 4, 2025, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian.
Vancouver/ICMJE
Jacobsen S. Conversation with Enos Mafokate on Early Life and Development as an Equestrian (1) [Internet]. 2025 Nov;13(4). Available from: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/mafokate-equestrian
Note on Formatting
This document follows an adapted Nature research-article format tailored for an interview. Traditional sections such as Methods, Results, and Discussion are replaced with clearly defined parts: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Main Text (Interview), and a concluding Discussion, along with supplementary sections detailing Data Availability, References, and Author Contributions. This structure maintains scholarly rigor while effectively accommodating narrative content.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Keywords: Riane Eisler, partnership education, human nature, caring societies, cultural transformation
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/11
Riane Eisler, an Austrian-born American systems scientist, futurist, and human rights advocate, is renowned for her influential work on cultural transformation and gender equity. Best known for “The Chalice and the Blade,” she introduced the partnership versus dominator models of social organization. She received the Humanist Pioneer Award, and in conversation with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Eisler emphasized the urgent need for humanists to focus on values-based systems and the transformative power of caring economics. Drawing on neuroscience and history, she argues that peace begins at home and calls for a shift in worldview to build more equitable, sustainable, and compassionate societies rooted in connection rather than control. The three books of hers of note that could be highlighted are The Chalice and the Blade—now in its 57th U.S. printing with 30 foreign editions, The Real Wealth of Nations, and Nurturing Our Humanity: How Domination and Partnership Shape Our Brains, Lives, and Future (Oxford University Press, 2019).
In this conversation, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Eisler. She critiques the roots of education’s domination—fear, hierarchy, and top-down control—and advocates for a partnership-based education that emphasizes equity, multicultural content, environmental awareness, and relational skills. Drawing on neuroscience and history, Eisler emphasizes that “peace begins at home,” advocating for a shift toward caring economics and integrated learning. Her influential works—including The Chalice and the Blade, The Real Wealth of Nations, and Tomorrow’s Children—offer a blueprint for fostering compassionate, sustainable societies.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we are here once again with the prolific Riane Eisler. We will be discussing education within the partnership model. The partnership studies framework, which you developed, proposes a dualistic contrast between two systems: the domination system, which is based on hierarchy, control, and fear, and the partnership system, which emphasizes mutual respect, equity, and nurturing.
In education, has the United States historically focused more on the partnership model or on the domination model?
Riane Eisler: You know the answer to that—it has been the domination model. The approach has been mainly to cram information into children’s heads. That information, to a considerable extent, serves two purposes.
First, it prepares them for the dominant workplace. Second, it maintains the stories and the language of domination.
Jacobsen: When you say that it prepares them for the dominant workforce and conditions them for further domination in educational styles, are you suggesting it is all top-down?
Eisler: The entire system is hierarchical. In Tomorrow’s Children—my book on applying partnership principles to education—I begin by discussing three elements of the educational process: process, structure, and content. Progressive education has paid considerable attention to process, aiming to make learning more participatory for children.
Some attention has also been given to structure, such as involving children in specific decision-making processes within schools. However, content has been almost entirely ignored by so-called progressive education.
In Tomorrow’s Children, the focus is very much on content. Why? Because we have been told many stories that are either false, biased, or incomplete. These omissions prevent us from adequately addressing the challenges we face as a species.
We are not well prepared to deal with issues such as climate change, artificial intelligence, and the complexities of the social media landscape. Education must instead emphasize new stories that are, first, gender-balanced—because much of the old curriculum, especially history, has idealized wars and the so-called “great men” who won them. Figures such as Napoleon Bonaparte come to mind. Students were expected to memorize their names and the dates of their battles.
Including more women is important, but it is not enough to add women into a domination system—those who have managed to succeed and become visible. We must also include values and qualities traditionally labelled as “feminine.”
I will address that later. Of course, partnership education is also environmentally sensitive.
And the content must be multicultural. There are encouraging trends moving in this direction.
So it is a truly integrated and integrative approach to education, one that prepares young people for partnership rather than domination.
Jacobsen: What would you say are the important signifiers, in terms of labels and relations, that appear at the pre-secondary, secondary, and post-secondary levels of education? In terms of hierarchies, the potential for control and fear that arises from those hierarchies which are more prominent in school systems focused on domination.
Eisler: The fear is always there—the fear of failure. The fear of one’s peers, because they are competing with you, the fear of the administration, of the teacher, of authority figures.
We do not know our history well, but Tomorrow’s Children does address it, including the domination aspects of our past, when physical punishment in schools was routine. Fear, therefore, is one of the clearest indicators of dominator education.
Jacobsen: What about systems that produce a particular persona—say, “Mr.” or “Mrs.”—someone who operates entirely on one gear? For example, part of education should probably involve interpersonal skills. Suppose someone is grieving or emotionally activated because something has upset them, and another person responds only with argumentation and a rigid system of facts. In that case, they are not using the right approach. In such situations, care and consolation are probably more appropriate.
Eisler: Precisely. One of the proposals of partnership education is not only to change the traditional content of education—making it more gender-balanced, multicultural, and environmentally sensitive—but also to teach children relational skills.
Children in partnership education would be taught how to care: caring for themselves, caring for others, and caring for our natural environment—our Mother Earth.
Moreover, it is striking how absent this is in traditional education. Again, there are some trends toward incorporating more multiculturalism, greater gender balance, and increased environmental consciousness. However, these are often treated as add-ons rather than being fully integrated into the system.
Partnership education is not only about making curricula more gender-balanced, multicultural, and environmentally sensitive, but also about teaching children relational skills—essential for building healthy relationships.
What I propose in Tomorrow’s Children is an education that tells a different story of human nature and evolution than the one conventionally taught. In fact, the book foreshadows much of what we now recognize as essential: emotional literacy, which you mentioned earlier. It also foreshadows telling a different story of Darwin—what I call “meaningful evolution”—rather than the distorted “dog-eat-dog” story. Of course, dogs do not eat dogs, but that is how evolution has often been misinterpreted.
Jacobsen: Was it Kropotkin who argued that cooperation is a factor in evolution?
Eisler: It was Peter Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (1902). Kropotkin was an anarchist—in the proper sense of the word, meaning self-governance, rather than chaos. He was indeed remarkable. Moreover, yes, thinkers like him, who recognized the importance of cooperation, should be included in education—but they are not.
Jacobsen: This may not influence the outcome of research itself. If research is done correctly, the results will be what they are. However, in terms of the questions asked and the research programs funded and emphasized, education appears to play a significant role. Specific perspectives dominate the intellectual and research landscape. Has this affected how human nature is represented in the evidence?
Eisler: Yes. If you ask the so-called “common person” what human nature is, many will respond with the language of sin—original sin—or with the reductionist story of “selfish genes.” Of course, we naturally care more for those who are closest to us. However, consider societies that have progressed further toward the partnership model: they have more caring policies, such as paid parental leave, universal healthcare, and support systems for families.
In these nations, like Finland, Sweden, and Norway, women hold approximately 40 to 50 percent of parliamentary seats, and female heads of state are not uncommon. These societies also invest a greater proportion of their GDP than most others in supporting people through NGOs worldwide—people to whom they are not regionally or genetically related.
There is clearly something wrong with the conventional view of human nature as inherently flawed. Sociobiologists popularized the idea that selfishness and aggression are dominant traits, but this view distorts reality. Killing one’s own mother, for example, is extraordinarily rare—the Menendez case is the exception, not the rule.The stories of selfishness and domination have been popularized and institutionalized, shaping education, culture, and policy in ways that obscure the whole reality of our human capacity for care, empathy, and cooperation.
These distorted stories about human nature have been accepted even in science because they maintain a domination system that is ultimately based on fear. It is a fear of those in power—whether a parent, a religious authority, or a political leader. Consider some of the so-called Christian parenting guides, which literally teach that you “spoil the child if you spare the rod.” They claim that even an eighteen-month-old baby must be forced to sit absolutely still in a high chair because what the child must learn is that the parent’s will is law.
If that is not preparation for fitting into a top-down system, I do not know what is. It begins with fearing God, then fearing the authoritarian leader of the state, and, of course, fearing the parent. This indoctrination begins very early. Education, as I point out in Tomorrow’s Children, begins long before formal schooling.
We have not paid enough attention to what neuroscience tells us. We are bombarded with data, but we often fail to connect the dots. What neuroscience makes clear is that what children observe or experience—especially in their earliest years—literally shapes the architecture of their brains. It influences how we feel, think, act, and even how we vote as adults.
Now, the good news is that we can change. Humans are an extraordinarily flexible species. However, as we know, meaningful change often takes time. Those who have undergone psychoanalysis, for example, will tell you that it requires significant effort and time to reprogram ourselves, if you will. So why not start early?
Fortunately, there has been a trend among pediatricians, early childhood educators, and Montessori practitioners to emphasize the importance of the first years of life. However, this work must continue. Parenting, dating, and numerous aspects of daily life require strong relational skills. These skills are shaped by whether relationships are oriented toward domination or toward partnership. Of course, it is always a matter of degree—where on the continuum a society or family falls.
Dominator societies tend to be very warlike. They devote enormous resources to military budgets—often euphemistically labelled “defence.”
Jacobsen: Where does partnership education emphasize peace? Not necessarily in the sense of advocating war or not, but in cultivating values that make war less appealing.
Eisler: Everywhere, to put it bluntly. Partnership education is not centered on memorizing the dates of wars or the names of the men who won or lost them. Instead, it fosters a more humane approach to learning. It is education for partnership rather than education for domination.
The Center for Partnership Systems is hosting a virtual summit called ‘Peace Begins at Home,’ which connects the dots—showing what neuroscience reveals: that it is in our homes where we first learn how to relate, through what we observe and what we experience. Unless we encounter partnership models along the way, we may never realize that partnership is even a possibility.
It is also important to learn about our prehistoric past, thousands of years ago, when societies were oriented more toward partnership than domination—particularly during the early Neolithic, the first agrarian age. However, history has often been taught as if it only consists of the last five to ten thousand years, which marked the violent shift toward domination.
For example, the Yamnaya people—well documented in archaeology and genetics—introduced warfare and practices that were far from peaceful. DNA studies show that when they migrated into Europe, they killed or displaced the local male populations. The Yamnaya genetic markers largely replaced those of the earlier inhabitants, such as in what archaeologist Marija Gimbutas called “Old Europe.”
We have also inherited our languages through this shift in domination. Nearly all European languages are Indo-European. Only a few exceptions remain—such as Basque, spoken in a small region of the Pyrenees between Spain and France, which is not an Indo-European language. It is no coincidence that the Mondragón cooperatives emerged in this region, where matrilineal and matrifocal traditions endured. However, these were not matriarchies.
The difference between matriarchy and patriarchy is only a matter of who controls. The genuine alternative to patriarchy is partnership.
In Tomorrow’s Children, I emphasize that partnership education also humanizes men. This is just as important as making women visible. It involves transforming rigid gender stereotypes for everyone.
I want to provide you with some examples. For instance, in developing the curriculum— and my book Tomorrow’s Children includes many lesson plans, most aimed at higher grades but adaptable for younger students—we challenge the conventional distinction between “art,” meaning what hangs in museums, and so-called “crafts,” such as tapestries, rugs, and weaving, is shown to be part of male-dominance. Traditionally, it was primarily women who created these, so it is no coincidence that such forms have been marginalized.
I love some of the art that hangs in museums, but let us face it, much of it idealizes domination. In Tomorrow’s Children, I include a lesson plan that highlights this distinction and showcases women artists, such as African weavers and pottery makers. These are not “mere crafts”—they are art. So it is also multicultural.
We also discuss concepts such as mass. It is often difficult for children to relate to such abstract ideas, especially children who have not been included in the standard curriculum—indigenous children, for example. However, so-called “indigenous societies” understood mass in profound ways. They constructed monuments aligned with the solstices, so that at specific times of year the sun would shine through with precision. However, we have acted as though Western science is the only form of knowledge on the planet.
In Tomorrow’s Children, I cite the historian of science David Noble, who wrote A World Without Women. Consider this: Western science emerged from a clerical, all-male, misogynist culture, shaped in large part by the rediscovery of ancient Greek texts. However, even Athens was already a mix—an uneasy blend of partnership and domination. It leaned heavily toward male dominance. Remember, the much-praised Athenian democracy excluded all women, all enslaved people (male and female), and all men who did not own property. Aristotle himself argued that women were inferior by nature.
So democracy in Athens was a peculiar adaptation of the concept. Moreover, as historian Robert Flacelière demonstrates in Daily Life in Greece at the Time of Pericles [sometimes cited as The Daily Life of the Greeks], the head of household had the legal right to decide whether a newborn would live. If a father deemed a child unwanted, the infant could be exposed, left outside to die. Some were “rescued” and enslaved; others perished.
This illustrates how deeply ingrained male power and fear were—not only in public life but also in the household. The Old Testament echoes this as well: Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac at God’s command is another example of male power, fear, and terror as normalized cultural elements.
As I point out in Tomorrow’s Children, and in my best-known book, The Chalice and the Blade, the Athenians even made it compulsory for everyone in society to watch plays that inculcated domination as the only viable model for society. However, within these same traditions, playwrights such as Aristophanes wrote of women’s peace movements in Athens. Is that not remarkable? However, we rarely connect such examples with our deeper prehistory.
Tomorrow’s Children was ahead of its time in drawing out these connections—between what we teach, the stories we tell, and the social systems we perpetuate. Tomorrow’s Children includes many examples drawn from across the humanities. Too often, when we think of the humanities, we imagine old white men from Western culture. However, that is not the humanities. Humanity is much broader and richer than that.
Some of the United Nations declarations on women and children should be part of our conception of the humanities. We need a way of including all of humanity, not just men, not just women. Domination systems rely on rigid gender stereotypes precisely so that one can be ranked above the other, while pretending that no one exists in between. However, throughout history and prehistory, there have always been people who did not fit neatly into these categories.
There are many such examples. So the goal is not to erase the positive aspects of American history, but to teach both the admirable and the terrible. For instance, we must include slavery and conquest. Christopher Columbus, once venerated, is now increasingly recognized in a more critical light. In Tomorrow’s Children, I use many illustrations and cartoons to help children think about these issues. One cartoon I particularly like shows conquistadors arriving on shore and proclaiming, “We discovered you,” while the indigenous people respond, “What do you mean? We discovered you arriving here.” It all depends on your paradigm, your worldview.
This does not mean we ignore the promising developments of the past centuries, especially the last three hundred years. However, we must connect the dots: every progressive social movement has challenged a tradition of domination. Think about it.
The Enlightenment’s “rights of man” movement challenged the notion that kings had a divinely ordained right to rule over their subjects. The women’s movement challenged the divinely ordained right of men to rule over women and children within their homes. The abolitionist movement, the civil rights movement, and today’s Black Lives Matter movement have all challenged the notion of a “superior race” ruling over an “inferior” one. The environmental movement challenges humanity’s supposed right to dominate nature.
That is what Tomorrow’s Children presents: that children—and humanity—do not have a viable future if the domination system continues to shape our policies and our attitudes. Between nuclear weapons and climate change, domination threatens to bring us to evolutionary collapse. We must shift toward partnership.
Jacobsen: Dominator models often produce bluster—a kind of defence mechanism of saving face when exposed for lying or being wrong. We see this in many prominent cases, including among tech industry leaders. What role does this have in reducing a society’s ability to make course corrections?
Eisler:
You know the answer: distraction. Marketing and overconsumption also serve as powerful distractions. Marketing for overconsumption has become a highly effective art form, and it is highly rewarded.
So, really, we are back to the four cornerstones: childhood and family, gender, economics, and story and language. So that children can have a future, we must recognize the barriers.
Gender, of course, is not only a woman’s issue but an organizing principle for families and for economic systems. The so-called “feminine” is consistently devalued. There is always money for weapons, but somehow there is never enough money for feeding and caring for children, for caregiving in general.
Our economic system rewards domination rather than care. And then there is story and language. Tomorrow’s Children addresses all of these—indeed, even before I formally articulated the framework of the four cornerstones, the book already grappled with them.
If we do not change education, we will continue to use it as an instrument to maintain domination. Education must instead become an instrument for accelerating the shift toward partnership.
Not an idealized, perfect partnership—but certainly something better than the horrendous inequalities we now see worldwide, as regression toward authoritarianism and domination in all spheres, including the family, childhood, and gender, continues.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Riane.
Eisler: Then we have more to look forward to. Take care of yourself, my friend.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/10
Charles Karel Bouley, professionally known as Karel, is a trailblazing LGBTQ broadcaster, entertainer, and activist. As half of the first openly gay duo in U.S. drive-time radio, he made history while shaping California law on LGBTQ wrongful death cases. Karel rose to prominence as the #1 talk show host on KFI AM 640 in Los Angeles and KGO AM 810 in San Francisco, later expanding to Free Speech TV and the Karel Cast podcast. His work spans journalism (HuffPost, The Advocate, Billboard), television (CNN, MSNBC), and music. A voting member of NARAS, GALECA, and SAG-AFTRA, Karel now lives and creates in Las Vegas.
In this inaugural Gay Week discussion with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Bouley reflects on Gavin Newsom’s controversial podcast comments on transgender athletes, arguing for nuanced, case-by-case debate rather than blanket bans or labelling allies as transphobes. He critiques GOP “obsessions” with LGBTQ issues, challenges proposed rollbacks under Project 2025, and highlights threats from Florida laws, cuts to HIV/PrEP funding, and federal executive orders undermining transgender rights.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Because trans issues are all over the news—RFK Jr. even mentioned it yesterday—we can certainly talk about this. Welcome to the inaugural session of this Gay Week with Carole Bouley. We will discuss Gavin Newsom today and may also touch on other topics. This is intended to be a weekly Spitfire chat for the Commem Project; hopefully, they will accept it, and we can make it a regular occurrence. We are starting with fire and brimstone. Gavin Newsom is a well-known political figure in the United States. I am speaking from a Canadian perspective, as you know my roots are Canadian.
Karel Bouley: My mother’s maiden name is Tremblay, and my father’s last name is Bouley. I currently have an application in Canada because my grandfather, Joseph Camille Tremblay, was born in Quebec. There may be a way that under Canadian law, I can apply for citizenship through my grandparents, so I am seeking Canadian citizenship based on my grandparents’ Canadian heritage, as both my paternal and maternal grandparents were Canadian. So we’ll see if I get it.
From my grandparents’ generation backwards, the great-great’s they were born in Canada. Five generations back, the family came from France, with ancestors settling in Quebec (the St. Lawrence River area) and then moving down into Massachusetts and Vermont. My lineage is Canadian, specifically French Canadian, on both sides.
Back to Gavin. Full disclosure: I know Gavin Newsom. We’ve met many timse or been on air together a few as well. I’ve also emceed a campaign event for him.
I first met Gavin over 20 years ago when we clashed on air. In February 2004, as mayor of San Francisco, he directed the city clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Roughly 4,000 licenses were issued before the California Supreme Court ordered a halt in March; in August 2004, the court voided those licenses. I told him on air at the time, “It’s all well and good that you wanted to prove a point, but you harmed us,” because eleven states passed constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. We disagreed for a few years on air until he finally asked me one day at an event, “When would it have been a good time to stand up for equality, Karel?” I had to admit he won that argument.
Well, lately, when LGBTQ organizations and commentators have discussed him as a potential presidential contender, there’s also been frustration from queer and especially trans communities. Including several posts on social media this week that got a lot of attention.
JACOBSON:: One flashpoint: his new podcast, “This Is Gavin Newsom,” launched March 6, 2025, with conservative activist Charlie Kirk as the first guest. In that episode, Newsom agreed with Kirk that allowing transgender girls and women to compete in girls’ and women’s sports is “deeply unfair,” a stance that drew sharp criticism from LGBTQ+ advocates and many Democrats. GLAAD also faulted the podcast’s early lineup for featuring multiple anti-trans voices without including any trans guests.
Bouley: When I saw this on social media I decided to make it a topic on The Karel Cast. My opinion was look, I happened to agree with him on one of the topics…and when I said that online and in my show I was immediately labeled a transphobe by my own community—a community I’ve spent 40 to 45 years championing. I’m literally on the wall at Harvey Milk Plaza for my contributions, and I’ve suffered discrimination myself, greatly and still do. Yet suddenly I’m being called a transphobe.” The topic of the show that day was: Does it have to be all or nothing? Because I wanted to talk about counting people out because you disagree with one statement or one policy, even though I, myself, find myself guilty of that in some cases.
But when can we have a debate about this? My niece changed my views on trans issues. I used to be the kind of person who said, “You can have whatever surgery you want, but ultimately underneath you’re an XX or XY chromosome, and that’s your biological determination.” I was wrong—dead wrong. First of all, there are variations like XXY or XYY. Second, I realized it’s not up to me to determine what makes a man or a woman. That is not my call. As she pointed out and I fully agreed. Viewpoint changed.
We have radical transphobes like J.K. Rowling saying, “No matter what you do, you’ll never be a woman.” I even have a friends in the gay community that have said to me the same thing—that trans women aren’t “real women.” Now, that is transphobia. However, when it comes to the specific discussion—trans people in sports—it becomes more complex.
First, we’re talking about a small portion of trans people, who themselves are less than 1% to 2% of the population in professional sports. It’s a fraction of a fraction that participates in competitive sports. Now, there are 396k people that identify as trans under the age of 24 in the United States, so while estimates put the number of trans athletes at under a thousand nationally professionally, any blanket ban could bar any of 396k from playing. So Gavin’s stance, at least as it came across in the podcasat—was that male-to-female transgender people should not compete in female sports. Now, I’m not going to speak for Gavin. I didn’t hear the full quote he made with Charlie Kirk, I’d have to go back and listen, but the gist was: if you were born male and then transition to female, you shouldn’t be in female sports. At least that’s what I get from all the comments online. That’s a raging debate right now. Even Trump has jumped into it.
Now I shared on The Karel Cast partial agreement. Personally, I believe there should be no blanket bans. Take Texas: after 16 tries its legislature is sending a bill to the governor that would ban trans people from using public bathrooms altogether. At all. So, I guess they’re supposed to pee in the bushes? And if you’re caught, they want to fine you $25,000. That’s not only absurd, but I believe it’s unconstitutional. And it is transphobia. So again, it’s nuance. To me, the athlete debate is a different matter.
I saw Martina Navratilova, an out lesbian, on a morning show in Europe saying she would not want to compete in tennis against women who had transitioned from male to female, because of the apparent advantage. She was talking about people who transitioned after puberty—meaning that if you were male, your arms and legs grew longer, and you became taller—so there is an advantage there. Pre-puberty, it’s a different situation…
Transitioning before puberty is entirely different. Because of these nuances, I don’t believe there should be a blanket rule. It should be decided athlete by athlete and sport by sport. For instance, female-to-male transitions: let’s say you’re a five-foot-five female who becomes a man. Why shouldn’t you compete in gymnastics? You’re not going to be any bigger than the other men—you’ll be the same size, the same weight, the same everything. So there’s no unfair advantage there.
In other sports, such as boxing or wrestling, however, if you are female but transitioned from male post puberty, you may have an unfair advantage. South Park actually parodied this a couple of seasons ago, and it was hysterical and I’m sure quite offensive to many as they often are. . That’s why I say it should be case by case. But this morning, I read on LGBTQ Nation about a country that created strict rules, and now they’re even excluding cisgender, heterosexual females from some sports simply because they’re “too big.” That illustrates how complex blanket policies can become.
I think individual sports should make these decisions, and there’s definitely room for dialogue. Shutting Gavin or anyone down and labelling them a transphobe is dangerous. He may have opinions that upset parts of the trans community, but he’s certainly not against transgender people, at least I have never heard him say he doesn’t like the “t” in “lgbbtq.”
Another thing that was being said that Gavin said was that he believes people shouldn’t transition until they’re 18 or even 25. I talked this through with some friends, and one of them said something powerful: “Why are you, or Gavin, or anyone even having that conversation?”
I asked what they meant. They said, “You believe in a woman’s right to choose, correct?” I said, of course. They continued: “And if that woman happens to be 13 or 14 years old—a victim of incest or rape, or pregnant at 13—you still support her right to choose?” I said, Yes, of course. They replied, “Then it’s the same thing with trans kids. If a trans child wants to transition pre-puberty, and their doctors support it, their psychologists support it, and their parents support it, why are you even in that conversation?”
That hit me hard. You can have an opinion, Scott. I can have an opinion. People can’t get tattooed until they’re 18—so there is law based on opinions about when people should do certain things. But ultimately, in matters this personal, it’s not up to us, and it shouldn’t be up to the government or the law.
Again, shutting anyone that has been an ally down as a transphobe is dangerous. But I think we all could use some education about the trans experience, to hear their stories, so we can better understand. We have clear medical evidence that outcomes are better when trans youth transition pre-puberty rather than after. I may not fully understand that, and from my perspective, waiting until 18 doesn’t seem like a problem—after all, you have to wait until 18 for a tattoo like I said—but that’s not my call to make. Why?
I’m not trans, I don’t have a trans family member, and I’m not a doctor. Therefore, I don’t get an opinion on whether or when someone should transition. Neither do you, nor anyone else outside of that process—and indeed not the government. There should be discussions. Trans people themselves should engage people like Gavin, or even myself, educate everyone about transitioning, on if there’s a compromise that all are happy with on sports.
Again, I don’t believe there should be a blanket ban on trans athletes. I know where I stand: it should be case by case. I hope that doesn’t make me transphobic. If Gavin advocates a complete ban as social media said he did this week, then that is something I hope he does more research on, more networking, meeting more trans athletes and having discussions. And I myself am reading and seeking out more information to see if my case-by-case option may be a wrong idea. And if I find it is, then I’ll change it. That’s what we need to do. If someone is an ally but has a misguided opinion, we need to engage them, educate them, give them a chance to be heard and even change if needed.
Meanwhile, the political right, especially MAGA Republicans, is obsessed with trans people. They brought it up even in the RFK Jr. hearings about health care and vaccines this week—topics that had nothing to do with trans issues. JD Vance weighed in, too, dragging trans people into the discussion.
Their obsession is bizarre. And honestly, I think it’s sexual. They’re repressing desires. Grindr crashes every time there’s a Republican convention. That’s not an accident. Take an example from just a couple of months ago: Laverne Cox—the trans actress and influencer who rose to prominence on Orange Is The New Black—faced backlash when it came out that she had been dating a MAGA-supporting, New York police officer for three years. Her trans followers couldn’t believe she was “sleeping with the enemy,” someone aligned with people pushing anti-trans policies every day. She was “cancelled” by many in her own community.
I wouldn’t date someone from MAGA. I certainly wouldn’t date someone transphobic. But she did, and she got in trouble for it. And that shows you something: if MAGA people are so dead-set against trans folks, why is a MAGA cop dating one of the most famous trans women in the world? It proves they’re obsessed with trans people.
It’s everywhere. I’m looking at a dozen LGBTQ headlines right now, all focused on trans people and trans rights. They’ve become the new punching bag, maybe because they’re a small portion of the population. I’m here to defend them, and others are too.
But that being said, Google was in the news today for something disturbing: parents of trans kids searching for resources to support their children were being directed to conversion therapy sites. Conversion therapy is torture. It doesn’t work, and it harms people. Yet people are finding that Google search results are still offering links to it. That’s not what families want; that’s not what they’re asking for. And that’s where we are today.
Google is serving that up to them.
Jacobsen: Some people I know in different areas will use a VPN and set it to another, more evidence-based country, and then the Google search results adjust accordingly. That’s one more thing.
Bouley: And this week, you had Rand Paul saying about a CDC staff member who was fired that it was “good,” because—this is his quote—“his lifestyle made him unfit to be in government.” The staffer was gay. The only person in that conversation unfit to be in government is Rand Paul. The notion that a caricature of a politician would denounce someone solely for being gay, someone working in public health, takes us back to the 1980s. And that’s the same era they’re dragging us toward by cutting HIV funding.
This week, they announced more cuts to HIV programs, both worldwide and here in the United States. There are even rumours they’re preparing to cut coverage for PrEP therapy. We know PrEP has dramatically reduced the spread of HIV/AIDS. I’ll be honest: I don’t personally take PrEP, and I disagree with it for myself, but I’m glad it exists. My late husband was HIV positive. I never contracted HIV. Safe sex works. But if you want to take a drug that may have side effects, go ahead.
Especially in underdeveloped nations, PrEP is a significant resource, and I fully support its availability there. In the U.S., wear a condom—that’s my view. Ultimately, it’s a matter of freedom of choice. If you want to take PrEP, take it. And yes, it should be covered, because if someone contracts HIV, it costs the healthcare system far more than preventive medication. Covering PrEP is cost-effective and humane. Trump and his allies want to cut it.
That’s in the news this week, too: they’re talking about cutting funding for PrEP under the Affordable Care Act. It was covered under Obamacare, reaffirmed under Biden when it was challenged in court, and the courts ruled it must be covered. Now conservatives are trying to find a way around that, to strip it away. This is part of Project 2025—rolling back rights in every way possible.
We also know that when the Supreme Court reconvenes, there’s a case pending that could challenge same-sex marriage. It stems from Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses even after being ordered to. She’s pushing her case all the way to the Supreme Court. If they rule in her favour, it could effectively undo Obergefell v. Hodges, the decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. There’s even talk in some circles of revisiting Loving v. Virginia, which would mean undoing interracial marriage.
So there’s been a lot of bad LGBTQ news this week. On top of that, the gay community is alienating an ally in Gavin Newsom because they perceive him as transphobic. Some of his comments were transphobic, I’ll grant that, but he needs education, not condemnation. Trans athletes in sports is a genuinely complex issue, and the sporting community itself should come up with the solution. Hopefully, it won’t be a blanket ban but a case-by-case approach.
Jacobsen: Then there’s Florida. They’re deeply entrenched in the “war on woke.” They’re even targeting symbolic gestures—like rainbow-colored crosswalks. I believe there’s now a threat to put people in jail for using chalk to recolor a sidewalk outside a memorial where over 50 LGBTQ people were murdered at Pulse nightclub in Orlando.
Bouley: Florida is a hateful state. I was born in Miami, but I left. Remember when we talked about this before? I said I don’t need pride flags flying at government offices; I need equal rights. One of the most hateful things Florida did this week wasn’t painting a sidewalk but was planningdf to get rid of vaccine mandates, so children or adults would no longer be required to take vaccines.
That’s a far bigger issue than rainbow sidewalks. Rainbow sidewalks are a distraction from the fact that they’re literally trying to endanger lives. Still, the idea that you could go to jail for chalking a rainbow on a sidewalk is absurd. And let’s be clear: this is not a “war on woke.” Woke is not a bad word. I’d much rather be awake than asleep, coherent than in a coma.
If “woke” means being accepting, loving, diverse, equitable, inclusive—if it means being educated, able to read, able to think critically—I’ll take it. So when they say they’re fighting a war on woke, what they’re really fighting is a war on intelligence, compassion, and empathy—all the qualities that make us decent human beings.
The notion that a rainbow sidewalk is somehow offensive is ridiculous. I don’t need rainbow sidewalks, but I don’t mind them either. They’re a nice way of saying, “We care that you’re in our community.” Personally, I worry more about getting run over on the sidewalk—living in Las Vegas, where the red you see on sidewalks is too often blood.
But this is not a war on “woke.” It’s a war on gay people. To call it anything else is dishonest. They’re literally trying to shove us back into a pink closet, and we’re not going to go. That upsets them, so they’re doing everything they can to erase gay culture from their culture. It’s all part of Project 2025, and Ron DeSantis is more than willing to lead the way.
It’s sad. And it’s happening outside a nightclub where more than 50 LGBTQ people were slaughtered at Pulse in Orlando. That makes it even more insulting. Not that Florida could look much worse, but this makes them look worse still—so petty and bigoted that a painted crosswalk is their “line in the sand.”
Meanwhile, when a school shooter turned out to be trans, everyone on the right rushed to declare, “See? They’re mentally ill.” First of all, if you keep kicking any community hard enough, eventually someone is going to snap. They keep kicking the trans community, and yes, one nut fell out.
But let’s talk numbers. Of the 258 mass shooting deaths in the U.S. so far this year, only two involved a trans shooter. The other 254 were caused overwhelmingly by straight, cisgender white men with guns—many of them extremists or MAGA supporters or right-leaning.
So before anyone talks about the “mental illness of trans people,” they should be talking about the mental illness of straight white men who often cling to a right-wing ideology. They’re the ones committing mass shootings, not the trans or gay community. To center the debate around one trans shooter, while ignoring the hundreds of deaths caused by white cis men, is insulting, ludicrous, and ignorant—which pretty much sums up their party.
Jacobsen: I’m not sure if this is updated or not, but Executive Order 14168, issued January 20, 2025, withdrew federal recognition of transgender identity. It banned gender self-ID on government documents, eliminated federal funding for gender-affirming care, and enshrined a rigid male/female binary across agency materials. Are there any updates you’re aware of?
Bouley: They’re going to tie it up in court. But now, the Department of Justice is also trying to push a “trans gun ban,” to bar trans people from buying guns because of one mass shooting. Out of hundreds of mass shootings, most carried out by straight cisgender men, they’ve never moved to ban them from buying guns. But now, suddenly, they’re targeting trans people. That shows how stupid and ridiculous this party is.
And that executive order you mentioned? It’s unconstitutional. Whether they like it or not, the Constitution covers trans people, gay people, bi people, lesbians, and queer people. We are covered by it. I know they hate that. Trump, MAGA, Republicans—they’ve hated my entire life, the fact that when our founders wrote about “all men are created equal,” it meant me too. They hate that, but it does.
If the courts interpret the law correctly, they will not allow Trump’s bans to stand. Can they cut funding? Sure. We’ve talked about this with Pride festivals. Yes, they can cut funding. Will that hurt the trans community? Absolutely. But they don’t care. They act like trans people aren’t Americans. But they are. I’m an American. Trans people are Americans. They deserve the same rights and privileges as every other American.
If any person can walk in off the street and buy a gun, then trans people should be able to do the same. If any other American can receive government funding for programs, then gay and trans Americans should also be able to receive funding. Singling us out suggests we’re not American. And they’d love for us to just accept that. But we are Americans, and the Constitution covers us.
Right now, that executive order is being picked apart by the courts to see if it can hold up. And Trump keeps losing in the courts—he lost two more cases this week alone. His tariffs were ruled unconstitutional.
Jacobsen: His funding cuts were also found to violate World Trade Organization rules.
Bouley: He’s losing over and over. So whether this stands or falls will depend on the judges. Meanwhile, there’s a transgender competitor on American Ninja Warrior. And he’s fantastic. You’d never even know he was trans unless he told you.
Jacobsen: Honestly, some of the hottest guys on dating apps are trans.
Bouley: It’s true. I’ve cruised more than a few guys and later found out they were trans. And you know what? I don’t care. But the right is so preoccupied that yesterday Tucker Carlson was in the news, saying Pete Buttigieg is a “fake gay” and that he wants to ask him specific questions about gay sex. Tucker needs to just rent some porn.
Tucker Carlson sounds like Stanley Kubrick directing Eyes Wide Shut. He wants to sit there like an audience member asking Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman about their sex life—except now it’s Pete Buttigieg he’s fixated on. What does he want to ask? If Pete is a top or a bottom, or if he “rims Chasten.” What? What is a “fake gay,” anyway? By the way, you can be gay and celibate. Gay is not about sex; it’s about orientation. The fact that Tucker keeps tying homosexuality purely to sex proves how little he knows—and how much of a perv he is.
Jacobsen: What’s the other item? Oh, right—Senate Bill 8 in Texas, the one banning trans people from using bathrooms.
Bouley: Here’s what I say: they should just start going in front of the bathrooms. Literally, take a dump outside the door. Make the point. By the way, I couldn’t find any documented case of a woman being molested in a bathroom by a trans woman. None. I also couldn’t find any documented case of a man being harassed in a male bathroom by a female-to-male trans person. What I did find were plenty of cases of women being assaulted in bathrooms by cisgender men.
And I found many, many cases of straight men being arrested in bathrooms for having gay sex. In fact, statistics show that a large percentage of men arrested for bathroom sex identify as heterosexual. So what exactly are they afraid of when it comes to trans people in bathrooms? I can’t find any evidence of danger—other than, at worst, a smelly poop.
Jacobsen: Last item: the Trump administration is demanding that 40 states, D.C., and five territories strip so-called “gender ideology” from sex ed curricula. Canada has reasonably evidence-based sex ed. But when American politicians talk about “gender ideology,” what do they mean?
Bouley: Basically, “gay.” They collapse everything into one: gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer. They don’t understand nuance.
Even here in Nevada, parents can opt out of LGBTQ-inclusive curricula for their kids. When I was in school, I had sex ed. In college, sure, people even came in to talk about things like bondage. In high school, we just got the basics—straight, gay, fetishes, all of it. And you know what? We survived. All my classmates survived.
But conservatives use “gender ideology” as a dog whistle. To them, it just means “gay,” and they want it erased. They don’t want Stonewall taught, they don’t want the history of the gay rights movement taught, and they don’t want any acknowledgment of LGBTQ people in the classroom. They want us erased, as if we don’t exist.
We all know Republicans control what’s in schools. Do you know where most of our textbooks are printed? Texas. A majority of school textbooks come from Texas. Essentially, what the Texas school boards decide ultimately determines the curriculum for the rest of the country. That’s why it’s so easy to erase LGBTQ people from classrooms—because publishers in Texas aren’t going to fight to keep it in.
Jacobsen: Do you have any final thoughts for this week?
Bouley: Other than this, we’ve seen all of this before. We’ve seen rollbacks in gay rights before—under Reagan, under Bush. But I do know that the current opinion polls in the U.S., taken just last week, show 64% approval of same-sex marriage. And 71% of people surveyed said they don’t care about gay or trans issues; they have bigger things to worry about.
So why is the administration pushing a trans gun ban, bathroom bans, and other wedge issues? Because they’re distractions from the fact that the Epstein files haven’t been released, and the president, a known sexual predator, is probably in them. It’s a distraction from the fact that last week, six billion people were represented in a meeting—India, Russia, China, North Korea, and others. Modi was there, Kim Jong-un was there. The United States was not.
And if you want to talk about a crisis, that’s one. Every one of those countries punishes LGBTQ people and makes it illegal to be gay. That meeting should have alarmed everyone, including gay people, because we won’t win that trade war—and if it ever comes to a real war, we won’t win that either. Yet no one covered that meeting. It was a terrible meeting for gay rights and for human rights in general. We’ve seen this pendulum before. It swung toward love, peace, acceptance—Lady Gaga and rainbows—and now it’s swinging back the other way. We’ll see where it lands.
Jacobsen: Karel, thank you very much for your time today. I’ll see you next week.
Bouley: Thank you, Scott. I’m going to get that clock away from you sooner or later. Cheers—though I still think it makes a fabulous headdress for you.
Jacobsen: I prefer the clock.
Bouley: What a headdress it would make..
Jacobsen: Thank you. All right, we’ll talk to you next week.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/10
Jordan J. Edwards (He/Him/His) is the Deputy Director at The Normal Anomaly Initiative. He serves the Black, queer-plus community by expanding opportunities for sustainable employment and ensuring linkage to care services for people living with HIV and for those interested in PrEP. Jordan’s advocacy extends well beyond The Normal Anomaly. He is a Board Member of Montrose Grace Place, participates in the national Greater Than HIV campaign, and was recognized as a 2024 White House Rising Leader.
In this interview with Scott Douglas Jacobsen, Edwards talks about the challenges facing Black, queer-led organizations amid political backlash and declining corporate support. Edwards discusses how the rollback of funding, such as Target’s retreat on Pride initiatives, reveals both fragility and the presence of authentic allies. He highlights the strain on mental health, organizational sustainability, and generational gaps in advocacy strategies. Drawing on his experiences with The Normal Anomaly and national campaigns, Edwards emphasizes the importance of coalition-building, private donor engagement, and intergenerational learning in sustaining LGBTQ communities during turbulent times.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: It is helpful to see who truly stands with you. Some people have changed their public language, but they continue to act and provide support in meaningful ways. They step back from visible messaging to avoid political backlash, but still contribute through mini-grants or other funding sources. From what I observe, the visible support is what gets attacked, so that part shifts. However, the real question is: if you are not going to support me publicly, are you then directing funding to grassroots organizations that sustain the LGBTQ community and allow us to survive?
In the current political climate, the networks are very diverse—you have people from many different backgrounds. The political environment allows some to speak out more or less, depending on the moment. Right now, we are experiencing a wave of anti-LBGTQ sentiment. What has the political backlash looked like? Specifically, how has the rollback or reduction of corporate funding and support emboldened opponents?
Jordan Edwards: I have been thinking about this in relation to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). My intersectionality as a Black and queer person allows me to see both sides. Often, we discuss how the LGBTQ community feels and how the Black community feels, but being both Black and queer puts me in a position where neither community consistently supports the other. That creates a difficult tension. For example, when Target scaled back its LGBTQ Pride merchandise in 2023 after organized backlash, it became clear that corporations can retreat under pressure. While Target’s CEO did not step down at that time, the company’s actions highlighted the fragility of corporate support. However, these moments also reveal who truly supports us and what forms of change are possible. This gives us hope as a community. If we come together, identify our allies, and support them, we can make a difference. Many people redirected their support, choosing other corporations like Costco instead of Sam’s Club, or moving away from Target to companies that maintained their commitments. By finding where the real support lies, we can drive meaningful change.
Jacobsen: Even with corporations pulling back, what about the longstanding issue of tension between Black and queer communities, especially for people living at both intersections? Did the reduction in corporate funding and public support affect that dynamic in any way, or has it remained largely the same?
Edwards: It did. The corporate withdrawal of funding did impact our communities and had some effect on our organization. I work at The Normal Anomaly Initiative, which is a Black, queer-led organization. We lost federal funding from the CDC, but in terms of corporate funding, what we noticed was that during Pride Month, corporations like Shell or Chevron—who had historically supported us—still had departments that were able to provide funding. We maintained those relationships with individuals within corporations who consistently support the LGBTQ community. That is how we have continued to engage. I know some organizations have not been able to sustain that type of impact, but that has been our experience.
Jacobsen: Was much of the original corporate support financial because they saw it as a market opportunity, in other words?
Edwards: Yes, and I would say that some corporations approach us as a way to check multiple boxes, whether that is race, gender, or sexuality. However, we have been intentional in building relationships that reveal who is genuinely for us and who will actually support us. That way, we can ensure that our partnerships truly serve our community. Because if we align with organizations that are not authentically supportive, our community will rightly ask, “How can we trust you? How can we work with you?” That is something we have been cautious about.
Jacobsen: Are there comparable cases in other advanced industrial societies? Everyone is aware of the intense backlash against LGBTQ rights in some countries—through politics or legislation—but what about societies that have the resources and institutions to fight back?
Edwards: That is a good question. I recently had a conversation about the importance of collaboration with organizations that not only provide financial support but also stand publicly with us. The question becomes: are you actively promoting the LGBTQ community, or do you lack diversity within your own team? That distinction matters. While I do not have a complete answer, the key is to evaluate whether the backing extends beyond financial support to include structural support and representation.
Jacobsen: Mental health is always a struggle, especially for people who already feel marginalized in their society. Have you seen reports of community members struggling more with mental health when there is less visibility and fewer public signals of support? For example, some events may still happen, but without major headliners or the same level of visibility.
Edwards: Yes—mental health has absolutely been affected. Members of my team have been talking more about anxiety and the importance of checking in with each other. We have seen an increased need for therapy sessions and for support in navigating daily life. For the community as a whole, the best way I can describe it is like PTSD.
You are already fighting for basic recognition in spaces that often are not built for you, and then every time you turn on the TV or hear news out of the White House, it feels like something else is coming against you. That constant anticipation has taken a toll on mental health. Regarding events without sure headliners, we host a music festival and have had discussions about the type of headliners and sponsors we can attract.
Some of our sponsors have included pharmaceutical companies such as Gilead and ViiV Healthcare. However, when it comes to large corporations like Amazon or Target, we have not engaged with them directly as an organization—only as individual community members navigating consumer spaces.
Jacobsen: I was recently interviewing someone in a different context—refugees who had fled war zones. Many of them had trained in professions like journalism, but now they are driving for Uber or working as plumbers or construction workers. They lost not just jobs but their professional identity and sense of purpose, which is deeply traumatizing.
Obviously, it is not the same as war trauma, but I wonder if there is a parallel. When funding declines, people who once assumed support would be there often find themselves forced into survival jobs. Leaders of organizations and events, lacking stable funding, often drop out of advocacy altogether and transition into unrelated work to survive. Have you seen this happen in the past year?
Edwards: Absolutely, I have. Many organizations do not know how to pivot. They receive funding and build their programs entirely around what funders want, instead of centring on what they actually do well. When that specific funding disappears, they cannot adapt. For example, if an organization were entirely dependent on corporate funding for HIV testing or education, and that funding were to dry up, but testing and education were never their strengths, they would have no foundation to pivot from. I have seen organizations attempt to shift from testing to mental health initiatives or building community cohorts in order to survive. Some individuals have turned to side work—such as driving for Uber or taking up trades—because the funding they were receiving was never enough to support a living in the first place. This has only increased. Many organizations are worried about closing their doors because they lack the sustainability to pay salaries and wages. Moreover, that instability impacts both the organizations and the communities they serve, especially since many of the staff are themselves members of the communities most affected.
Jacobsen: In another interview in this series, someone in their 60s pointed out that gay, queer, and Black men have historically organized outside of mainstream spaces through grassroots work. They basically said, “We did it ourselves.” Perhaps it was not on the level of selling lemonade at a lemonade stand, but it was about self-reliance. For those who are not over 60 and who have lived in the relative equality created by that earlier generation, this seems to be their first major wake-up call. Is that the general sense being discussed?
Edwards: Yes, there is definitely a transgenerational gap. Individuals in their 50s and 60s possess a deep well of knowledge, having lived through these struggles before. Then there is my generation—I am 34—where many of us are asking, “What do we do now? How do we move? How do we create change?”
We should have been engaging with the older generation already to learn what worked and what did not, so we could build a through line and understand how to reach our goals. My generation relies heavily on technology and social media as our tools of engagement. However, when fundraising language puts a target on us, how do we still engage effectively?
Many people in my generation lack knowledge on how to build coalitions or networks offline, within smaller silos, or by reaching out to private donors. Wealthy individuals are willing to give, but they cannot always do so publicly due to their corporate positions. Think of people like Tim Cook or Sam Altman—reach out and connect with them. A lot of this work requires us to be in those rooms.
Jacobsen: Any final thoughts or comments?
Edwards: Yes. Recently, I was on stage at a conference with funders, including representatives from Gilead Sciences and the Elton John Foundation, alongside another individual who is a notable mogul. What they all said was, “We have been here before.” We are constantly in this cycle: we build something, it gets stripped away, and then we have to fight to rebuild.
Moreover, while that is discouraging, the key point raised was: why are we struggling separately instead of coming together to sustain ourselves? That message is vital. Collaboration and unity are among the most crucial ways we will survive the next three years.
Jacobsen: Thank you very much, Jordan.
Edwards: All received. Excellent—we will be in touch. Thank you.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/09
Said Najib Asil is the Founder and Executive Director of the Free Speech Centre, a Toronto-based independent nonprofit advocating for exiled journalists, press freedom, and the rights of media professionals. Prior to that, he led the Current Affairs department at TOLOnews, Afghanistan’s largest news network before the fall of Kabul. Asil was awarded a fellowship at CBC News through the JHR (Journalism and Human Rights) program from September 2022 to September 2023. With nearly two decades of journalism experience, he has contributed to BBC World News, France 24, NPR, and The Walrus.
In this interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Asil. Asil reflects on his decade with TOLOnews before the fall of Kabul in 2021 and details the Free Speech Centre’s efforts to support Afghan journalists inside Afghanistan and in exile across Canada, the U.S., and Europe. He emphasizes advocacy, training, and mental health programs, while also addressing the economic and professional struggles faced by displaced media workers. The conversation highlights resilience, forced migration, and the challenges of resettlement.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: All right, once more, we are here with the wonderful Said Najib Asil. He is now more established in Canada and continues to build various initiatives. Let me confirm a couple of things with you. You founded the Free Speech Centre. You are also part of the board of the Canadian Association of Journalists, Toronto chapter. What else?
Said Najib Asil: That is it. I also work as a freelancer.
Jacobsen: As a clarification, TOLOnews—your original organization—does it still operate in any capacity that you are involved with, even though it is based in a different country?
Asil: Yes, TOLOnews is still operating and remains Afghanistan’s largest news channel. I worked there for more than a decade in different positions before the fall of Kabul in August 2021. Since then, I have not been working with them.
Jacobsen: Now, what are the logistical needs of the Free Speech Centre today? Moreover, how do you envision its work for the rest of this year and into 2026?
Asil: Over the past two years, the Free Speech Centre, based on its mission, vision, and activities, has been engaged in three main areas. We are connected with journalists inside Afghanistan, as well as working with journalists in the region, including Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey. On a broader scale, we also organize events and conferences in Toronto, sharing insights into the media sector, current developments in Afghanistan, emerging narratives, and the challenges facing exiled media. We discuss these issues in Canada and with our partners in the United States.
Within Afghanistan, we are working with journalists in over 20 provinces. All of our activities, both inside and outside the country, are carried out voluntarily. Journalists inside Afghanistan share reports, documents, and updates about their cities and provinces, covering issues related to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and the restrictions imposed on the media. We document every single case happening daily. We monitor the state of the media in the country, including the new policies and changes imposed by the Taliban, from laws to other regulations.
At the same time, we advocate on behalf of journalists, particularly those who remain in Afghanistan. Our colleagues in Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey also continue to require our support. We collaborate with organizations such as Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and International Media Support (IMS), among others, to facilitate long-term resettlement in European countries. Through the Free Speech Centre, we organize conferences, host Zoom meetings, and write narratives on their behalf.
They are sharing their documents, and we provide recommendations and support letters to those organizations when references are needed. This is part of our advocacy work at the Free Speech Centre. In Canada, as well as with some of our volunteer journalist colleagues in the U.S., we are working to share the realities of the media sector over the past four years in Afghanistan, as well as the ongoing struggles. More than 7,000 journalists have left the country and are now residing in North America, Europe, and other regions. The reality of life in these countries is complex, and we are organizing events, conferences, and networking opportunities to address this complexity. For those still struggling with mental health issues and trauma, we organize webinars to help connect them with Canadian media organizations, so they can learn more and adapt. We are also providing training programs. These are part of our activities and mission at the Free Speech Centre from last year to the present.
Jacobsen: Every organization has resource limits. Many organizations, for instance, base their work around support groups for people who have suffered in various ways. They may have different experiences but similar traumas and backgrounds, which allows them to share and support each other. If you provide a space—such as forums or Zoom meetings—where they can converse and share their stories, it can be a means of coping. Is that a possibility through your center, or perhaps in collaboration with another organization?
Asil: Yes, it is possible, and it is essential for journalists. Journalists living in exile, as well as those still in Afghanistan, particularly women journalists, face enormous struggles. We understand the daily struggles of women journalists. In Europe and North America, Afghan journalists who have resettled over the past two to three years continue to face challenges. Meanwhile, women inside Afghanistan are no longer allowed to work in the media industry; they have been silenced and confined to their homes. They are struggling with mental health issues and trauma. To address this, we organize programs through Zoom and other platforms. We connect 20 to 30 journalists from various parts of the world, including Afghan journalists, and collaborate with universities and professors specializing in mental health. They share their knowledge, guidance, and strategies to help journalists survive and cope with their circumstances.
Jacobsen: I remember speaking with a Kurdish colleague many years ago about resettlement, before you and I even met. I said that people come to a new country out of necessity—they do not want to leave their homeland—but eventually, they resettle. He responded gently, but rhetorically: “Do they?” That struck me as a good question. From his experience, it seemed that a new place does not necessarily feel like home, even after many years have passed. What is your sense of the character of being forced by necessity out of one’s homeland—resettling, and the psychological process involved in that?
Asil: Right, so from two perspectives. First, for those who want to leave their countries and build a new life elsewhere, that is an entirely different case. However, for us, especially Afghan journalists, it was different. For me and hundreds of friends and colleagues, we already had jobs, good opportunities, and were able to work for our people inside Afghanistan. We continued in this way. We travelled to different parts of the world, but we always returned home to stay and work, because we knew how important it was to be journalists within our own country.
After August 2021, everything changed. There was no longer space for journalists, activists, women, or professors. These people had to leave the country. I never wanted to live in Toronto or anywhere else—I never expected it—but this is what happened. This is the reality. Moreover, this reality is complicated for journalists, activists, and others who were forced to leave their country because of war or oppression.
For us as journalists, it is tough. Many worked in Afghanistan for more than two decades. Some were anchors presenting the 6 p.m. news bulletin to over 20 million Afghans daily. In Canada and other countries, some individuals are working for Uber or in the construction industry. If we look deeply into their lives, it is a constant struggle—working to pay bills at the end of the month. Based on these realities, I would say it is tough to find yourself in a new country. It takes time to reestablish your life, to figure out how to continue, and to pursue the professional dreams you once had. Sometimes you are not allowed the chance to continue in your profession. This is the reality for Afghan journalists who have been exiled.
Jacobsen: What stories have struck you the most of those who have come to a new country and have managed to thrive?
Asil: I know many journalists, especially over the past three years in Canada, particularly in Toronto. I truly appreciate the support of the JHR (Journalists for Human Rights), which, following 2021, offered Afghan journalists a one-year fellowship program. Approximately 10 Afghan journalists received this opportunity and collaborated with various media organizations. I completed my fellowship at CBC, while my friends and colleagues worked at outlets such as CBC, CTV, the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail, and others for a year.
However, after the year ended, because the media market—especially in Toronto—is so saturated, it was tough to secure permanent positions. I am still in touch with most of them, and nearly all of them were unable to secure jobs in Canadian media after completing their fellowships. This is even though many of them had worked with major international media organizations, such as The Wall Street Journal and BBC World News, and were well-known journalists across Afghanistan and Central Asia. It shows how hard it is for them, even with strong professional backgrounds, to continue their careers here.
At the same time, living expenses—especially in a city like Toronto—make it extremely difficult for journalists to survive, particularly for families of five or six. This is the new reality. Rent, utilities, food, and bills are all very costly. As a result, many journalists have transitioned into other types of work. Some have enrolled in certificate programs to become mechanics or enter trades through programs like Hi-Work. When I see these journalists daily, it is hard because they don’t want to be driving Uber or doing jobs outside their profession. However, this is the reality they are continuing with now.
Jacobsen: Said, Thank you so much for your time today. I appreciate it.
Asil: I appreciate it as well, thank you so much.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/08
Irina Tsukerman is a human rights and national security attorney based in New York and Connecticut. She earned her Bachelor of Arts in National and Intercultural Studies and Middle East Studies from Fordham University in 2006, followed by a Juris Doctor from Fordham University School of Law in 2009. She operates a boutique national security law practice. She serves as President of Scarab Rising, Inc., a media and security strategic advisory firm. Additionally, she is the Editor-in-Chief of The Washington Outsider, which focuses on foreign policy, geopolitics, security, and human rights. She is actively involved in several professional organizations, including the American Bar Association’s Energy, Environment, and Science and Technology Sections, where she serves as Program Vice Chair in the Oil and Gas Committee. She is also a member of the New York City Bar Association. She serves on the Middle East and North Africa Affairs Committee and affiliates with the Foreign and Comparative Law Committee.
Tsukerman views U.S. visa revocations for PA/PLO officials and suspension of a Gaza childcare program as charged steps complicating any PA role in post-Hamas Gaza. In South Korea, she links indictments to entrenched corruption undermining public trust. In South Africa, she doubts a G20 inequality study will overcome ANC cronyism. Thailand’s ouster of Paetongtarn Shinawatra signals elite power struggles. She praises UAE prodigy Roudha Al Serkal’s WGM title as a significant step forward. Tsukerman condemns Russia’s occupation tactics in Zaporizhzhia and the Taliban’s escalating repression of Afghan women.
Interview conducted August 29, 2025.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So we are back here with Everywhere Insiders, a mix of Associated Press and Reuters, today. The U.S. State Department, under Secretary of State Antony Blinken, has revoked the visas of several Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization officials ahead of a high-level meeting at the UN General Assembly. The groups previously maintained representatives in the United States.
The State Department has also suspended a program that allowed some injured Palestinian children from Gaza to come to the U.S. for medical treatment. This decision reportedly followed political pressure from conservative voices on social media. It is unclear whether Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas himself will be affected by these visa restrictions. Any thoughts?
Irina Tsukerman: So far, the administration has not declared Abbas persona non grata, and it would not be easy to do so for the head of the Palestinian Authority. It is, however, noteworthy that this step was taken even as discussions continue about who might govern Gaza if Israel succeeds in removing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority has been floated as a possible candidate.
Reports indicate that Egypt has been training Palestinian security forces for a potential role in Gaza’s administration and post-conflict stabilization. Those would be personnel from the West Bank working in coordination with the Palestinian Authority. Essentially, the U.S. move signals that at least some members of the PA and PLO are viewed as problematic, citing reasons such as corruption, prior or ongoing support for terrorism, or human rights abuses. However, the administration has not provided detailed evidence publicly. If alternative leadership is being considered for Gaza, it has not been made clear who those figures would be. Israel and the UAE have discussed potential candidates, but no confirmation has been made.
This step by Washington complicates the prospect of the Palestinian Authority taking on a leadership role in Gaza. It makes U.S. diplomatic involvement in such an arrangement more awkward, given that several PA-linked officials have now been sanctioned.
On the medical program, Democrats in Congress are pressing for its reinstatement. Conservatives have raised concerns for several reasons. First, they object in principle to foreign nationals receiving medical care in the U.S. funded through American programs or resources. Second, they argue that hospitals in Israel, Egypt, or closer regional facilities are better positioned to treat most injuries, with only highly complex cases requiring U.S. expertise.
Third, conservatives worry that family members accompanying injured children could include individuals with ties to Hamas, who might overstay their visas or cause security issues in the U.S. The concern is that the medical program could be exploited as a means of entry under pretenses.
Historically, most Palestinian children in need of specialized care have been treated in Israeli hospitals, in the West Bank, or in countries like Egypt and Jordan, with some also going to Europe or the Gulf states. Relatively few cases involved travel to the U.S., particularly after restrictions on movement in and out of Gaza tightened in recent years.
Nevertheless, the program existed, and its suspension has become a public controversy. Even if it was rarely used, the fact that it has now been explicitly revoked has elevated it into the headlines.
Moreover, it is not the fact of how many people were actually utilizing it. However, the fact that it existed and is now being shut down—presumably as a political measure—is causing the outcry. If there were zero children actually coming to the U.S. and it was quietly defunded for that reason, I do not think anyone would have even noticed. However, because it was made into a public gesture, I think that is part of the reason for the pushback, at least theoretically. People are saying that it is not a good look because the kids have no involvement in any combat-related activities and, therefore, should not be penalized for any potential violations by their family members.
Jacobsen: The wife of South Korea’s former president was indicted Friday as part of investigations into his administration in an attempt to overcome opposition by declaring martial law. Yoon Suk-yeol is the jailed ex-president. The historical context is that South Korea has had several political crises involving corruption, bribery, and abuse of authority. However, there was no successful imposition of martial law by Yoon Suk-yeol. Any thoughts on this continuing saga?
Tsukerman: Yes. The key issue here is that allegations of corruption in South Korea—whether involving financial misconduct, bribery, or influence peddling—have repeatedly eroded public trust in leadership. Past leaders have sometimes used claims of national security threats or foreign interference to justify strong measures; however, these claims have not always been substantiated.
In this case, the underlying driver is corruption, involving not only financial misconduct by leaders themselves but also by their close associates and family members. Attempts to cover up such wrongdoing by framing it as a national security issue can backfire, causing more long-term damage to South Korea’s institutions and public confidence than if the leader had resigned outright.
What is interesting is that subsequent administrations have taken a different tack, especially in foreign policy. Some leaders have sought a more dovish approach toward North Korea, engaging in dialogue and peace overtures, even though Pyongyang has often rejected them. South Korea has demonstrated openness to supporting U.S.-led diplomatic initiatives, as seen when former President Donald Trump pursued meetings with Kim Jong-un.
So, while corruption scandals weaken domestic governance, they also intersect with South Korea’s broader security posture, raising the question of whether short-term political survival tactics have created greater instability than doing nothing at all.
Jacobsen: South Africa has commissioned an inequality report for the G20 summit, announced on Thursday, August 28. South Africa has appointed American Nobel Prize–winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who is widely respected, to lead a group of six experts in compiling the report and presenting it to world leaders.
Kenya-based nonprofit Oxfam, which regularly releases reports on wealth inequality, stated in June that the wealth of the wealthiest 1% has surged by $33.9 trillion since 2015—an amount they argue could eliminate global poverty 22 times over. I am not familiar with the precise definition of poverty that Oxfam uses. South Africa itself is ranked as one of the most unequal countries in the world. Any thoughts on this?
Tsukerman: I do think there is value in studying inequality, but given the level of corruption within the African National Congress (ANC) and the South African government more broadly, I am not sure whether such a study will be conducted fairly or provide real insight into the causes of the current situation.
The root causes of inequality in South Africa are self-evident. A small minority controls vast resources, often using political connections to dominate industries and significant sectors of the economy. That naturally results in limited upward mobility for most citizens unless they are politically connected.
This system has persisted for decades. The ANC, historically supported by the Soviet Union, inherited some of the same political and economic tendencies, where elites benefited disproportionately compared to the general population. Although South Africa today has a multi-party system, the ANC’s dominance means corruption and cronyism remain entrenched.
If the ANC genuinely wanted to address inequality, it would need to allow a more competitive political environment and reduce the stranglehold of monopolistic forces that control both politics and resources—whether energy, mining, or transportation. Without that, studying inequality alone risks being an exercise in futility.
I also question the timing. Commissioning such a study right before the G20 summit seems more like a public relations move to appear responsive to global concerns rather than a serious attempt to tackle inequality. If they had started earlier, they could have presented both data and tangible progress. As it stands, this feels performative.
It appears that South Africa is commissioning this study not for genuine impact, but rather for presentation purposes—something polished to show at an international gathering, only to be shelved afterward until the next summit. Meanwhile, the country faces very real economic problems.
There have been recurring energy blackouts, widespread corruption in the energy sector, and even allegations of internal sabotage. Public frustration is high over mismanagement and the perception that leaders are selling out national resources to foreign interests. South Africa has faced controversies over its ties with sanctioned states like Iran and Russia. While President Cyril Ramaphosa has at times attempted to reassure the U.S. and Western partners by downplaying such relationships, critics argue that little substantive change has occurred.
If South Africa is serious about reform, it must hold accountable those within the ANC and its allies who are undermining the economy. That requires truly independent inquiries rather than ones controlled by the very political actors sustaining the status quo.
Jacobsen: This one is significant. Thailand’s Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra was dismissed today, Friday, by the Thai Constitutional Court for violating ethics. She is the sixth prime minister from, or backed by, the billionaire Shinawatra family to be removed by either the military or the judiciary in a two-decade struggle between the country’s rival elites. Paetongtarn was also Thailand’s youngest prime minister. A special session of Parliament is scheduled for early September to determine the way forward. Any thoughts?
Tsukerman: The dismissal continues Thailand’s cycle of political instability. The Shinawatra family has dominated Thai politics for years, but members of the family—or leaders aligned with them—have repeatedly been ousted through coups or judicial rulings. Paetongtarn’s removal reflects both ongoing allegations of corruption and entrenched elite rivalries.
There are also external dimensions. Thailand’s political crises often intersect with regional tensions, such as strained relations with Cambodia. Nationalist rhetoric, combined with opaque dealings between Thai and Cambodian elites, has fueled unrest. While international mediators, including the United States, have occasionally stepped in to pressure dialogue and de-escalation, these interventions rarely resolve the deeper domestic divides.
Ultimately, Thailand’s instability stems from persistent elite infighting, recurring judicial interventions, and a lack of durable democratic protections for its population. The cycle of removing Shinawatra-linked leaders shows no signs of ending, and it continues to destabilize Thailand’s governance and credibility abroad.
Thailand has suffered for decades from political turmoil—characterized by authoritarian crackdowns, populist measures employed for demagoguery, and persistent rivalries between entrenched factions. The dismissal of Paetongtarn Shinawatra is clearly a blow to her supporters, who saw her position as a vehicle for advancing their factional interests. However, this does not mean a new appointment will improve Thailand’s prospects or ease tensions with Cambodia.
What is needed is sustained, serious diplomacy to address long-standing regional disputes. Internally, Thailand faces the deeper issue that the same political elites continue to dominate, regardless of which figurehead is in power. Their constant infighting rarely translates into better governance or more opportunities for the Thai public. The reality is that Thailand’s political culture has become entrenched in cycles of corruption, judicial intervention, and elite power struggles. Without systemic reform, simply replacing one official with another will not deliver stability or progress for ordinary citizens.
Jacobsen: That covers much heavy political news. Let us look at something positive. A recent milestone for women’s representation in sports: 16-year-old Roudha Al Serkal from the United Arab Emirates has become the first woman from the Gulf region to earn the title of Woman Grandmaster in chess.
She achieved the title during the Arab Women’s Chess Championship, scoring enough points to qualify for the title. Al Serkal, who is from Abu Dhabi, is now celebrated as a breakthrough figure for Gulf women in international chess.
This is being hailed as a win for Emirati women in a sport long dominated by men. It is also being framed in some reporting as a Gulf-wide achievement. Any thoughts?
Tsukerman: This is indeed a positive development. In several Gulf countries—particularly the UAE, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia—there has been a notable increase in women’s political empowerment, social visibility, and ability to pursue careers and activities that were once largely inaccessible to them.
In the UAE, for example, women have become increasingly active in business, cultural activities, and now in sports, such as chess. This is not entirely new—elite women in the region have historically had some visibility—but what is different now is the broader participation beyond just the ruling or elite families.
That said, there are important nuances. Saudi Arabia, despite its reputation for strict conservatism, is a much larger and more diverse society, with over 30 million people and a long history of urban centers where women have been relatively engaged and active. The harshest restrictions on women were more common in rural, tribal, and suburban areas. In contrast, the UAE is a smaller country with a more closely knit population. While it has long been outward-looking in trade and business, its social norms have, on average, been more conservative.
The increased visibility of Emirati women—whether in business, diplomacy, or sports like chess—is the result of many years of gradual internal change. Unlike Saudi Arabia, where reforms under recent leadership were rolled out in sweeping public announcements, the UAE’s progress has been quieter and less internationally publicized, but still significant.
It is encouraging to see Emirati women gaining more opportunities and recognition. Realistically, conservative family structures in the UAE will continue to shape society for some time, and women’s political power remains limited—diplomatic and official roles exist. However, they are not yet close to decision-making authority. Even so, the progress matters. It has the potential to create opportunities not just for elite women, but also for middle- and working-class women, making society more vibrant and inclusive over time.
So, a symbolic gain, but still important. It is an improvement, and in this context, even symbolic change carries weight.
Jacobsen: Let us go with the short version here. Russia’s occupation of Zaporizhzhia, including the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, has kept the region a focus point since the invasion. Enerhodar, once a thriving city of around 50,000 people, has now been described by Reuters as a “ghost town,” with reports of intimidation and seemingly arbitrary detentions aimed at erasing Ukrainian identity. What are your thoughts on Russia’s use of terror, intimidation, and cultural erasure in this particular area?
Tsukerman: None of this should come as a surprise. Cultural erasure—bordering on genocidal intent—is part of Russia’s strategy in Ukraine. Russian officials and state-linked figures have made repeated calls for the liquidation or re-education of Ukrainians, rhetoric that clearly indicates genocidal intent. Disturbingly, such statements have not triggered proportionate international political consequences.
The European Union has imposed successive rounds of sanctions—now in the high teens—but sanctions alone have not altered Russia’s fundamental objectives. Russia has been remarkably successful at infiltrating Western political discourse, normalizing the idea that Ukraine is not truly sovereign and advancing the narrative that Russia has some “rightful” role there. This undermines Ukraine’s international standing and emboldens further aggression.
On the ground, Russia has combined repression with depopulation. Many residents of Enerhodar and the surrounding area have fled, both out of fear of repression and because Russia cannot be trusted to manage nuclear infrastructure safely. Russia has a long history of corruption, negligence, and poor maintenance in technical and nuclear facilities—a legacy from Soviet times that persists today. There have even been questions about the functionality of its own nuclear arsenal due to chronic mismanagement.
When it comes to captured infrastructure like the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, Russia’s attitude is deeply troubling: a mix of arrogance, nihilism, and disregard for human life—including its own soldiers. That creates a real risk of a nuclear accident under occupation, whether through incompetence or neglect. This danger is a primary reason people have evacuated; no one wants to remain near a potential nuclear catastrophe.
At the same time, Russia benefits strategically from depopulating occupied regions. Fewer Ukrainians in the area means less risk of resistance, sabotage, or organized opposition. For Moscow, holding the nuclear plant is already a tactical and symbolic success—they prefer to reduce the local population rather than face ongoing civilian resistance.
What astonishes me is that the Zaporizhzhia plant has not become the subject of far more urgent and focused diplomatic negotiations. The potential consequences of an accident are catastrophic, not just for Ukraine but for Europe as a whole.
Even an accidental discharge at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant would be an environmental disaster, resulting in massive casualties. I do not understand why there has not been more international pressure to secure this area and negotiate it out of Russian hands. Of course, for Russia, this site represents significant leverage, and they would be very hesitant to part with it without demanding something substantial in return.
At the very least, there should be sustained diplomatic efforts, given the sensitivity of the nuclear security issue in this conflict. A disaster at that plant could render parts of Ukraine uninhabitable for decades.
Jacobsen: We have time for one more today. This one comes from UN News. At a press conference in Geneva, Sophia Kalthorp, UN Women’s Chief of Humanitarian Action, stated that despite existing bans, Afghan people overwhelmingly want girls to have access to education. Reportedly, more than 90% of Afghan adults support the right of girls to be in school, despite the Taliban’s restrictions. As I understand it, the Taliban bans girls from education beyond grade six. Any thoughts?
Tsukerman: The UN has been remarkably ineffective in pressuring the Taliban. The regime has not been weakened by international non-recognition; instead, it has leveraged economic and geopolitical partnerships to entrench its rule. Despite horrific reports of repression—including banning girls from secondary and higher education, restricting women from most jobs, prohibiting them from travelling without a male guardian, and even imposing rules about women not being visible through windows in their own homes—the Taliban has managed to build ties abroad.
Russia, for example, removed the Taliban from its list of terrorist organizations and has invited Taliban officials to international forums. Reports suggest that Russian security services have even provided training and assistance in camps. China and Iran have also increased their engagement, particularly through energy and trade deals. Pakistan remains central to the Taliban’s rise and survival, despite ongoing border clashes, while India has cautiously opened diplomatic channels to counter Pakistani influence.
At the same time, the Taliban attempts to present itself internationally as a legitimate government. Some of its so-called initiatives—such as claims that banning women under 35 from driving reduces greenhouse emissions—are absurd and highlight their instrumentalization of policy for control and propaganda rather than genuine governance.
Western governments have also engaged selectively: for example, the UK has negotiated with the Taliban over the return of Afghan refugees, with the Taliban promising housing and economic support for returnees. However, none of this changes the fundamental reality: the Taliban continues to erase women from public life systematically, and international engagement has so far failed to reverse or even slow that trend.
Jacobsen: Do you have any more comments on that?
Tsukerman: Yes. To finish the point, while the Taliban has promised to build housing for Afghans being expelled from the UK, Iran, Pakistan, and other countries, and might be using resources from energy and trade deals to do so, repression inside Afghanistan has not lessened. In fact, it has continued to intensify, particularly against women.
Germany has also entered the picture. It has negotiated the return of certain Afghan nationals classified as criminals under German law, arranging their transfer under heavy security convoys and specific conditions. I find it troubling that so much emphasis is placed on returning such individuals, while far less focus is directed toward protecting the rights of ordinary Afghans who are not criminals and who face severe repression at home. The humanitarian priority should be securing the safety and rights of the vulnerable, rather than simply expelling offenders.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Irina.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/07
Sigurdur “Siggy” Runarsson is Vice President of Siðmennt, the Icelandic Ethical Humanist Association, now Humanists Iceland, and one of Iceland’s best-known humanist celebrants. Since Siðmennt gained legal recognition in 2013, he has officiated hundreds of secular baby-namings, civil confirmations, weddings, vow renewals, and funerals, helping membership climb to roughly 6,500 in a country of 400,000. Runarsson’s ceremonies are distinguished by meticulous video interviews, playful original poetry, and the dramatic Icelandic landscapes he often uses as venues—from glaciers, lava fields, and black-sand beaches to intimate community halls. He welcomes intercultural elements, enabling couples to weave Iranian sofreh rituals, Jewish glass-breaking, or Celtic hand-fasting into a framework grounded in humanist values of autonomy, dignity, and inclusivity. Abroad, his “runaway weddings” have become a niche attraction for tourists seeking nature-centred vows. At home, former civil-confirmation students now return to him for marriages and child-namings, illustrating how his empathetic approach is reshaping Iceland’s life-passage traditions for future generations.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we are here with Siggy Runarsson. Thank you very much again for joining me. The last time we spoke was in 2019 or 2020 in an interview focused on gender equality, Iceland, and humanist ceremonies.
Iceland has a small population—around 400,000 people. Yet, a significant portion of its residents are registered with or aligned with Siðmennt, the Icelandic Ethical Humanist Association. How has that community grown so quickly in such a short period?
Sigurdur Runarsson: The main reason is that Siðmennt has become a meaningful alternative for people seeking secular, inclusive ways to celebrate life’s key milestones. We offer civil ceremonies for baby namings, weddings, vow renewals, and funerals, as well as a popular civil confirmation program for teenagers. This confirmation is a non-religious coming-of-age ceremony that serves as an alternative to traditional Christian confirmations.
In many ways, our model is similar to what our colleagues in Norway have developed. Civil confirmation, in particular, is widely embraced by teenagers and their families as a celebration of maturity based on humanist values. Funerals, of course, are another critical area where we provide celebrants and services rooted in dignity, respect, and personal meaning.
As of now, Siðmennt has around 6,500 registered members. We are a recognized life-stance organization in Iceland and a member of Humanists International, adhering to humanist principles such as human rights, reason, and secular ethics. While many of our members identify as atheists, our work appeals to a broader audience interested in a values-based, non-religious worldview.
People are joining because of the quality and meaning of the services we provide, but outreach also plays a role. Since 2013, Siðmennt has been legally recognized as a life-stance organization, which means individuals can formally register with us through the national registry. This enables a portion of their tax—known as the “parish tax” or sóknargjald—to be directed to our organization instead of going to a religious institution or reverting to the state.
In Iceland, all taxpayers contribute this fee, which is then allocated to registered religious or life-stance organizations. If someone is not registered with any such organization, the cost goes to the state treasury. Therefore, joining Siðmennt allows individuals to redirect this portion of their taxes toward an organization that represents their worldview.
Before our official registration in 2013, we operated through voluntary membership fees and donations. We continue to offer that option today, so individuals can support Siðmennt even if they are officially registered with another organization. This allows for a degree of dual affiliation, especially among those who may identify culturally with a religion but philosophically with humanism.
One of the main reasons for our recent growth is likely the decreasing appeal of the National Church of Iceland. While it still holds a privileged legal status, a growing number of people—particularly younger generations—do not feel it reflects their beliefs or values. Additionally, immigration brings people from a variety of religious and non-religious backgrounds. Some join the Catholic Church, which is growing due to migration, while others seek secular options like Siðmennt.
Our rapid growth reflects both societal shifts and the increasing visibility of humanist values and services in Iceland.
We appeal—or perhaps it’s our charm—as spokespersons not just for atheists, but for human beings in general, and humanism as it’s formally defined. I know it might not sound elegant, but in many cases, we function as the lowest common denominator. That is, we are an option that does not offend anyone.
So, for example, take marriage. People want to get married but are not religious. In Iceland, it is relatively easy to have a priest perform the ceremony with minimal religious content. Still, in many cases, it feels like hypocrisy to ask a priest for a non-religious wedding. If you are spiritual, of course, go to church. But if not, why ask a religious official to do something secular?
That’s where we come in. We offer a sincere and consistent alternative. In many ways, that’s why people find us appealing. The growth of our organization began even before we were formally established. It started with parents looking for a secular alternative for their teenagers when it came to confirmation ceremonies. That’s how the humanist movement in Iceland began. That core offering—civil confirmation—has always been the backbone of Siðmennt.
When the legal status of life-stance organizations changed in Iceland in February 2013, Siðmennt became officially registered. From that point on, our celebrants could become certified officiants—not just to perform symbolic weddings, but also legally binding ones.
Of course, our services are open to everyone. You do not have to be a member of Siðmennt to book a ceremony. A significant part of our work today includes weddings and elopements for foreigners. It has become something of a niche within the tourist industry.
People come to Iceland to elope—what we call a “runaway wedding”—and often the couple is from different religious backgrounds. They do not want to choose one tradition over another, or be forced to join a church or religious group to have a ceremony. So they decided that we—Humanists Iceland—would create a non-religious, meaningful ceremony. That’s a significant part of the ceremonies we provide now.
If I remember correctly, we do about 200 to 400 weddings a year. Many of these are for Icelanders, usually held on Saturdays at two, three, four, or five in the afternoon. But many of the ceremonies we conduct are for foreigners. These are typically people taking a short vacation—maybe five to ten days in Iceland—who choose to get married here.
So they might get married on a Tuesday at 11 a.m., out on the Snæfellsnes Peninsula, by the Black Church, on a beach, or beside one of our waterfalls. That’s one of the reasons we’ve been doing more and more ceremonies in recent years—we’ve been catering to the needs of foreigners who want to elope and are looking for a secular, humanist approach rather than a religious officiant.
That has undoubtedly contributed to our growth, though it’s still a small fraction of the broader tourism industry. Before COVID-19, Iceland was receiving over 2 million visitors per year. We may be returning to those numbers, perhaps around 2.3 million tourists this year. I don’t know the exact percentage of those who come here to elope, but even if it’s just 0.0001%, the number of ceremonies will continue to grow.
Jacobsen: So, returning to the original question, you’re saying that both membership growth and the increase in services come from the developments you’ve just described?
Runarsson: Yes, exactly. What I’ve described over the last ten minutes—those are probably the main reasons for our growth, both in terms of membership within Iceland and in services for both Icelanders and foreigners.
Jacobsen: Ceremonies are a key part of your growth. In the last five years, have humanist ceremonies in Iceland evolved in specific ways? How might Icelanders have added their nuances that others—building humanist communities abroad—could learn from?
Runarsson: That’s a good question. Our colleagues in Denmark, for example, are still in a legal fight to get their organization recognized in the same way as a church so that they can conduct legal ceremonies. Sweden, however, recently changed its laws, so humanists there can now legally marry people.
As for us in Iceland, yes, ceremonies have evolved over the past five years. The structure has become more refined as our membership has grown and our funding has improved. I’ve developed my approach over time, as my profile has grown and I’ve conducted more ceremonies.
Jacobsen: You’ve likely expanded and professionalized your services?
Runarsson: Absolutely. I conduct all types of ceremonies—weddings, funerals, namings, and civil confirmations. Domestically, the choice of Siðmennt by Icelanders for their ceremonies dates back to our history. We started 35 years ago with civil confirmations. Many Icelanders now in their twenties and thirties went through that program. Some of them are now coming back to us for weddings or naming ceremonies for their children.
Our confirmation program includes a course—not religious or biblical—but focused on what it means to be a good person and a responsible adult. We have a structured curriculum for that. So we’ve been present in people’s lives for generations.
When it comes to marking special moments—naming a child, getting married, holding a funeral—we are often the go-to organization. People frequently tell us at weddings, “Yes, I had my civil confirmation with Siðmennt ten or twenty years ago.”
Jacobsen: So it felt natural for you to seek out humanist assistance for this event in your life. I suppose one question I would have is: Are there aspects of broader Western—North American or Western European—ceremony traditions that you draw from and apply to your ceremonies?
Runarsson: Yes. The basic framework of a wedding ceremony is quite similar to what you’d find in a Christian or specifically Lutheran-Protestant service. We are, of course, celebrating the same key life event. Apart from the religious content, we perform many of the same elements a priest or other religious officiant would.
Suppose you’re asking where I draw inspiration from, particularly when I’m officiating for foreigners coming to Iceland. In that case, I know they often want an “Icelandic flavour” to their ceremony. So I include selections from old Icelandic literature—both poetry and prose from the Icelandic sagas.
I read them aloud in what we imagine the old language might have sounded like—Old Norse, the shared ancestor of modern Icelandic and Norwegian, dating back to the settlement era. Then I repeat the same verse in English, so the couple and their guests understand it.
I’ve used material from the sagas, and while it might resemble what is used by the Ásatrúarfélagið—the organization in Iceland devoted to the revival of Norse paganism—I am not taking a religious approach. Instead, I’m drawing from the wisdom and poetic beauty of those historical texts. The Ásatrú community may use these materials in a more spiritual context, but we use them philosophically or culturally.
Jacobsen: That’s fascinating.
Runarsson: And of course, think about weddings you’ve attended, where a priest or officiant tells the couple’s story in a humorous or heartfelt way. We do the same. Creating a personalized, meaningful narrative is central to what we do, just as it is in many Western ceremonies.
So, yes, our approach isn’t meant to be radically different from what people expect. We’re not trying to be a spectacle or to contrast ourselves for the sake of being different. Our primary role is to marry people legally—that’s the foundation of the ceremony.
We ask the couple how they want to identify: husband and wife, partners, spouses—whatever language suits them. We include elements like exchanging rings, vows, and even the classic “you may kiss the bride” or “you may kiss the groom.”
We’ve also incorporated rituals borrowed from other traditions, such as handfasting, which comes from old Celtic and Irish customs. That’s where the English phrase “tie the knot” originates. So we’ve adopted that in some ceremonies too, just like our humanist colleagues in Scotland have.
The personalized aspect of the ceremony often mirrors what you’d find in church weddings. But what our couples are looking for is the experience, especially the natural setting. Most people who come to us want to get married outdoors in Iceland’s nature. That connection to nature plays a much larger role than it does in traditional indoor weddings.
Jacobsen: That’s very interesting.
Runarsson: When we conduct ceremonies in nature—in the Icelandic landscape—you feel that you’re off the beaten path. People come here to be surrounded by nature. I’ve done weddings in highland valleys, beside waterfalls, on black sand beaches, inside ice caves, and even on glaciers.
As officiants, we understand that we are part of the equation, but not the focus. We’re not the main characters in a staged performance. The surroundings—the crashing waves, the towering waterfalls, the glowing blue of an ice cave—those are what make the moment unforgettable.
A ceremony indoors, say in a ballroom or hall, is very different in tone and feeling from one out in the wild. In that sense, we’re not necessarily looking to mimic a particular tradition from another country or religion. What defines our ceremonies is the moment, the location, the raw elements—wind, rain, light, and silence.
Even on a dry day, if you’re close to a waterfall, you’ll still feel the spray. These natural elements often play a much bigger role in the ceremony than the actual words I write or the formal structure we use. Sometimes I wonder if people even remember what I say—because the surroundings are so breathtaking and, ultimately, it’s their moment.
It’s important to let nature have its role and to respect the fact that people have specifically chosen a location and asked me to come there for the ceremony. That intention matters. Of course, I still focus on writing a thoughtful ceremony and selecting the right words. About a third of my ceremonies are personalized stories based on what the couple shares with me in interviews beforehand—I always interview with them.
Jacobsen: Do you ever get unusual requests? For instance, when the volcanic eruption happened a few years ago, did anyone ask for a ceremony in front of the lava flow?
Runarsson: Actually, yes! I did one ceremony near the first eruption, in August 2021 —can’t quite remember the exact date. It was at the top of a mountain, very close to the volcano, during its later phase, when it was still active but not as dramatic as in the beginning.
As for strange requests—I don’t think of them as “weird.” People come from different backgrounds and cultures, and that brings variation, which I welcome. Sometimes the location itself surprises me. Foreigners often know more about hidden parts of Iceland than I do—and that’s wonderful. They end up introducing me to my own country!
In terms of ceremony content, I occasionally receive requests from religious individuals seeking a secular officiant. They ask how they might incorporate religious elements into the ceremony. One option is to include religious content in their vows. I always step aside during the vows so couples can say whatever they want—spiritual or otherwise.
In the broader humanist community, most of our international colleagues respect all religions. We’re currently working on a shared Nordic project—a website dedicated to explaining what a humanist wedding is. One of the key ideas is that there are no “strange” requests. If someone wants to say a prayer before or after the ceremony, that’s not a problem.
What is essential is that the celebrant does not perform religious content or preach. But we respect the background, culture, and faith of those getting married, even when the officiation is entirely secular.
Jacobsen: Can you give an example of that?
Runarsson: Yes—last year I married a couple in Harpa Concert Hall, down by the Reykjavík harbour. Two American women—one was Persian, born in the U.S. but with Iranian heritage, and the other was from Texas.
They asked me to incorporate Iranian wedding customs into the ceremony. These customs are often symbolic, even superstitious in some cases—for example, placing a cloth over the couple’s heads or having specific foods present. I had no problem with that.
Rather than me performing those rituals, I wrote a description—almost like a brief article—explaining what her mother and sister were doing during the ceremony. It was more like a documentary narration than an active role. I stayed true to being a secular celebrant, but I acknowledged and respected the family’s traditions.
I tried to pronounce the names correctly, of course—Farsi, in this case—and made sure the significance of the actions was conveyed. That was probably the most complex request I’ve received, but I enjoyed it. It wasn’t religious in how I presented it, and the family members themselves performed the rituals. That’s the kind of balance we try to strike: fully respectful, but never compromising our humanist values.
Jacobsen: That’s a thoughtful and elegant way to handle it.
Runarsson: I also once married a man of Jewish background whose bride was not Jewish. He wanted to wear a kippah—that’s the traditional head covering—and to say a prayer. He also wanted to break a glass during the ceremony, which is a well-known Jewish wedding tradition symbolizing good fortune and remembrance. I had no issue with any of that.
We sometimes receive requests like this. Our approach, as humanists, is grounded in tolerance for all religions and all backgrounds. I do not personally perform religious content, but I am always willing to make space for it in the ceremony. Suppose the couple or their family wishes to include a spiritual element. In that case, we find a respectful way to do so without compromising the humanist foundation.
One of my favourite special requests, though, was when a couple asked me to meet them at Reykjavík Domestic Airport. They had rented a helicopter. We flew to Þórisjökull Glacier, landed there, and held the ceremony on the ice. The pilot turned off the engine, we stepped out, and I prepared the space for the ceremony. On the way back, we landed at Glymur Waterfall, which is quite a challenging hike on foot. So yes, they had the deluxe transportation option!
That was a truly memorable experience. Usually, when I officiate glacier weddings, we drive as close as we can and then hike, or the couple rents a super jeep. But this time, it was something very different. I had never flown in a helicopter before. It gave me a new perspective on my own country.
Jacobsen: So, officiating weddings has helped you rediscover Iceland?
Runarsson: My couples often introduce me to places I had only vaguely heard of or never visited. They know the hiking trails, the geology, and they have specific dreams about where and how they want to marry. I’ve been to locations I had unknowingly passed by dozens of times before but never truly noticed. That’s what happens—you often know other countries better than your own. But I love that my couples surprise me with locations that are new and beautiful.
Jacobsen: What has been the most extravagant humanist wedding you’ve ever conducted? I ask because in North America, especially in the U.S., weddings can be massive productions—costly, elaborate affairs. I imagine Iceland has some of that culture, too.
Runarsson: Yes, we have a version of that here as well. And you’re right—”extravagant” can mean different things. But not all humanist weddings are grand or costly. That said, I’ve done several surprise weddings, which are my personal favourite.
For example, I’ve had couples hire me for a baby naming ceremony, and then—once the baby’s name is announced—they surprise everyone by getting married on the spot. It’s very cost-effective, especially when guests have flown in from abroad. One time, the father was Icelandic, and the mother was from England. All the family came for the baby naming, and then—boom—they announced the wedding. Everything was already in place.
Another time, I was asked to be part of a surprise wedding disguised as a graduation celebration. The woman had just finished her dentistry studies, and her partner had recently completed his training to become a ship captain. They hosted a party to celebrate both milestones, and I was seated at a table as a “friend of the family,” beside the bride’s sisters.
They had hired an MC—not a celebrant, but a musician and entertainer—to host the event. We staged a little theatrical moment. The MC joked that the couple had never officially gotten engaged, and then called them onstage. He suggested that now was the perfect time to propose, and the whole thing turned into a surprise wedding. Someone placed a veil on the bride’s head, even though she wasn’t wearing a traditional dress. It was spontaneous and joyful.
Jacobsen: That sounds like a moment no one would forget.
Runarsson: It was extraordinary. These types of ceremonies may not be extravagant in terms of cost, but they’re rich in meaning and creativity. And honestly, they capture the essence of what we try to do: personalize the moment and make it unforgettable.
So someone stuck a veil on her head as a joke, and everyone was laughing and making fun—in a warm, celebratory way. Then, all of a sudden, the MC said, “Now you’re engaged!” And then he turned and said, “Wait a minute—your cousin Siggy—isn’t he here? He’s always marrying people!”
And I stood up and said, “Oh yes, I’m here.” Then I was called up on stage—and there it was: a surprise wedding unfolding right before everyone’s eyes. I still don’t know if everyone believed it at first. Many thought it was a performance or a prank. But of course, it was legally binding. She said yes, he said yes, and they were officially married.
I do enjoy the shock effect of surprise weddings. They’re not extravagant in a traditional sense, but they have their kind of drama and delight.
Jacobsen: But in terms of truly extravagant ceremonies, your helicopter wedding probably tops the list?
Runarsson: Yes, I’d say so. That was the most extravagant one I’ve done. And yes—it was my first time in a helicopter.
Jacobsen: That’s amazing.
Runarsson: There’s something truly mystical about landing on a glacier. Usually, when people go to glaciers, they’re taken to accessible spots—places where you’ll find tracks in the snow, tourist jeeps, and snowmobiles. It can feel quite busy and touristic.
But with the helicopter wedding, we landed somewhere far less touched. It looked pristine—no tracks, no people nearby. It felt like untouched nature. It was more breathtaking than any photo could capture or any story I could tell. Even after all these years, I’m still amazed by the Icelandic landscape. It keeps surprising me with new places, new perspectives.
Jacobsen: I think that’s a common experience—people are constantly struck by Icelandic nature. And people are struck by the people, too. Icelanders are very matter-of-fact, straightforward, and down-to-earth. They’re honest, but never cruelly or aggressively. That’s something people notice. And the landscape is like that, too—raw, consequential, direct. There’s no pretension. It just is. And that’s part of what makes it so impactful. Earlier, you briefly mentioned one of the most magical aspects of your work. Can you expand on that?
Runarsson: Yes—what I consider the most magical, and perhaps most important, part of my work as a celebrant is the video interview with the couple. It’s essential for me in crafting a meaningful ceremony.
I use Google Meet—mainly because it allows unlimited call time, and I don’t get cut off. I don’t record the interview like Zoom allows, but that’s fine because I take notes. I dislike doing interviews by phone. I much prefer video, and I know some of my colleagues insist on meeting the couple in person the day before the ceremony. That can be challenging to schedule, especially if people arrive late or are travelling across Iceland.
Video interviews work exceptionally well for me. I usually schedule 70 minutes, but the conversations often stretch to 2 or even 3 hours. It’s very much like what we’re doing now—a conversation—but I have a very structured set of questions that I follow.
I rarely send those questions in advance, because they lose their magic when read in an email. When I guide people through them in real time, it draws out their stories in a much more natural and meaningful way.
I always have the couple together, side by side. The interview often becomes an emotional experience. You could call it a kind of narrative cleansing. I begin with practical questions—logistics, preferences, and background. Once we’ve found a rhythm, I dig deeper into their history—how they met, how their relationship developed.
At one point, I used to think of the interview as just a task to get through. But now, I see it as one of the most rewarding aspects of the entire process. It allows me to understand and personalize the ceremony fully, and it will enable the couple to reflect on their journey together, sometimes in a way they’ve never done before.
I’m pretty good at conducting interviews, asking insightful questions, and encouraging people to open up. That probably ties back to what you mentioned earlier—about Icelanders being direct and honest. I try to use that same openness, maybe even a bit of charisma, to draw stories out of people.
I am not a therapist or a couples’ counsellor by any means—but sometimes, it feels like I’m doing that kind of work. During interviews, one of the partners might say, “We’ve never talked about this before.” For example, I might ask, “What changed when you started living together? Did you get to know each other in a new way? Were there any surprises?” Some couples have already had those conversations.
Others respond, “I didn’t know you felt that way,” or “You never told me that.” I use light banter, humour, and genuine curiosity to help people share. And the more I’m able to write in my notes, the richer the ceremony becomes—because I have more authentic material to work with. I didn’t recognize this at first, but later I realized: this is where the magic of my ceremonies happens, not during the writing, but during the interview itself.
In the early years, I took light notes and tried to create the magic while writing the ceremony script. Now, it’s the other way around. I treat the interview as the core creative process. I write more during the interview, and I do it in a way that fits directly into the structure of the personalized part of the ceremony. It’s very intentional.
And yes, you can be Nordic, even if not technically Scandinavian, depending on definitions. I might be a white male in his mid-life, but I try to use my differences to my advantage. I’m not an American wedding salesman. I do things differently because I am different. Most of the couples I marry are American, Canadian, or Australian. But I present a soft, Nordic, Icelandic personality, which people appreciate. That distinction becomes part of the experience.
I often say that when we finally meet in person, they’ll get a “big Icelandic hug” from me—and I hug them both. I’m not afraid of physical affection. It helps create warmth, connection, and joy.
If a couple chooses an American celebrant, they may get a different kind of experience, shaped by cultural expectations. But I enjoy being Icelandic, Nordic, even “metrosexual,” as I sometimes say. And I embrace my Icelandic quirks, including our harsher-sounding language and mannerisms. I always remind couples that English is not my native language, so if I say something awkward, I ask for forgiveness in advance.
That linguistic difference also gives me a kind of license to be direct—and to conduct interviews in a way that gets people genuinely excited about their wedding. I want them to feel seen and understood, to feel like their story matters to the person officiating the ceremony.
Jacobsen: That shows in how you approach the entire process.
Runarsson: Three years ago, we held a retreat for all of our celebrants—about two or three days in the countryside—to re-educate ourselves, share knowledge, and compare ceremony scripts. One of the guest speakers was a poet and author. He writes both fiction and poetry. He came to help us reconnect with an ancient Icelandic tradition: writing poems about everything and everyone around us.
It’s not something we do so much today, but before the internet, this was what people in Iceland did for fun. We wrote poems about each other. It was a way to share, connect, and celebrate. So during our celebrant retreat, we were encouraged to reconnect with that tradition and become better writers by creating something personal and meaningful.
I started with short poems—simple rhymes. You can follow all sorts of poetic rules, but it’s still a fairly open form. There are influences from other cultures, of course—like Japanese haiku, for example—but Iceland has its rich poetic traditions. Some are based on alliteration or specific rhyme structures, depending on the placement of certain letters or sounds. I don’t even know the names of all the forms in Icelandic, but I gave it a try.
Jacobsen: So you started integrating poetry into your ceremonies?
Runarsson: Yes. I began by writing a short poem instead of simply retelling the story of how the couple got engaged. I started composing a little verse—two or three stanzas—about their proposal. I still do this for every ceremony, if I have enough material from the interview.
I took that inspiration from the retreat seriously and decided, “Why not write a poem for every couple?” I’m not an advanced poet by any means. But if I’ve done a proper interview—which I almost always do—I have enough content to create something sincere and lighthearted. And that’s the magic of it. The couple always laughs. The point isn’t to win a literary award—it’s that I made something just for them.
Jacobsen: It sounds like it comes from a heartfelt place. You’re not claiming to be a master poet—you’re just being honest. That’s very Icelandic. Not even self-deprecating, just matter-of-fact: “I’m new at this. It’s not sophisticated poetry, but it’s real.”
Runarsson: That kind of honesty is very much part of our culture. People from North America or elsewhere sometimes comment on it—they find it disarming. Icelanders are generally authentic. We don’t exaggerate. And that directness, that simplicity, is often what people fall in love with here, both in the people and in the landscape.
We have to remember that poetry is everywhere. It’s in music, it’s in storytelling.
Jacobsen: Take Eric B. & Rakim, for instance—hip-hop legends. The Message by Grandmaster Flash.
Runarsson: I’m old enough to remember when The Message by Grandmaster Flash came out in the ’80s.
Jacobsen: It’s still probably ranked as one of the greatest rap songs of all time. That track was profound. It captured a social reality that people were living through.
Runarsson: Think about rap battles—those verbal duels in the street where people roast each other. That’s a poetic form, too. Believe it or not, we had something very similar here in Iceland.
Before the days of streaming and smartphones, people would gather in community centers. Four or five individuals—known for their quick wit and poetic improvisation—would get up on stage. There’d be maybe 200 people in the audience, laughing and cheering. One person would deliver the first two lines of a poem, and the next person had to complete it in rhyme. All improvised, live.
Jacobsen: Like freestyle poetry battles.
Runarsson: We didn’t call it a “rap battle” in Icelandic, of course, but the concept is the same. It was a form of entertainment, often with a humorous twist. For instance, someone might start with, “This man was a good prime minister…” and another would finish with, “…but he lacked a sinister side.” It was all about wordplay.
These poems weren’t written down or refined later. They existed in the moment, for the audience. And it was a show. People loved it.
So when I say that my wedding poems are more like raps than advanced literary poetry, I focus on rhythm, rhyme, and humour. If I can include the couple’s location, pets, inside jokes, or even funny place names—and make it rhyme—they forgive everything. They laugh. And that’s the best outcome I can ask for.
Jacobsen: And it makes the ceremony unforgettable.
Runarsson: Yes. That’s what I love most—when people laugh in the middle of a meaningful ceremony. They feel seen, celebrated, and surprised. And they never forget it.
Iceland has won one Nobel Prize, and it was in literature, awarded to Halldór Laxness. Literature is deeply embedded in our national identity. With the sagas, narratives, and storytelling traditions, it’s all part and parcel of Icelandic culture.
You mentioned the sagas earlier. I read many of them in school growing up, of course, but recently I’ve started listening to them as audiobooks. Since I do much driving around Iceland for ceremonies, I have the time to revisit them. Sometimes I listen at double speed—depending on the narrator’s voice. I’ve listened to 20–30 hour recordings of Icelandic sagas while travelling between ceremonies.
What’s fascinating is that many of the areas where I work today are the same regions described in the sagas. Some of the old farm names are still in use. So not only am I discovering new and beautiful places in Icelandic nature, but I’m also reconnecting with our cultural history.
Even if I don’t use much material from the sagas directly in my ceremonies, there’s a spiritual connection. Listening to them helps me appreciate how difficult life once was in this land. It gives me a sense of humility and perspective, especially when I’m standing in my suit in the middle of Icelandic nature, protected from the elements, with heat in my car and food in my bag. People used to fight for survival here, in brutal wind, snow, and rain. Nature had a profound impact on life and well-being. Remembering that—especially in contrast to our modern comforts—grounds me.
Some sagas are written in prose; others are poetic. I’ve used select passages in ceremonies before. Halldór Laxness, of course, was a novelist. But his depictions of farm life and the emotional and physical strain caused by the elements are incredibly vivid and accurate. Even if the characters are fictional, the settings and struggles are real. His work offers a kind of reality check on our so-called modern problems.
Jacobsen: Do we have enough time or generational data yet to say whether humanist marriages perform better than religious ones? Do they last longer, or are they more stable?
Runarsson: That’s a real question—with an honest answer, I do not yet know. According to the data, the Icelandic Bureau of Statistics publishes marriage statistics. Still, these only include marriages registered and dissolved within Iceland. So, when I marry foreigners, and they divorce later in their home countries, that data doesn’t reach our national statistics. There’s a gap in the numbers.
From what I’ve seen, both among my friends and our humanist members, people fall in love, they marry, and some later divorce. It’s about people and their circumstances. The ceremony itself, and who performs it, doesn’t change the long-term outcome dramatically.
Jacobsen: That said, in a secular or naturalistic worldview, you’re not praying your problems away. You don’t expect divine intervention. You’re forced to face the negotiables and non-negotiables of your relationship in a more grounded, realistic way. That does not mean humanists are immune to delusions, of course—but certain kinds of magical thinking are just off the table. So, even couples married by a priest in Iceland are probably not thinking about it as a spiritual event?
Runarsson: Most Icelanders—even those married by a priest—don’t view the wedding as a religious ceremony. It’s a family event, a life milestone. The spiritual content is often symbolic or traditional rather than deeply believed. They’re not looking for divine blessings to guarantee a successful marriage—they’re making a social commitment, witnessed by loved ones.
So, we as a culture and people here in Iceland do not have a strong religious connection to the church. Even though many people are still officially members, they may only seek church services for significant life events, like funerals or weddings. Families might ask a priest to officiate, but the connection is more cultural than spiritual.
Now, I am not a specialist in religious history, but Protestant churches—and their ethics and ceremonial practices—are not as religiously symbolic as, for example, the Catholic Church. They do not use the same props or rituals. Incense, holy water, that kind of thing. Incense and holy water—those are more sensory rituals.
The Protestant culture is much less decorative or ritualistic than the Catholic Church. It shows both in how their churches are built and how the ceremonies are conducted. The word “Protestant” itself comes from protest. They were protesting the extravagance and rituals of the Catholic Church. And I suppose it all started with that German guy—Martin Luther?
He wanted to reform how Christianity was practiced at the time, and that led to this branch we now call Lutheran Protestantism. What I’m getting at is this: In Iceland, priests in the state church feel more like civil servants—because they are. The government pays them, so many people see them not so much as religious figures, but as public servants.
The contrast between humanist and Catholic ceremonies is powerful. But the contrast between humanist and Protestant ceremonies—at least here in Iceland—is much smaller. The public sees both as more service-oriented than faith-driven.
Jacobsen: That’s helpful context. Let’s end there for today. Nice chatting with you.
Runarsson: Nice chatting with you, too. Bye-bye.
Jacobsen: Take care. Bye-bye.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/06
Fine art photographer Elizabeth Waterman discusses her analog strike film portraits that challenge stereotypes surrounding sex work and transgender identity—primarily through her work with Thailand’s kathoey, commonly known as ladyboys. Waterman discusses the barriers faced by transgender women in Thailand, including the inability to legally change their gender and limited job opportunities that often push them into nightlife or sex work. Her advocacy centers on the Gender Recognition Act, a prospective bill held up in the Thai parliament. Through her book Moneygame Thailandand an upcoming TV doc-follow Moneygame: Ladyboys of Pattaya , she hopes to raise international awareness and foster meaningful legal reform.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So today, we’re here with Elizabeth Waterman. She’s a Los Angeles-based fine art photographer known for her analog film-based work that challenges societal narratives surrounding sex work, subcultures, and female empowerment.
Born in Taos, New Mexico, she earned a BA in Fine Art from the University of Southern California before immersing herself in documenting the lives of adult entertainers and performers. Waterman’s striking portraits capture the raw humanity of dancers, transgender sex workers, and artists, emphasizing their strength and dignity while shedding light on the often-unseen realities behind the scenes.
Her internationally exhibited images explore the intersections of art, identity, and representation, offering rare, humanizing perspectives that powerfully transcend stereotypes. Thank you for joining me today. I know your photography carries a humanitarian and advocacy element—especially in the Ladyboys project—so that might be of personal significance to you as well.
To begin with, not everyone is familiar with the term ladyboy, and many don’t have a humanizing or accurate image of who they are. So, how would you define the term, and what does the lived reality look like—apart from the stereotype?
Elizabeth Waterman: In Thailand, ladyboys are the common English term used to refer to kathoey, a Thai cultural identity referring to transgender women or effeminate male-presenting individuals. While not all Thai transgender women identify as kathoey, and the term can have nuanced meanings, it is widely used in both Thai society and internationally.
Jacobsen: In terms of stereotypes, what are the common misconceptions people have about kathoey, and what realities help debunk those myths?
Waterman: It’s an important point. In Thailand, ladyboys can be marginalized and are sometimes subject to stereotypes—portrayed as overly flamboyant, deceitful, or associated with nightlife and sex work. These portrayals overlook the complexity of their identities and lives. There’s a general lack of understanding about their social roles, professional diversity, and legal status.
Jacobsen: A natural follow-up would be: how does public acceptance shift once people gain a better understanding?
Waterman: Well, I began visiting Thailand about two years ago to photograph nightlife entertainers. Many of them were ladyboys—transgender women working in various nightlife roles such as cabaret performers, escorts, go-go dancers, and massage therapists. Through spending time with them, I was able to see the full spectrum of their humanity and experiences—not just what people typically associate with them. My goal was to create portraits that convey their dignity, resilience, and individuality.
As I got to know the ladyboys, I learned more about their lives, and I became aware of the fact that transgender women in Thailand—including ladyboys—do not have the legal right to change their gender. If someone is assigned male at birth, that designation remains on their birth certificate for life. They cannot change it to female.
As a result, their employment opportunities are severely limited. Many corporate or public-facing jobs require individuals to present and dress according to the gender on their official documents. As a result, many ladyboys are effectively pushed into nightlife work—cabarets, go-go dancing, escort work—not necessarily by choice but because other paths are institutionally blocked.
You have ladyboys of all ages who might want to pursue careers in medicine, journalism, education—anything really—but they often end up in the entertainment or sex industries because those are the spaces where their gender identity is more accepted, or at least tolerated.
Right now is a critical time, there exists a significant opportunity for change. A bill called the Gender Recognition Act was introduced in the Thai parliament in early 2024. If passed, it would allow transgender individuals, including ladyboys, to change their gender markers legally. This would open pathways for broader employment, reduce discrimination, and improve legal protections.
You may or may not be aware, but it’s an essential time for LGBTQ+ rights in Thailand. In 2024, Thailand’s parliament approved a bill legalizing same-sex marriage—a historic achievement that made international headlines. However, this Gender Recognition Act has not received nearly the same level of attention. I’m a big advocate for its passage.
These are beautiful, resilient women. I’m currently working on a photo book called Moneygame Thailand, which features portraits of many ladyboys I’ve met and worked with. I’m also developing a TV docu-follow show focused on their lives and experiences. More than anything, I want to bring international attention to this bill. It has been stalled in Thai parliament, and global awareness could help get it moving again.
Jacobsen: A lot of legal and policy changes tend to come on the heels of broader social shifts. What, in your view, was happening in Thai culture that enabled a bill like this to be proposed in the first place?
Waterman: It followed the momentum of the same-sex marriage bill. That took a long time to pass. In its wake, the Gender Recognition Act emerged as a logical next step in expanding rights for the LGBTQ+ community in Thailand. But so far, it has not succeeded. It’s struggling to gain the same level of support or attention.
Jacobsen: Are there other explicit laws that restrict equal rights for ladyboys beyond the lack of legal gender recognition?
Waterman: This law specifically deals with legal gender identity, yes. But broader rights issues exist. For example, if a ladyboy is arrested, she must be placed in a men’s prison, where she may face harassment or abuse. That’s a serious and often overlooked consequence of legal non-recognition.
Then there’s the issue of mandatory military service. In Thailand, all males are required to register for conscription. Kathoey must attend these check-ins and try to obtain an exemption. It’s a stressful and often humiliating process. They have to travel long distances, sometimes missing work, and navigate a bureaucratic system that doesn’t acknowledge their gender identity.
In that sense, it’s almost the reverse of the situation in the United States—where transgender individuals sometimes fight for the right to serve openly in the military. In Thailand, ladyboys often struggle to avoid conscription altogether.
Jacobsen: That’s a strange asymmetry—or maybe an inverse symmetry is more accurate.
Waterman: Yes, exactly. It’s quite different.
Jacobsen: When you were doing your photographic work within these communities, how did you approach it in a way that captured the reality of their lives while still humanizing them—and without reinforcing the very stereotypes you were trying to challenge?
Waterman: Well, with my subjects, I always try to get to know them personally and build relationships over time. I’ve traveled to Thailand four times now, photographing some of the same individuals on each of my visits. I’ve also been privileged to peek into their personal lives—photographing them at home, learning about their hobbies, meeting their families. I’ve spent time with them outside of work, not just in the clubs where they perform. That’s important—seeing them as full human beings rather than just their roles in nightlife.
I also try not to focus my lens too heavily on the granular details of their jobs or on the sex work itself. Instead, I approach the work holistically—capturing who they are as people, their friendships, their families, their goals, and their dreams. I conduct extensive interviews with each subject, which gives me deeper insight.
To help build trust and improve communication, I’ve also been learning to speak Thai. It’s been a small but important project—probably about three years of lessons, once a week. So, maybe not 800 hours, but I’m working on it. I’m at a basic Thai level at the moment. It’s a difficult language, but the effort has helped enormously.
Jacobsen: When you’re conducting in-depth interviews, observing how people interact, and creating humanizing photographic work, you’re essentially building comprehensive case studies on each person. So, within that, what have you noticed in terms of commonalities with mainstream Thai culture, and what are some idiosyncrasies that distinguish the ladyboy experience?
Waterman: You mean commonalities between all ladyboys and then between ladyboys and the general population?
Jacobsen: Everyone is a cross-section of everyday life—everyone pays bills, sleeps, eats, and so on. Therefore, there is a baseline of shared human experience. But what are some of the deeper cultural commonalities and the more distinctive realities faced by ladyboys in Thailand?
Waterman: One of the most defining experiences for ladyboys is their limited access to employment. That’s the biggest commonality among them. At the same time, they may be culturally visible—Thailand is often thought of as relatively tolerant—but there are still significant limitations. They’re often funnelled into nightlife jobs. Some may find work at cosmetics counters in department stores, but the options are narrow. That shared economic constraint defines much of their lives.
Jacobsen: That answers it. Economics is central in nearly every society. As far as I know, there’s no socialist utopia out there—so when income is restricted, that has ripple effects. How does this financial limitation affect ladyboys’ access to education, healthcare, travel, and other necessities like dental care, housing, or even food?
To give an example, in some places, people with limited income and disabilities often end up living with others out of necessity. They rely more on social capital than on financial capital. Is that true for ladyboys, too, especially those working in nightlife, dancing, or sex work?
Waterman: Yes, very much so. Many ladyboys rely on their communities, their chosen families, and their support networks to survive. When you don’t have access to stable income, it’s hard to afford education or medical care—including gender-affirming healthcare, which is expensive. Travel and even basic needs can be a challenge.
So, you often find these informal support systems—people living together, sharing resources, and helping each other through tough times. It’s a kind of grassroots solidarity, and it’s essential for their survival. Many of them are also sending money home to their families, which adds another layer of pressure.
That also affects their routines—many are working on a 16:8 day-night cycle, meaning they’re up through the night and sleep most of the day. Ladyboys rarely pursue higher education, not because of a lack of interest but because they don’t have the time or money. They often live hand-to-mouth, and any extra income typically goes to supporting their families.
Although many would love to study or advance their skills, they often lack the necessary resources. That’s a common thread with sex workers in general: there’s limited upward mobility. Many people stay in the same job for years because it does not pay well or offer a clear path forward.
There is also a deep familial obligation in Thai culture, closely tied to Buddhist values. When someone earns money—especially in working-class or marginalized communities—it’s expected that they send funds back to their families. For ladyboys, this often means supporting parents or siblings. For cisgender women in sex work, it might mean supporting their children or aging parents.
So ladyboys tend to stay in nightlife and entertainment for a long time. Again, it’s a job that’s difficult to exit. And unfortunately, there is a higher incidence of substance abuse. Since they work at night, in clubs or go-go bars, they often have to drink as part of the job—either to entertain customers or to cope with the stress and emotional toll. Over time, this can lead to dependence.
Their schedules are demanding. They usually work from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m., then sleep during the day. Their lives become entirely focused on work and rest, with very little time for anything else. It becomes a cycle—work, drink, sleep—making it even harder to step back and think about long-term goals or changes.
Jacobsen: That answers the question—and also brings up a comparative angle. I’ve talked to some colleagues informally—not as part of an interview—but they’ve brought up different models of sex work. For instance, the Nordic model is often cited as an alternative that aims to reduce harm. That’s the one where sex work itself is decriminalized, but buying sex is criminalized.
What are the current laws and protections in place for ladyboys in Thailand? If any. And what kinds of policy provisions or support systems do you think could help protect them, particularly from negative mental health impacts or abuse?
Because as you’ve noted, many are using substances to cope with very real physical and emotional stressors—whether it’s from long, difficult hours or violent or unstable clients. So what could be done?
Waterman: Many ladyboys working in nightlife are performing aspects of their jobs outside the protection of the law. For instance, they may be gainfully and legally employed at a go-go bar, but any services they provide outside of that context—like escorting—are not legally protected.
There is no legal recourse if something goes wrong. If a client fails to pay or becomes abusive, there is no legal framework to support or protect them.
Now, while ladyboys working inside clubs might have some basic protections through their employers, if they also provide services independently—say, meeting clients outside the club—then they’re vulnerable. And again, there’s no legal avenue to pursue justice if something goes wrong.
Because of this, ladyboys often rely on community-based protection. Their community becomes their safety net. For example, in places like Pattaya City—one of the hubs of Thailand’s sex tourism—you might see freelance escorts lined up along the beach path. There might be one ladyboy acting as a kind of watchdog, looking out for the group and making sure no one is harassed. Sometimes, they move in groups of 10 or more to help protect one another.
So, in the absence of state or institutional support, ladyboys depend heavily on one another. It’s a grassroots system of mutual care and security.
Jacobsen: If legal protections were put in place—say, if sex work were decriminalized or regulated—do you think that would improve conditions? Or would the transient nature of the clientele in sex tourism make enforcement difficult?
Waterman: That’s a complex question. You’re right that sex tourism involves a highly transient client base—people are there and then gone. That makes accountability difficult. And we’re also talking about a broader system that doesn’t just affect ladyboys but also cisgender women working in the industry. Therefore, it’s a massive and nuanced issue that would require significant legal and cultural shifts to address meaningfully.
But the one thing I want to emphasize right now is the Gender Recognition Act—because that’s a concrete piece of legislation that’s already in parliament. It has been approved by public consensus and supported by the major political parties, and it’s now awaiting full passage by parliament. It’s been sitting there for a couple of years now, so there’s real potential for it to pass soon.
If enacted, it would allow transgender individuals—including ladyboys—to change their gender marker legally. That could open up access to a whole range of rights and protections. It’s a major step forward.
As for addressing sex work itself—that’s a much bigger legal and cultural issue, and again, not one that impacts ladyboys alone. It affects all sex workers, including cisgender women, so it’s a separate conversation.
But yes, in terms of improving the lives of ladyboys, especially those working in sex work, the Gender Recognition Act could be transformational. It would provide access to better employment opportunities, healthcare, and legal protections.
Jacobsen: How would you compare the legal status and rights of ladyboys in Thailand to transgender women elsewhere—say, in the United States?
Waterman: Well, in some respects, transgender rights in the U.S. are more advanced. For example, trans people can legally change their gender markers on official documents. That’s still not the case in Thailand.
However, the U.S. has also experienced significant regression, particularly during the Trump administration. There were rollbacks on trans protections in healthcare, education, and the military. Therefore, while there may be more legal options in the U.S., the prevailing political climate has created its own set of challenges.
Trans rights vary significantly around the world. I’m not deeply schooled in the nuances of every country’s legal framework, but one major difference between the U.S. and Thailand is this: in the U.S., transgender people can legally change their gender marker. They might also have access to gender-affirming surgeries through health insurance—though that’s not always guaranteed, of course.
In Thailand, there’s no legal avenue to change your gender on official documents, and any public insurance does not typically cover gender-affirming procedures. From a legal and institutional standpoint, Thailand is significantly more restrictive.
Also, although discrimination still exists in the U.S., trans individuals should be able to pursue employment in any field. That’s at least the legal principle, even if it’s not always upheld in practice. In Thailand, it’s very different. In most conventional jobs—what you might call “straight jobs”—you’re expected to dress and present as the gender listed on your birth certificate. That disqualifies many ladyboys from pursuing those positions.
Jacobsen: Are suicide rates, self-harm, or depression high among ladyboys? Do we have data?
Waterman: I don’t have concrete statistics on that, so I wouldn’t want to speculate irresponsibly. However, I can share the emotional patterns and themes that emerged during my in-depth interviews. Many ladyboys express hope. A lot of them have a clear goal: to save enough money to leave the nightlife or sex industry and find a more stable life. That dream of exit—of eventually moving on—is very common.
At the same time, these goals often feel far-fetched or far away to the ladyboys themselves—they experience a real sense that there are no clear pathways to achieve that dream. The barriers feel enormous. However, there is also a strong current of resilience. Many speak warmly about their friendships with other ladyboys. These relationships are a major source of emotional strength. That shared bond is powerful.
There’s another layer, too. Stereotypically—and with some truth—ladyboys are known for being fun, playful, and even a bit aggressive in their energy. There’s a rowdy, extroverted culture in some of these communities, particularly among those working in nightlife. They joke with each other and with customers. That kind of boldness is often associated more with masculinity, not femininity, which creates a social dynamic that’s hard to classify.
Jacobsen: So it’s a mix of masculine and feminine energies—culturally coded ones, at least. Do you think that personality style—being playful and assertive—is connected in part to biology? Higher testosterone levels, for instance?
Waterman: Yes, I do. I’ve always thought that’s part of it. Some ladyboys probably do have more testosterone in their systems than cisgender women, and that might contribute to that particular energy—more assertiveness, more playfulness, and that bold presence you see in nightlife spaces.
Jacobsen: Let’s pivot slightly to governance. When a new administration comes into power in Thailand—say a different executive government—does that shift the direction of judicial decisions or affect whether certain bills get passed into law? Or are these different branches more independent from one another?
Waterman: I don’t know that I can speak with authority on the entire structure, but the Thai political system is complex. It’s not always clear how independent the branches are. But I can point you toward some useful resources.
There are two key individuals involved in the Gender Recognition Act:
- Kittinun Daramadhaj, aka “Danny,” the lawyer and activist who drafted the bill. He’s a personal contact of mine and is extremely dedicated to advancing the bill.
- Tunyawaj Kamolwongwat, the Member of the House of Representatives of Thailand who helped to pass Thailand’s Equal Marriage Law and then officially brought the Gender Recognition Act bill forth to Thai Parliament in 2024.
I’ll send you Facebook links for both of them.
And for context, the People’s Party is the political party supporting the bill. It’s a progressive, socially democratic party advocating for reforms in several areas, including LGBTQ+ rights.
Jacobsen: So if this bill is coming out under a progressive party like the People’s Party, you could make the case that their political leadership—relative to Thailand’s general political climate—helps explain its emergence. It’s a correlation, of course, not necessarily causation, but it does hold up.
Waterman: Yes, I became more of a journalist through working on this project. My background and training are in fine art photography, but as I started to connect more deeply with ladyboys and people like Danny, who drafted the Gender Recognition Act, I began learning about the legal aspects. That’s when I became invested in understanding the policy implications.
Jacobsen: That’s all fascinating. And the photos are excellent, too.
Waterman: Thank you. Yes, I’m very proud of them. They’re powerful. They capture these women in a way that’s real and respectful.
Jacobsen: So, what’s the current holdup on the bill?
Waterman: The holdup is in Thai Parliament. For the Gender Recognition Act to pass, it has to clear many hurdles including: public support, party support, and parliamentary approval. The public and the parties are already on board—the delay is with the more conservative members of Parliament.
I firmly believe that if there were more international attention on this bill—if it were better publicized—it would move forward. Thailand wants to be seen as progressive. They don’t want to be known for holding back LGBTQ+ rights. The problem is that even many ladyboys in Thailand don’t know about the bill. There is not enough public awareness.
Jacobsen: That tracks with many countries. Most people don’t follow legislation closely unless it’s election season—or until the law has already passed.
Waterman: It’s the same story with marriage equality. Everyone knows about the Equal Marriage Law because it made international news when it passed in 2024, but it had been years in the making. It was a huge deal when it passedl. It gave the impression that Thailand was incredibly progressive on LGBTQ+ issues. And while it is a step forward, there are still major gaps—like the lack of legal gender recognition for transgender people.
That’s what I want to shine a light on. Through my TV show and photo book, I aim to raise global awareness about this issue. I want the international community to see that while Thailand has made progress, there’s still urgent work to do—especially when it comes to transgender rights.
Jacobsen: Many reforms don’t move forward until the public applies pressure or international attention creates a mirror effect. There’s a lot of performative politics, too—on all sides. However, once a policy is passed and becomes normalized, people usually return to their daily lives.
It’s like marriage equality in the United States. It was controversial for a time, but after it passed, most people realized it had no real impact on their marriages—especially not on straight, cisgender, or religious unions. It became part of the new normal.
Waterman: The same would happen here. If the Gender Recognition Act passes, ladyboys could have real options—working at a bank, attending university, pursuing careers that aren’t limited to escorting, go-go dancing, or offering adult massages. That kind of choice is what’s really at stake.
Jacobsen: Thailand, geographically and conceptually, is somewhat similar to the Philippines for North Americans—we know it’s there, we have vague ideas, but we don’t know much about it. It feels distant and unfamiliar.
Waterman: That’s true. It’s foreign to most. But it’s such an amazing place. I love it. Thailand is the only Southeast Asian country that was never colonized, and this fact is a source of tremendous national pride. Buddhist values are deeply embedded in the culture, and there is so much beauty—culturally, spiritually, and artistically.
That’s part of why I want to bring more attention to it through my work—not just the adult industry or ladyboys, but the country itself. I love the ladyboys. I want to help improve their lives. This matters to me.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Elizabeth.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/09/05
Michael Ashley Schulman, CFA, Chief Investment Officer of Running Point Capital Advisors, offers expert insight into current global financial dynamics. Schulman offers timely insights into macroeconomic trends, US fiscal policy, and the global tech landscape. In this in-depth August 2025 interview, economist Michael Ashley Schulman analyzes how US–China and US–UK trade negotiations contributed to record equity market highs despite geopolitical volatility. He explores the US dollar’s decline, driven by fiscal policy under Trump’s administration, and highlights mixed progress in bilateral trade talks.
As of mid-2025, the U.S. imposed a 10% baseline tariff on nearly all imports with reciprocal rates up to 50% striking about 66 countries, later widening to hundreds of products and hinting at semiconductor duties up to 300%. Supply chains shift toward friendshoring, regional “slowbalization,” and complex rerouting, pushing costs higher while accelerating automation and AI logistics. India moves from favored to targeted: a 25% reciprocal tariff effective August 7 plus an added 25% penalty August 27; a ₹40 billion credit guarantee barely helps. Equities rallied on strong earnings and rate-cut hopes. Institutional credibility still dictates capital, valuations, and resilience.
Interview conducted August 28, 2025.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: How might the U.S. tariffs on 66 countries reshape global supply chains?
Michael Ashley Schulman: U.S. Tariff Route 66! You’re poking at a wonderfully twisted question, and tariffs are indeed the quirkiest of tax pirates! The original Route 66 begins in Chicago, Illinois and ends in Santa Monica, California. The Tariff Route 66 is global (and possibly unending). Let’s unravel this windy knot with clarity and snark.
As of mid‑2025, the U.S. has imposed tariffs on imports from approximately 66 countries, plus there are broader baseline tariffs affecting many more, stretching to nearly every trading partner. So, the perceived number is higher than 66.
On April 2, 2025—Liberation Day—the administration slapped a 10% baseline tariff on nearly all imports, with additional reciprocal tariffs (up to 50%) aimed at around 60 countries and territories. Fast forward to later in the summer, and things got juicier. A report flagged 66 countries, the European Union, Taiwan, and even the Falkland Islands—all hit with these sweeping tariffs. In case you are wondering, we import frozen seafood and wool from the Falklands.
I just wanted to set the scene; now to get to the heart of your question regarding supply chains.
We gave a heads-up and restarted the tariff conversation with our family office clients last year when Trump started climbing in the presidential polls and betting sites. Tariffs are like boulders dropped into the river of global trade; they don’t stop the flow, but they force it to twist and carve new channels. When the U.S. slaps tariffs on countries, it doesn’t just mean American importers pay more. Yes, that’s right, U.S. tariffs are a tax paid by the American buyers of foreign goods; they are not paid by the foreign sellers. There is a misconception that it’s foreign countries or foreign companies that directly pay the tariffs we impose but that’s not the case. Buyers can ask foreign sellers for concessions or price breaks which in turn creates thousands of inefficient private one-off discussions and negotiations.
Tariffs set off a chain reaction through production networks, logistics routes, and even diplomatic alliances. Let’s unpack the supply chain chessboard this creates.
Companies already dabbling friendshoring (moving production to politically friendly nations) will accelerate the trend. For example, instead of importing directly from China, firms might ship components to Mexico for final assembly, exploiting USMCA trade rules. Think of it as the corporate version of routing your Amazon delivery through your office or a neighbor’s door to dodge a porch pirate.
When tariffs get this broad, supply chains don’t just move, they camouflage. Goods might be rerouted through intermediary countries with lighter trade frictions. This means more complex customs paperwork, longer shipping times, and the birth of creative labeling schemes–Is this really a Turkish washing machine, or a Chinese one wearing a fez?
Fragmentation of global networks means that instead of the old “just in time” model which relied on scale and seamless flows, firms may regionalize supply chains into Americas-centric, Europe-centric, and Asia-centric networks. That reduces efficiency but increases resilience; call it “slowbalization.”
**No, I didn’t make up that term–wish I had–it’s been around since at least 2019.**
Imagine supply chains less like a spiderweb and more like a patchwork quilt, stitched with thicker threads within each bloc.
These shifts in commodity and component sourcing mean that Southeast Asia may capture even more of the semiconductor assembly and testing work once clustered in China and Taiwan. When it comes to cars, North American suppliers may see a renaissance, though at higher consumer prices. And tariff hit energy and minerals producers may dump excess supply into China, Japan, Korea, or the EU at discount prices, redrawing resource maps.
We tell the business owners that we advise that tariff knock-on effects could be felt on inflation and innovation with higher input costs rippling into consumer goods, tightening margins and raising prices. Some firms will pass costs along, others will eat them, and some may decide it’s cheaper to automate domestically rather than chase tariff-free factories abroad. Ironically, that could accelerate robotics, AI logistics, and micro-factories close to end consumers.
Geopolitically, countries outside the tariff dragnet suddenly become highly attractive trade partners. Trade alliances may shift, with U.S. allies and China potentially finding themselves on the same side of a U.S.-imposed wall. It’s supply chain War Games with blocs fighting for survival and market share. The tariffs won’t stop globalization, but they’ll warp it.Expect higher costs, slower flows, and more regional clustering. The real story isn’t just about where your phone is made, but how many passports its components rack up before it lands in your pocket.
Funny enough, what may matter most here in the U.S. is the Fed lowering interest rates so that corporations can better afford the financing to build domestic factories and automate with robotics. I could easily transition into one of my past harped on economic themes: that at this point in the US cycle, lower interest rates are not inflationary, but deflationary because they make manufacturing (and goods production) much more affordable. Lower interest rates would make this entire manufacturing at-home transition much more affordable.
In a BEST-case world, companies quickly lean into “friendshoring,” routing final assembly to tariff-friendly hubs while scaling U.S. advanced manufacturing in semiconductors and automation; costs stabilize after a short inflation bump. The more likely BASE-case is patchwork regionalization where firms split their supply webs into Americas, Euro-Med, and Indo-Pacific blocs, rationalize product lines, and use tariff-hopping via compliant final assembly. Inflation stays a notch higher, but the system adjusts around a permanent tax wedge. The WORST-case is transshipment games and retaliation where Washington cracks down with anti-circumvention cases, partners respond in kind, and global supply chains fragment further, raising costs, bloating inventories, and eroding productivity; I believe that goods found to be transshipped to evade tariffs face a 40% tariff, plus potential additional penalties.
The unstable current and warped planning is evident in fresh POTUS tweets and ever-changing frameworks. Case-in-point, India recently moved from friendshoring candidate to tariff-challenged for U.S.-bound supply chains. On July 31, 2025, the White House issued an order that set India’s reciprocal tariff at 25%, effective August 7, 2025 (it replaces the 10% baseline for India). A separate Russia-related action issued the following week adds an extra 25% “penalty” tariff on Indian-origin goods effective August 27, 2025, bringing the stacked additional duty to 50% on many items. Near-term reroutes may tilt harder toward USMCA (Mexico/Canada) and select Southeast Asia lanes, with stricter origin/compliance work to avoid anti-circumvention snags.
Recently (last Friday), President Donald Trump stunned by turning a narrow steel and aluminum cover charge into an all-you-can-tariff buffet, slapping more than four hundred everyday items—from motorcycles to tableware—while giving customs brokers and importers roughly zero runway; the duties hit the next business day with no mercy for goods already at sea. The net now snags a bewildering array of items, a flex of how far sector tariffs can stretch, and it sits apart from the so-called reciprocal play. This tranche goes broad and oddly domestic, tagging cargo-handling gear, auto parts, furniture, baby booster seats, and personal care that merely arrives in metal tins, a quiet pivot in how steel and aluminum derivatives get policed. The real bruise is not just the rate but the maze of overlapping levies, shifting codes, and a budgeting and compliance tax that never shows up on the price tag. Think supply chain escape room meets pop quiz, where the room keeps moving and the answers are buried in customs footnotes.
Trump also said semiconductor tariffs will be set in the next couple weeks that could reach 300%. Surprise complexities like this are a true challenge to business planning; semiconductors are used by everyone.
Jacobsen: Why did markets rally in spite of the escalating tariff tensions?
Schulman: Tariffs were the distraction, not the main concern; or to quote an adage, it’s the economy stupid. Stocks rallied not because tariffs disappeared but because louder music drowned them out; second quarter profits beat the script, led by cash rich platforms riding the artificial intelligence wave, which eased recession jitters and floated valuations, while July consumer price data kept dreams of gentler policy alive. Investors judged the tariff hit as a manageable tax wedge, with many companies passing costs along, rerouting final assembly to friendlier ports, or enjoying a bit of home field protection. Profits and policy hope headlined the show, tariffs opened as the bad warm up act, but the market left singing along with the catchy headliner hits.
Despite tariff confusion, economic growth was a strong 3% in the second quarter, unemployment remains reasonably low, and investors keep hoping and expecting a Federal Reserve interest rate cut which would help risk assets to rally further. Even though the Fed has sorely disappointed many observers by not cutting rates so far this year, it just makes those forecasters even more adamant that the Fed will cut at the next meeting. I don’t know if it’s a case of misplaced hope or just adamant belief like the person that never takes “no” for an answer.
Jacobsen: Are U.S. tariffs on Indian exports a protectionist decision or a geopolitical calculation?
Schulman: Both, in stereo. The 25% reciprocal rate on India is classic home turf protection dressed up as fairness, with the White House saying it aims to fix lopsided deficits and shore up domestic industry and national security. An extra 25% that starts on August 27 is a geopolitical lever disguised as a customs bill tied to India’s intake of Russian crude and meant to raise the price of neutrality.
Think of the United States as the club owner who loves to talk about open doors while quietly hiking the cover charge at the velvet rope; that is the protection part, a not so free trade that is really fee trade to shield the local D.J or band and keep the margins fat. Now add geopolitics as the doorman whispering rules that change if you roll up with the wrong entourage; buy your oil at the rival bar and the cover doubles later this month. It is where the host smiles for your selfie-photo and then hands you a bill marked duty calls. The goal is to push India to pick a lane and to pay up if it will not, while telling voters this is fairness not a food fight. Snark aside, it is one maneuver with two payoffs, pricing power at the port and pressure on the gameboard.
Jacobsen: Will India’s ₹40 billion credit guarantee scheme offset the damage caused by the tariffs?
Schulman: Ughhhh, doubtful! India seems more complex from a demographic and corporate perspective than the U.S. Short answer, no, this is duct tape on a cracked dam. The forty billion rupees planned credit guarantee covers only a sliver of bank risk on loans that are late for small exporters, which helps cash flow but does not erase a price handicap at the dock. India sold nearly $80 billion of goods to America last year—maybe check me on that—and more than half of that flow now runs into the new tariff wall, with many items facing a stacked 50% hit by late August, which means a tariff bill in the tens of billions that no guarantee can wish away. Think of it like trying to beat a luxury surcharge with a store credit card, nice for the points, useless against the sticker shock. The scheme may keep some textile and jewelry firms on life support and buy time while banks and ministries triage, but the arithmetic still screams relocation, re-pricing, or lost share until the policy weather changes.
I may need to explain this better since as I mentioned earlier, it is the importer that writes the check to the U.S. government. However, as I also mentioned, tariffs create thousands of inefficient private negotiations to split the tariff bill at the figurative dinner table. It’s tricky. Tariff incidence is a tug-of-war over margins and volume. If the importer can push prices to shoppers, the consumer pays; if demand balks, the importer leans on the supplier to cut the export price, so the exporter eats part of it; if a cheaper substitute exists in a friendlier country, the Indian exporter just loses the order and pays with lost revenue, which is the most expensive currency of all! The credit guarantee helps cash flow for firms that survive this do-or-die reality show round, but it does not erase the wedge at the dock or bring back the orders that never ship.
Jacobsen: Are central banks beginning a newer phase of synchronized global monetary easing?
Schulman: No, not beginning because many central banks already have begun, but it is not a synchronized huddle so much as a messy café crowd where some friends are sipping decaf lattes, others are in the back staring at the menu, and one big one is insisting on full throttle double espresso. The Federal Reserve has held steady so far in 2025 and is still evaluating options, Europe pressed pause after a string of reductions, the Bank of England cut a quarter point on August 6, the Bank of Canada last cut in March to 2.75%, and Japan is the odd caffeinating one tiptoeing toward normalization by raising rates rather than easing. You may recall that in March 2024, after 17 years, the Bank of Japan (BOJ) ended its negative interest rate policy and raised short-term interest rates to between 0% and 0.1%; they further raised rates in mid-2024 and the beginning of 2025.
Across emerging markets the crowd is decaffeinating. The backdrop enabler has been a significantly weaker U.S. dollar brought about by President Trump’s tariff and fiscal turmoil which has eased currency and inflation pressure enough for several emerging central banks to ease without inviting a run on their exchange rates. A weaker U.S. dollar makes it easier for EMs to repay their dollar denominated debt and allows them to lower interest rates without causing their local currency to weaken relative to the dollar. I believe Mexico recently cut rates again, Chile restarted cuts in July, Colombia, Peru, and the Czech Republic trimmed in the spring. China is playing its own tune, loosening with a reserve-requirement cut and a small policy tweak while keeping lending benchmarks steady and leaning on property and consumer-credit support rather than a big-bang rate slash.
Jacobsen: What happens if the U.S.–China tariff moratorium expires and then there’s no renewal?
Schulman: Possibly more tweets, more threats, and more suspension of belief by the market. Formulaically, however, if the truce lapses, the playlist flips from lo-fi détente to speed-metal tariffs in one beat. Suspended China-specific hikes snap back above the 10% baseline, import costs on China-origin goods jump, and buyers reroute or cancel orders while compliance folks start mainlining antacids. It is not good for either side. Consumers and businesses can expect a quick price up bump in electronics, machinery, toys, furniture, and the like as importers test pass-through, plus more audits and seizures now that the small-parcel loophole is already shut for China and is ending broadly in August. No more hiding in the de minimis coat closet.
On Beijing’s side, if I’m being strategic, a smart reply-guy move is to tighten the licensing spigot on gallium, germanium, graphite and other choke-point inputs. Call it death by paperwork delay rather than a headline ban. This will crimp critical battery, chip, and magnet supply. Markets would treat it like a risk-off squall or storm. American names with heavy China sourcing or sales take a valuation haircut, Mexico and other USMCA finishers get a sympathy bid, and the dollar-yuan vibe check gets spicy. The politics get louder and the supply chain math gets meaner; pay up, pivot to North America and parts of Southeast Asia, or eat the margin hit and pray for a holiday miracle. Think The Bear’s kitchen—the FX/Hulu series—at dinner rush where service is a beautiful panic; orders still go out, but there’s yelling, fire drills, triage, and a lot more burnt toast than anyone admits.
Jacobsen: Are global equity record highs signaling a bubble?
Schulman: That’s the funny thing about record highs, they only occur at or near record highs. We tell our family office clients that people point to this as a bad or scary thing, but by definition it is the only way it occurs.
The tells that keep me out of the doomsday bunker are that breadth isn’t pure mania; the median stock still lags its peak and leadership is concentrated in a handful of heavyweights whose cash flows are actually growing. The counterpoint is equally real; the equity risk premium has thinned to a five-year low, so the cushion under prices is more yoga mat than mattress, and any mix of stickier inflation, a hawkish central-bank remix, or an earnings wobble could turn the bubbly into flat soda fast. Call it froth with fundamentals and not dot-com cosplay; it is just a market that needs the hits to keep coming.
The U.S. economy is resilient,…and weird. From surging GDP estimates to a cooling manufacturing sector to high construction spending, the economy remains a study in contradictions. It is neither hot nor cold, but instead managing a strange, contradictory equilibrium—driving with one foot on the gas and the other hovering over the brake. For investors, this presents a balancing act. The Fed is still in restrictive mode, geopolitical risk is elevated, and yet the core economic engine refuses to sputter. We continue to position portfolios with an eye toward durability, quality earnings, balance sheet strength, growth, and select private opportunities, while maintaining flexibility to adapt as the macro picture evolves.
We tell our family office clients that you have to separate individual nuances from broad trends in both the domestic and the international markets! Individual stocks trade up and down on subtleties; they report earnings it looks positive then management says something that makes the outlook cloudy and it goes down; maybe there’s a twist in margins or marketing expenses that cause analysts to turn favorable or negative. But the broad market seems to be in a melt up fueled by still high corporate margins and profits, consumers still spending, unemployment still relatively low, and the rate of change and shock from bad news declining. Maybe the news is worsening, but it’s getting worse at a lower rate.
You also want to look at other risk-on indicators (or sentiment barometers). Bitcoin, Ethereum, and gold are near record highs, meme-stocks are making a comeback, e.g., Opendoor Technologies which has never seen profits had a 314% 6-day rise. And there have been over 200 U.S. IPOs already priced this year, double last year’s pace. U.S. companies have managed to sustain margins and the U.S. consumer continues to do what it does best, spend. Perhaps most telling, stock investors seem to reason that if bond markets aren’t concerned about the deficit-expanding potential of Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill, neither should they be.
Emerging country stocks and businesses—apologies if it seems like I’m rambling, there is just so much to cover—EM equity and bond markets have been propped by lower interest rates as a weaker U.S. dollar has allowed EM central banks to cut interest rates.
Additionally, and importantly, a booming AI industry not only is a catalyst for chip and energy growth but also increasing productivity and margins for companies around the globe. Generative Ai may be American or Chinese, developed by Open Ai, Gemini, Anthropic or Baidu, Alibaba, DeepSeek, or SenseTime, but companies in Europe, South America, and the rest of Asia can tap into it to improve productivity and margins. AI is a great equalizer for businesses around the world; they don’t have to spend hundreds of billions to develop, it but can just tap in and rent it.
Jacobsen: How is political interference in economic institutions affecting global investor confidence? What do you think about the region?
Schulman: I may have mentioned this in a previous interview: government and politics, rule and law, are economic interference by definition. Perception on whether the intrusion is helpful or detrimental makes the difference. When politicians lean on the referees, markets start pricing in a rigged game. Confidence rides on boring, rules-based institutions; meddling swaps a predictable rulebook for improv, which investors translate into wider risk premiums, weaker currencies, and shallower capex. You can see the spectrum. Mexico’s push to elect judges spooked capital because it blurs contract enforcement; the peso told you what it thought in real time. Turkey is the flip side; after years of political cross-traffic, a hard pivot to orthodox policy rebuilt some credibility and the central bank keeps telegraphing price-stability first.
For the Gulf and its neighbors, policy frameworks, dollar pegs, and steady reforms support low inflation and non-oil growth, and the International Monetary Fund keeps handing out gold stars for institutional upgrades. The United Arab Emirates continues to court capital with deepening foreign-ownership access and predictable legal venues, which is catnip for global allocators.
Institutional credibility is the ultimate multiple-expander; it has been foundational to U.S. growth leadership or what some call exceptionalism. Where the rulebook is clear and insulated from the politics of the week, money stays sticky; where the scoreboard operator starts taking calls from the owner’s box, the cost of capital quietly drifts north.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Michael.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Authors(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/07/02
Peter Evans is the Chief Executive Officer of Xtract One Technologies, a company specializing in AI-based threat detection and security solutions. He has over 25 years of experience in digital transformation and innovation within high-growth technology sectors. Evans has held CEO roles at four technology companies and has overseen revenue growth, profitability improvements, and multiple liquidity events. Before joining Xtract One, he held senior positions at technology and security firms, including IBM, where he contributed to the strategic direction of the Internet Security Systems division, focusing on security considerations related to cloud computing, telecommunications, and mobile technologies.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What led to the selection of Xtract One’s Gateway for deployment at Manitoba’s Health Sciences Centre and Crisis Response Centre?
Peter Evans: Manitoba Health conducted a thorough evaluation where they tested multiple security solutions. Xtract One Gateway demonstrated strong performance during its pilot across various hospital locations.
Healthcare environments create unique security challenges. Patients arrive in distress, staff need efficient movement between areas, and the setting must remain welcoming. During the pilot, Gateway showed it could handle these complexities effectively while maintaining appropriate security levels.
We worked collaboratively with HSC staff throughout the process. Their emergency department deals with situations different from those of the Crisis Response Centre, requiring tailored approaches for each location. Our willingness to adapt to their specific needs, combined with Gateway’s performance in testing, influenced their final decision.
Jacobsen: How does the system ensure robust threat detection while also maintaining a comfortable and seamless experience for patients, staff, and visitors?
Evans: Xtract One Gateway allows people to walk through naturally without removing items from their pockets or bags. Our AI algorithms distinguish between potential threats and everyday items like laptops, tablets, notebooks, keys, and phones. False alerts are decreased significantly, preventing unnecessary invasiveness and delays for patients.
With Gateway, healthcare staff spend less time managing security processes and more time focusing on patient care. The system prevents entrance bottlenecks, which is important for emergency departments where delays could affect clinical outcomes.
Jacobsen: How does Gateway distinguish between potential weapons and everyday personal items?
Evans: Xtract One Gateway combines advanced sensor technology with AI algorithms to create what we call “threat signatures.” The system analyzes object characteristics and then compares them against a library of known threat profiles.
We’ve trained our AI on millions of data points representing both threats and common personal belongings. The system continuously improves through machine learning, becoming more accurate over time.
For HSC specifically, we determined sensitivity settings to match and balance their security profile, patient experience, and operational flow.
Jacobsen: What operational improvements are expected in hospitals with this implementation?
Evans: Enhanced safety without operational bottlenecks stands as the primary benefit. Traditional security often creates entry delays that negatively impact patient experience and potentially clinical outcomes.
Xtract One Gateway delivers faster processing while maintaining security coverage. Emergency departments operate more efficiently, staff focus on patient care rather than security procedures, and the atmosphere remains conducive to healing.
Security staffing requirements decrease, as well. Gateway’s precision in identifying actual threats allows personnel deployment to more strategic roles instead of conducting manual searches or managing security lines. This is particularly valuable given current healthcare staffing challenges.
Jacobsen: How do Canadian Occupational Safety and Health Agency and the Ontario Nurses’ Association statistics make the need for advanced security solutions urgent in healthcare?
Evans: Statistics from the Ontario Nurses’ Association reveal that up to 85% of nurseshave experienced workplace violence. Canadian Occupational Safety and Health Agency data confirms healthcare workers face some of the highest violence rates across industries.
These numbers have continued trending upward in recent years. Healthcare workers, dedicated to healing others, increasingly become targets of violence. Manitoba Nurses Union president Darlene Jackson noted that frontline staff felt “much safer” with our detectors in place.
Real people experience trauma in their workplace when these incidents occur. Staff safety affects everything from retention rates to quality of care. Advanced security solutions like Gateway create environments where healthcare professionals can focus primarily on patient care.
Jacobsen: How does Gateway improve screening times and reduce the need for separate bag searches at entry points?
Evans: Xtract One Gateway fundamentally changes the screening paradigm. Traditional security approaches require people to empty pockets, remove items from bags, or undergo separate screening processes for carried items. This creates significant delays, requires additional staffing, and often creates an unwelcoming atmosphere.
Our Gateway system allows individuals to walk through naturally while carrying their belongings. The AI-powered detection can scan both the person and their bags and backpacks simultaneously, identifying potential threats while distinguishing harmless personal items like laptops, tablets, and phones. In most cases, this eliminates the need for separate bag searches.
In terms of actual numbers, we typically see processing times that are significantly faster than traditional metal detector and bag search combinations. This means that healthcare facility patients can simply walk-right-in, while the hospital maintains effective security coverage.
Jacobsen: What other industries can benefit from AI threat detection systems?
Evans: While healthcare facilities represent an important application of our technology, we’re seeing adoption across numerous sectors where safety concerns must be balanced with operational efficiency and visitor experience.
Sports and entertainment venues have been early adopters, and educational institutions from K-12 to universities are increasingly implementing these solutions to protect students and staff. What’s interesting is how the technology is being adapted to meet the unique needs of each environment. In corporate settings, it might focus on protecting intellectual property as much as people. In schools, it needs to accommodate high-volume morning entry of students carrying educational technology. The flexibility of AI-based systems like our Gateway means we can customize solutions for virtually any environment where safety and security are priorities.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Peter.
–
Xtract One Technologies is a top provider of AI-powered threat detection and security solutions designed to create safe, seamless entry experiences. Its discreet, non-invasive Gateway systems allow facility operators to identify weapons and threats at entry and exit points without slowing foot traffic. Focused on enhancing “Walk-right-In” convenience, Xtract One supports diverse environments, including schools, hospitals, arenas, stadiums, manufacturing sites, and distribution centers. Known for blending advanced security with user-friendly design, the company leads the market in providing safety without compromising experience. Xtract One’s cutting-edge solutions reflect its commitment to innovation, efficiency, and protection across high-traffic, high-security venues.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/27
In this wide-ranging interview, Javier Palomarez shares his insights on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s early leadership, highlighting his pragmatic approach to trade and diplomacy. He emphasizes the importance of Canada–U.S.–Mexico relations under the USMCA, highlighting mutual economic and strategic interests. Palomarez warns of declining trust and trade due to tariffs and political rhetoric, noting boycotts and shifts in public sentiment in Canada. He advocates for restoring confidence and stability through diplomacy and collaboration. With key industries like automotive and energy at stake, Palomarez urges leaders to find common ground and preserve the economic backbone of the Western Hemisphere.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Javier Palomarez, what are your general sentiments regarding Mark Carney’s first few weeks in office as Prime Minister, particularly on trade and economic policy? How is this reflected in Mexico’s relationship with the United States?
Javier Palomarez: I’m impressed with Prime Minister Carney. He has handled himself admirably.
Both he and President Claudia Sheinbaum have done a commendable job in approaching the Canada–Mexico relationship and recent North American dialogue with pragmatism. They have both been diplomatic and have helped lower tensions while establishing a more respectful and equal footing in discussions.
The U.S.–Canada relationship has historically been strong. For decades, it has remained mostly positive. Economically, this partnership has supported millions of jobs and small businesses across both countries.
According to the latest trade data, Canada is the United States’ second-largest trading partner, with more than $750 billion in two-way goods and services traded annually. The trade relationship encompasses key industries, including automotive parts, timber, crude oil, natural gas, and others. It truly covers the whole spectrum.
So, I’m pleased with how the Prime Minister has steered these conversations. I’m hopeful that both nations will continue to engage constructively because we depend on each other. This relationship must remain symbiotic.
Jacobsen: What about the security aspect of the relationship? Is there a broader strategic element at play?
Palomarez: Now, Scott, I’m not a national security expert by any stretch, but it’s evident we also share strategic defence interests. For instance, Canada has been in discussions about participating in missile defence upgrades, including potential alignment with aspects of the U.S. Integrated Air and Missile Defense system—though not the Israeli-developed Iron Dome, which is a separate, short-range missile defence system.
This relationship—between the United States, Canada, and Mexico—has broad economic and geopolitical significance. It is mutually beneficial, and the United States would be unwise to undermine it.
The Canada–U.S.–Mexico triad—under the USMCA, which replaced NAFTA in 2020—is the economic backbone of the Western Hemisphere. Together, we form the largest trading bloc in the region. We are obligated to respect this interdependence and keep building on the strong foundation we already have.
Looking ahead, the USMCA is scheduled for a joint review in 2026, six years after it enters into force. That means we need to begin preparing now—to ensure the agreement strengthens mutual gains, addresses evolving concerns, and gives all three countries a fair say.
I’m thankful that Prime Minister Carney has demonstrated true diplomacy in managing these complex dynamics and helped keep the relationship on course.
Jacobsen: Something you and others have mentioned to me—perhaps not in these exact words—is that stability is good for business. Why is that the case? And what kinds of actions from political leaders can create instability? How has Carney managed to avoid those?
Palomarez: Instability—the inability to plan or invest confidently—is detrimental to businesses on both sides of the border. When markets and regulatory environments are uncertain, companies hesitate. That slows growth.
By avoiding inflammatory rhetoric and resisting political bait, Carney has helped maintain a level-headed approach. He understands that business requires a stable environment to make long-term plans, build partnerships, and commit to capital expenditures. Without that, business 26 confidence drops. And that is not good for anyone—Canadian, American, or Mexican.
Your Prime Minister’s willingness and ability to calm the conversation—to avoid taking the bait that’s been thrown—and instead think strategically and pragmatically is critically important right now. I’m thankful to both him and President Sheinbaum in Mexico because that’s precisely what we need in a trade partner. We need mutual respect and trust. Without that, there will not be a stable environment in which businesses on both sides of the border can plan, invest, grow, and drive our economies forward.
Some trade provisions can be renegotiated during this period—particularly under the USMCA review. The industries that are coming online or have matured in recent years will be key for Canada to consider during negotiations with the United States—and vice versa.
Jacobsen: Which industries, in your view, are most relevant here?
Palomarez: Well, right off the bat, there’s the automotive industry. Parts go back and forth multiple times across borders before final assembly and sale. Energy is another critical area for all three partners—especially Canada and the U.S. Pipelines, crude oil, and natural gas—these are foundational sectors for both countries. We must be mindful of this and safeguard those shared interests.
There’s a lot at stake. The relationship has taken a hit. It began with U.S. tariffs on non-USMCA goods and then extended into energy, with a 10% tariff applied. In response, the Prime Minister issued retaliatory tariffs. As of now, we’re seeing approximately a 1.5% decline in trade on both sides. There’s been a measurable decrease in cross-border tourism—fewer Canadians visiting the U.S. and fewer Americans going to Canada.
We’re also seeing signs of a consumer backlash. A poll found that roughly 91% of Canadians expressed a desire to reduce their dependence on American goods. Such sentiments are not conducive to the American business environment. The U.S. needs to understand just how critically important this relationship is. We often take it for granted and fail to reflect on it in a meaningful way.
But the trade you see is just the tip of the iceberg. We share far more than a border—we share people, culture, language, and history. There are also significant national security implications. There is so much built into this relationship.
So, given that long-standing history, calmer heads will prevail. We will normalize relations and return to a place of mutual respect and productive trade.
Jacobsen: As a general rule, I tend to trust that high-income societies function best when mutual trust is intact. When political relationships deteriorate, trust between the societies involved erodes as well. So how can Prime Minister Carney work with President Trump to repair and rebuild trust and, in turn, enhance the potential for income growth for both nations?
Palomarez: Some of the answers here are pretty obvious—mutual respect, returning to the negotiating table, and operating from a shared commitment to restoring trust.
Interestingly, Carney and Trump have more in common than some people might expect. They both understand the importance of financial markets and macroeconomic stability, albeit from different perspectives. If they can focus on mutual interest rather than ideology and rebuild institutional respect across the board, we’ll be in a much better place.
They both face the challenge of navigating historic economic pressures—challenges we have not seen in either country in recent memory. Both are under immense pressure from their respective populations to address the failures of prior administrations. They are each working to secure a better future for their nations and, in doing so, for this hemisphere as a whole.
So yes, they have a lot in common if you think about it. Both Prime Minister Carney and President Trump marked decisive political shifts in their respective countries. If they approached the situation from that perspective—recognizing their shared challenges and goals—they could find real common ground. They both face the pressure of proving themselves in contrast to the leaders who preceded them.
In that commonality lies real potential: the chance to work together rather than continue down a path of friction. The United States would benefit from remembering the long and storied partnership with Canada—one that has repeatedly worked to the advantage of both countries. That shared history holds not just the challenge but also the opportunity to restore and strengthen the relationship.
Jacobsen: Are you aware of the recent changes Prime Minister Carney has made to his cabinet? Do you think those changes might offer insight into how he plans to move forward economically—both in terms of policy direction and resource allocation for government-supported business ventures?
Palomarez: Not in great detail—only from a distance. But again, like Trump in his way, Carney is a man on a mission. They both campaigned on specific mandates and now they’re working to deliver on those promises. There’s a lot to prove—and not a lot of time to do it.
It’s like trying to turn an ocean liner around in a narrow canal. It’s slow, it’s complicated, and it takes precision. They’re both facing that challenge simultaneously.
So, amidst all the upheaval and change in both countries, we’re better off respecting each other and identifying points of alignment—ways we can normalize the relationship and work together for the benefit of both nations and their economies.
Jacobsen: Has any sector in business or trade relations, which may have initially seemed damaged during recent tensions, actually turned out to be better off in the long run? Perhaps it was a sunset industry whose decline was accelerated.
Palomarez: Yes. One of the things I’ve observed—in the cases of Mexico, Canada, and even the European Union—is that long-standing trade relationships can be significantly damaged, if not completely undone, in a matter of weeks. And once that damage is done, it’s tough to rebuild the trust.
Trust is fundamental to the U.S.–Canada relationship. And the fear I have is that both the American and Canadian people have long memories. When that trust is broken, it can take years to restore fully. I’m fearful, again, that Canadians have started to boycott American goods. I worry that it may take a while for people to forget—and, more importantly—forgive. So, for me, the sooner we get back to the business of finding common ground and working toward normalization, the better.
My plea to our own President is to actively seek out those points of commonality. We have far more in common than we have in areas where we differ. There is a necessary interdependence and collaboration that has to exist between our countries. If you doubt that, look at a country like Israel and ask what it feels like to have a neighbour across the border who may not have your best interests at heart. It is a stark contrast to what we have enjoyed with Canada—and what I fear we have taken for granted.
A strong economic and trade relationship with a neighbour like Canada is a national asset. It is something we need to preserve, not erode.
Palomarez: Absolutely. Thanks, Scott. Good luck, and I’ll be in touch soon.
Jacobsen: Safe travels, Javier.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/26
Part 3 of 3
Pat Merryweather-Arges, Executive Director of Project Patient Care and longtime Rotarian, shares insights from her decades of humanitarian work across over 30 countries. Merryweather‑Arges explains that under‑resourced hospitals gain quickest impact from three essentials: staff training in evidence‑based protocols, reliable WASH (water, sanitation, hygiene), and vaccinations, especially against pneumonia and polio. Clean water alone slashes infection‑related deaths ten‑fold. She cites Rotary’s four‑decade polio‑eradication campaign—launched in 1985, expanded from a Philippine pilot, now down to ten cases in Pakistan and Afghanistan—as its largest, proving disciplined partnerships, Gates Foundation matching, and field technology can ultimately push diseases to zero.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: When you’re doing your assessments, as a professional and expert, how do you determine what’s appropriate and most urgently needed in a hospital with limited infrastructure? And more broadly, what do under-resourced hospitals, particularly in rural or low-income areas, most often need to achieve high impact with minimal cost?
Pat Merryweather-Arges: Two things come to mind immediately.
First is training and education. Many births, surgeries, and procedures occur in these settings—often without proper protocols. Just ensuring that staff are trained in best practices can dramatically improve outcomes.
Second is clean water. It sounds basic, but infections are rampant, and clean water is fundamental to preventing complications and maintaining hygiene. Without it, even basic care becomes risky.
The situation becomes extremely dangerous without clean water, and the number of infection-related deaths is significantly higher. I have the data written down somewhere—people die of infections even in the U.S., but the rate is about 10 times higher in countries lacking water and sanitation infrastructure.
I remember visiting a hospital in India—well-intentioned but overwhelmed. In one corner, bloody linens were piled up. They had one delivery room, which consisted of a chair with an opening for childbirth. The exam table where women lie down during delivery had gloves on it.
We were there because they had a very high maternal and infant mortality rate.
I asked the physician about the gloves. He said, “Well, I clean them after I deliver.” But that is a huge source of infection. Surgical gloves are porous, and you cannot reuse them. So we had to explain to him why single-use gloves are essential and how critical it is to have clean water available.
Truck deliveries can bring water in—it is not impossible. But the combination of water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) saves lives. Once babies are born, immunizations are critical as well.
Depending on the region, of course, polio is a concern, but so is pneumonia, which is a leading cause of death for children under five. Many of them do not receive pneumococcal vaccines, which could prevent that.
So I would say the three most essential things are:
- Vaccines,
- WASH (Water, Sanitation, Hygiene), and
- Proper medical protocols.
You cannot perform surgery and then expect a wound to heal in an unclean environment. Dirt and bacteria will almost certainly lead to complications.
Jacobsen: What is the biggest, longest-running project Rotary International has ever taken on—either solo or in collaboration? Something where the effort spanned years, and ultimately succeeded?
Merryweather-Arges: That would be polio eradication. Rotary took that on as a global mission in 1985. At that time, there were approximately 150,000 children paralyzed every year due to polio.
Rotary ran a pilot program in the Philippines, and it was successful—the country was eventually declared polio-free. From there, Rotary decided to expand the initiative globally. So yes, they have been working on it for over 40 years. That was the beginning of the global push. It has been a long road, but the commitment has never wavered.
This year, there have been only ten wild poliovirus cases worldwide. But it is still a challenge. It has a ripple effect when countries begin cutting back on funding, especially in key areas. For example, USAID provided significant financing for polio vaccines, the workers, and the cold storage necessary to keep the vaccines viable.
That support has been cut, and we are working hard to fill the gap. Other countries have stepped in, but there remains a huge gap that we are still addressing.
The goal is simple: get to zero cases. And we are close, very close.
When I was in India, it was the first time I witnessed the scale of polio’s impact on people’s lives. People had been paralyzed by polio. I saw them at train stations, trying to earn any money they could. Many were using modified skateboards to move around, pushing themselves along with their hands.
It was heartbreaking—but also deeply motivating. We are at the eradication threshold, and it is not just Rotary leading the charge.
We helped launch the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), which includes the World Health Organization, CDC, UNICEF, and critically, the Gates Foundation.
The Gates Foundation has been a game-changer. They match Rotary donations two to one and have also brought advanced technology. When you are down to just a handful of cases, you need to pinpoint exactly where they are and ensure everyone in the area is immunized.
The Gates Foundation introduced mobile technology, like iPads, for healthcare workers to use in the field. That technology has vastly improved tracking, reporting, and coordination.
So yes, this is Rotary’s long-term project, but it has had far-reaching effects. We have learned so much. We now run health fair campaigns in many parts of Africa and beyond—all because we know that vaccination and fundamental healthcare matter.
Jacobsen: I do not think we are going to top that.
Merryweather-Arges: [laughs] It is something. If the malaria vaccine proves effective, that will be huge—malaria kills so many people each year. Tuberculosis is another one, and they are working on a vaccine for the latest strain.
This work has been challenging, especially early on, because it was uncharted territory. Rotary had never taken on something of this scale before. But now, we are down to just Pakistan and Afghanistan, where the last wild polio cases remain. Thank you so much.
Jacobsen: Thank you. Have a great weekend!
Merryweather-Arges: You too. Bye!
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/25
Thomas Westenholz is a couple therapist based in Brighton and Hove, UK, specializing in Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) and Somatic Trauma Therapy. Through his practice at WAVO LTD and the Couples in Focus podcast, he helps partners break destructive patterns and rebuild emotional connection using honest, grounded, and research-informed approaches. Westenholz explains how posture, touch, and eye contact reflect emotional connection in romantic relationships. Drawing on Emotionally Focused and Somatic Therapy, he highlights body language as an early warning system, shaped by trauma and culture, and key to rebuilding trust, safety, and attunement between partners.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: How do posture, touch, and eye contact reflect the emotional state of a romantic relationship?
Thomas Westenholtz: Posture: I look for signs such as whether their frontal bodies are facing each other and how far apart they are standing or sitting from each other. Are arms crossed or open?
Couples that feel more connected, open, and safe with each other tend to point their bodies towards each other, while disconnected, angry, or resentful couples tend to turn more away.
Arms tend to be open and relaxed, while crossed arms often show defensiveness. This is typically seen in a more avoidant partner protecting themselves from criticism.
Touch is a very significant bonding cue for humans. Couples who feel safe and connected again tend to touch each other far more. Touch (unless there is substantial trauma) tends to soothe and calm the nervous system, making us more receptive to our partner. It also releases bonding hormones such as oxytocin.
A hand touching a hand, a hug, a hand on a shoulder. These are signs of affection and facilitate bonding.
Lack of touch is also common in couples who feel disconnected and either have had some traumatic fracture or where resentment is present.
However, we can’t look at touch in isolation without seeing the context. Touch plays an even more significant role when one partner is in distress, and couples who feel safe and close tend to touch each other more in distress. In contrast, a lack of touch can be a warning sign that they cannot respond and support each other in key moments of distress, leading to loneliness and distress.
Eye contact, similar to touch, also shows the comfort and ease a couple has with each other. Couples who struggle with emotional vulnerability tend to find it hard to have eye contact when speaking about more vulnerable parts. They will look down (shame) or away (avoidance).
Eye contact also releases bonding hormones and is an important cue to regulate each other, as it says, “I am here with you. You are not alone”.
Jacobsen: What subtle body language cues indicate emotional disconnection between partners?
Westenholtz: Turning away, looking away, withholding touch, rolling eye. “Follow the toes, knees and eyes, and you will see where they want to be” — coupletherapy.earth
Are they looking to move away from discomfort or towards someone?
Jacobsen: How can body language serve as an early warning system?
Westenholtz: As John Gottman’s research showed, when couples reach with contempt, they are far more likely to end in divorce/separation.
Contempt is turning their back on someone, rolling their eyes.
It communicates “you do not matter to me, I do not care for you”
When I notice a lack of touch during distress or a couple’s body language turns away from each other, then it’s a warning system that their safety (the foundation for any long-term relationship) is in trouble.
They are no longer relating (trying to understand each other’s world); they are busy protecting themselves.
Jacobsen: How do cultural norms influence the interpretation of romantic body language?
Westenholtz: While I am not an expert on all world cultures, it does have an impact.
Some of these signs are universal. However, some cultures normalise touch more than others. Even within Europe, imagine British vs Italians.
Some cultures also have different customs around eye contact. Similar to some cultures, touch is not permitted in public.
My responses are very much through a Western lens. However, we do know that before a child is shaped by its culture, they naturally seek eye contact and touch from their caregiver to soothe, and so it’s universal something our nervous system responds to.
Culture primarily impacts what is permitted and our meaning-making (cognitive processing) of what is happening.
Jacobsen: Can couples become more attuned to nonverbal emotional signals?
Westenholtz: The attunement to these signals is hardwired or created very early, when the brain has the highest neuroplasticity.
And so, unlike logic reasoning, we can pick this up and respond with approach/avoid behaviour before we even have language.
Yes, couples can learn to read this, and in my couples therapy, I help couples notice their nonverbal signals, which are body language and tonality.
This means they can be aware of the signals they send that cause their partner more distress and which comfort them. And it’s this map of themselves and their partner that helps them respond in new ways and create a new cycle of connection.
Jacobsen: What are common misconceptions about body language in romantic relationships?
Westenholtz: I think the most common is simply the lack of awareness of what signals we are sending out with our body language, and that we are often stuck in trying to solve an issue using logic when our bodies communicate far more than our words.
Saying “I love you” while walking away with our back turned to our partner feels very different in their emotional brain (limbic system) than if we are looking into their eyes, holding their hand and saying “I love you”
Jacobsen: How might trauma or attachment history impact the expression or interpretation of romantic body language?
Westenholtz: Excellent question.
Trauma interrupts the processing of signals, as there tends to be either numbing or hyper-vigilance, so the system is alert to danger.
People who have had severe trauma tend to send more defensive cues as they are more self-protective. Escalation tends to happen much faster and more extreme as small signals that a calm nervous system would see as a simply “he is walking away, to get to work on time” can be seen as “he does not care about me” and so that simple turning away can be interpreted in different ways. A more traumatised brain tends to look for the danger cue and would see the second option. This is just an example.
Trauma can strongly impact our interpretation of body language, as what would usually not be a danger cue suddenly becomes one.
They are also more likely to send hostile or defensive body language to protect themselves from imaginary dangers.
Jacobsen: In emotionally focused or somatically based therapy, how is body language used?
Westenholtz: In somatic trauma work, we help the person notice their bodily sensations. What tends to happen in trauma is a disconnect between the bodily sensation, which biologically is one of the three compasses we have to navigate back into balance (logic/cognition, emotion & sensations).
By becoming more aware of their sensation, they can begin to regulate and take actions to get themselves back in a calm place.
An example of how body language could be used is teaching someone bodily boundaries by slowly walking towards them, and they say stop when something in their body feels uncomfortable.
In Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy, we make people aware of how they react in their bodies and notice sensations. Someone could start to fiddle their fingers suddenly, and I might say “x, I noticed you started to fiddle your finger when Y said x, can you help me understand what’s happening for you right now?”
It brings awareness to their body language and sensations so they can start to navigate the world and their relationship better. Without the three compasses, it’s easy to get lost.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Thomas.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/25
Part 1 of 5
Eru Hiko-Tahuri, a Māori creative and author of Māori Boy Atheist, explores his journey from religious upbringing to secular humanism. Hiko-Tahuri discusses cultural tensions as a Māori atheist, advocating for respectful integration of Māori values like manaakitanga and whanaungatanga within secular contexts. Hiko-Tahuri reflects on navigating Māori identity as an atheist. He emphasizes integrating Māori values like manaakitanga and whanaungatanga into secular spaces. Through storytelling, funerary practices, and community rituals, Hiko-Tahuri demonstrates that cultural richness and humanist principles can coexist without reliance on supernatural belief.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we’re joined by Eru Hiko-Tahuri, a multifaceted Māori creative and intellectual voice based in New Zealand.
Eru Hiko-Tahuri: Thank you for having me.
Jacobsen: He’s best known as the author of Māori Boy Atheist, where he chronicles his journey from childhood religious observance to secular humanism. Alongside writing, he engages audiences as a radio host, musician, and airbrush artist, integrating cultural expression with personal storytelling. Since launching Māori Boy Atheist, with editions available in English, Te Reo Māori, and French, he has contributed meaningfully to rationalist and skeptic communities, offering insights on navigating Māori spirituality as an atheist.
The book was first published in 2015 and has served as a platform to explore the intersection of Māori identity and secularism. His public talks and podcasts, notably The Heretical Hori, encourage free thought and integrity within the indigenous context. They combine art, reflective media, and cultural dialogue to foster conversations on belief, identity, and resilience. Through those platforms, I aim to respectfully explore and challenge ideas, especially within Māori communities where belief systems can be deeply personal and culturally intertwined.
Thank you very much for joining me today—I appreciate it.
Hiko-Tahuri: It’s a pleasure to be here.
Jacobsen: How do core humanist principles align with traditional Māori concepts such as mana, mana motuhake, and whanaungatanga?
Hiko-Tahuri: Whanaungatanga speaks to kinship and the interconnectedness of people. That aligns closely with humanism, emphasizing dignity, respect, and empathy. You treat others as people first—essentially as extended family. It’s about looking after the people within your sphere, which reflects humanist ethics well.
Jacobsen: How can secular humanist organizations incorporate Te Ao Māori—the Māori worldview—into their activities without endorsing supernaturalism while respecting and integrating those cultural values?
Hiko-Tahuri: That’s a great question. It’s not always straightforward, but let me give an example from personal experience. When someone in our family passes away, we take them to the marae—a tribal meeting ground—where they lie in state for three days. During that time, relatives come to mourn, share memories, cry, laugh, tell jokes, and say goodbyes.
Depending on travel or family arrangements, the person is buried or cremated on the third day—sometimes longer. This process reflects core Māori values like manaakitanga (hospitality, care) and whanaungatanga, which coexist naturally with humanist principles of community, respect, and shared humanity. These values shape how we live and commemorate life without invoking supernatural beliefs.
Employers in Aotearoa generally understand that if someone goes to a funeral, they might be gone for three days—that’s just the time it takes. All of that work, by the way, is done voluntarily. We gather at the marae. Some families will care for the food, and others will help with arrangements. You can even sleep there.
We sleep beside the body for those three days. We keep them with us. We talk to them. We joke about them. We tell stories. We insult them lovingly. We laugh. We cry. It’s all done out in the open, and it’s for everyone to witness. That’s just the way we do it. It’s a good, profound way of grieving together as a collective.
Jacobsen: And within a secular humanist context, this isn’t just about superficial inclusion—it’s about acknowledging different ways of being. That kind of grieving is profoundly human and deeply cultural. It’s not about hierarchy—this isn’t about one way being better than another.
Take my Dutch heritage, for example. They’re big on windmills, dikes, black licorice, and clogs. The traditional way of burial there is usually more private—placing the body in a mound of Earth and marking it with a cross or a headstone. The grieving tends to happen separately from the deceased.
But for you, it’s different. Being with the body, telling stories, laughing and crying beside them—all part of the process. I wouldn’t say one way is more valid than the other. These are just different cultural processes for the same human experience. One does not invalidate the other.
Hiko-Tahuri: This is just the way we do it. I don’t judge how others handle it, but this is the way I prefer because it’s how I grew up. It’s what feels real to me.
And yes, there are usually religious aspects involved in the funeral proceedings. When those moments arise, I sit quietly and let them happen around me. I do not participate in those parts because I cannot in good conscience. And that’s one of the problematic areas—Indigenous and non-religious. Those are the tensions.
Jacobsen: How do you navigate those tensions?
Hiko-Tahuri: That’s the most challenging part, honestly. Knowing when to stay quiet, step back, and speak. It isn’t easy.
Jacobsen: Were there aspects where you didn’t feel tension at all? Or places where the friction started to show?
Hiko-Tahuri: Yes. One of the earliest points where tension emerges is during the pōwhiri—the welcoming ceremony when people arrive at the marae. That includes a series of formal speeches. It’s in that speech-making process where religious content often appears. That’s where the rub tends to start.
Jacobsen: Do you find conversations with others in the Māori community become more difficult when you do not endorse the spiritual or supernatural aspects of the culture?
Hiko-Tahuri: Yes. It can be challenging. Not always, but often. Some people are very accepting. Others feel that rejecting the supernatural is rejecting the culture itself, which is not my intention. But the tension is real.
Jacobsen: So you’re engaging in the same practices but not endorsing the supernaturalism around them. Is that difficult for people?
Hiko-Tahuri: Yes. Many people do not understand that distinction. There have been many times when I’ve been told, “You’re not Māori if you don’t believe in these things.” That has happened quite a few times.
Jacobsen: That is unfortunately common. I have encountered similar stories in speaking with Indigenous people—particularly from North America. The closest equivalent, in terms of how it’s discussed internationally, is often with African Americans in more conservative or evangelistic religious circles: Baptist, Pentecostal, Methodist—hardline Christianity in Black communities in the United States.
Suppose you’re a woman in those communities, and you reject the concept of God or Christianity entirely. In that case, you’ve forfeited your “Black card.” You’re suddenly seen as no longer fully part of the community.
Hiko-Tahuri: Yes.
Jacobsen: And that is not just an identity issue—it’s social. You’re giving up a significant source of communal support in a society that will not necessarily provide support to you proportionately. So, there are deeper sociological and economic implications at play.
I’ve heard similar things from North American Indigenous people, too—they say, ‘You’ve given up your Indigenous card.
Hiko-Tahuri: Somehow, you’re less Māori or less authentic if you’re secular. On the marae or in the community, that feeling can be present.
Jacobsen: Would you say it is quite that extreme in New Zealand?
Hiko-Tahuri: Probably not to the same extent. New Zealanders are generally pretty liberal. Highly religious people here are sometimes even seen as a bit unusual. We’re more secular than many places—certainly more than I’ve seen in North America. So, it is not as intense, but it can still be challenging.
This is especially true among people in what we might call the Māori Renaissance—those who are just now reconnecting with their heritage. Typically, the first people they learn from are religious, so religion is deeply woven into the cultural learning they receive. Then they meet someone like me, who speaks the language and participates fully in the culture but is openly non-religious—and that creates tension for them. It challenges their framework.
Jacobsen: If you look at the traditional Māori worldview—how human beings were made, how the world came into being—what aspects can be reconciled with a humanistic way of looking at things, and what aspects cannot? And maybe you could give us a bit of a background primer. What’s the general picture?
Hiko-Tahuri: In the Māori creation narrative, everything begins with Te Kore—the void or nothingness. From Te Korecame Ranginui (Sky Father) and Papatūānuku (Earth Mother). They were bound together in a tight embrace, and between them lived their many children—some say seventy, others say fewer.
Because the children were trapped in the darkness between their parents, they decided that their parents had to be separated to live with light and space. This led to a conflict among the children—each had a different view on handling the situation. Eventually, Tāne Mahuta, the God of forests and birds, pushed his parents apart, creating the world of light, Te Ao Mārama.
These children—atua, the closest term to “gods”—became personifications of natural elements. So there’s Tangaroa for the sea, Tāwhirimātea for weather and storms, Rongo for cultivated food, and so on. There’s debate around what atruly means—whether they’re deities or ancestral forces—but they represent aspects of the natural world in human-like form.
These stories explain natural forces through personification. Of course, much of it doesn’t align with what we know from science about how humans or the Earth came into being. But some aspects resonate. For instance, each atua has a personality—just like humans do. This humanizes nature and gives people a relational framework for understanding their environment.
So yes, while the cosmology isn’t scientifically accurate, the relational values and metaphors can still be meaningful. That’s where the humanist alignment might be found—not in literal belief but in symbolic or cultural interpretation.
It reminds me of reading Joseph Campbell—how mythologies worldwide echo similar patterns. Eventually, you realize that they can’t all be true—and most likely, none of them are. That was my journey. Campbell was instrumental in helping me unpack much of what I had assumed. Once you see that every culture has a creation story—and they often contradict one another—you start questioning which, if any, are “true” in a literal sense.
Jacobsen: I’ve found it helpful to separate spirituality in the supernatural sense from spirituality as a personal or communal meaning-making practice, especially in conversations like this and other interviews. In other words, spirituality that gives a person purpose or peace doesn’t need to invoke the supernatural.
Hiko-Tahuri: Absolutely. That distinction has been vital for me, too.
Jacobsen: When people say “spiritual,” I sometimes ask: Do you mean supernaturalism or practices that foster wellbeing or connection? Prayer or meditation, for example, can have measurable health benefits—lowering stress and calming the nervous system—without requiring a belief in the supernatural.
So yes—looking at spiritual practices in the edification or enriching sense—not in the supernatural sense—what practices are done in the community or individually, or at least encouraged, that might be comparable to things like attending Easter or Christmas mass? Or personal rituals like being told to read a specific scripture in the morning, pray for ten minutes, hold a rosary, and recite ten Hail Marys?
Hiko-Tahuri: I was thinking about practices of personal unification. A lot of our communal activities involve singing. We’re a people who love to sing together. You will hear singing at any large gathering—a meeting, a ceremony, or a funeral.
Yes, some of the songs are religious, but what’s significant is that you have 300 people singing in harmony. And the richness of sound—those layers of harmonies—is incredible. Whether it’s traditional waiata, more contemporary songs, or even religious hymns, singing together is powerful. Even if the content has spiritual roots, the experience is about unity, connection, and shared emotion.
Jacobsen: That resonates with me. We’re both secular humanists and atheists. I can relate to my time in a university choir. I was in it for about two and a half years, and we sang many classical European music—Bach, Mozart’s Requiem, and other choral works.
Sometimes, we performed modern songs with a 1950s vibe. I remember people using phrases like “cat” and “daddio” or “you dig,” like something out of an Eddie Murphy or Richard Pryor scene. I sang bass, and we once collaborated with musicians from the Vancouver Symphony Orchestra in a 500-seat church. The acoustics were stunning.
It was technically Christian or sacred music—cathedral music, I’d call it—but the overwhelming sense of awe, the physical resonance, the unity of voices… It was a spiritual experience in that broader, secular sense of the word.
Hiko-Tahuri: Yes, I’d call that spiritual too. It taps into a level of connection and emotion you do not find anywhere else.
I do not avoid using “spiritual” in that context. It describes an experience of profound meaning, joy, or connection. I am not using it to refer to supernatural beliefs.
I’m not one of those people who avoids the word altogether. I use it for deeply moving experiences that are transcendent in an emotional sense. Just because a word has a particular religious usage does not mean it is limited to that meaning.
Jacobsen: Yes—most words have secondary meanings. So, use the second meaning! And if someone asks, explain it.
Hiko-Tahuri: Absolutely.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/25
An old friend once lost his virginity to the same girl who deflowered another friend.
They were drunk.
They did the act.
Then a thud.
Next morning, apparently, there was a forehead indentation.
The Fair Maiden of Joy fell off, on top,
clocked her fair head on the side table.
The head was done,
as well as the deed.
Two sonflowers left,
stem, root, and leaf.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/20
Reverend (Margaret Ann) Gretta Vosper was born July 6, 1958, in Ontario, Canada. She was born the second of four siblings. At age 17 (1975), Vosper left high school early. She grew up in the United Church before questioning its tenets. She enrolled at Mount Allison University in Sackville, New Brunswick, where she studied literature, psychology, and religion.
In the 1980s, she married Bill Ferguson while working in Inuvik. She had a daughter, Hazel. Then, she divorced in 1986. She returned to Kingston as a single mother. She is an ordained minister in the United Church of Canada. She earned a Master of Divinity from Queen’s Theological College, Queen’s University, in 1990. (Upon enrolling in Queen’s Theological College, she legally adopted the name “Gretta.”) She married fellow student Michael Kooiman in 1990. Their son, Izaak, was born in 1991.
Between 1991 and 1993, she served as a junior/team minister, first at United Church in Kingston and then at St. Matthew’s United Church in Toronto.
She was ordained in the United Church of Canada in 1993, affirming her belief in the Trinity in the language of the tradition. She was appointed a minister of West Hill United Church in Toronto in 1997. During a sermon in 2001, she informed the West Hill United congregation of her personal non-theism and rejection of belief in a supernatural God.
In 2003, the Lord’s Prayer was removed from worship services, and attendance at the church dropped from roughly 120 to about 40. She is professionally and personally partnered with Richard Scott Kearns, the music director at West Hill United Church.
In November 2004, she founded the Canadian Centre for Progressive Christianity. The network aimed to connect post-theist and progressive faith communities. Its contact list expanded from a handful of Ontarians to members in six denominations in all Canadian provinces. She published Holy Breath: Prayers for Worship and Reflection, a collection of non-theistic prayers that had been written earlier and first offered as a Christmas Eve gift to her congregation in 2004.
Subsequently, in 2008, she published With or Without God: Why the Way We Live is More Important Than What We Believe, a theological work. In 2009, she was named one of More Magazine’s “Most Compelling Women in Canada.” The same year, she published Another Breath, a collection of non-theistic poetry written between 2004 and 2008. It orients on human responsibility over appeals to God.
In 2010, Vosper and Scott Kearns showcased new progressive liturgical resources at the Common Dreams Conference in Melbourne, Australia. In 2011, Moderator Mardi Thindal praised Vosper for renewing the conversation about the nature of faith in the United Church of Canada. On March 1, 2011, she created the Blue Christmas service. It was entitled “Through Frozen Nights, We Wait” and intended for congregations coping with loss.
On January 7, 2012, she released Amen: What Prayer Can Mean in a World Beyond Belief through HarperCollins. It explored the tradition of prayer apart from supernatural claims. In 2013, she shifted from identifying as a non-theist to openly declaring herself an atheist in solidarity with persecuted Bangladeshi bloggers.
In January 2015, she wrote an open letter to Moderator Gary Paterson. She argued that the United Church’s Charlie Hebdo prayer promoted hatred by invocation of a supernatural God. On August 5–6, 2015, the Canadian Press ran “Atheist Minister Fighting for Her Job.” It was profiled as a heresy trial. The case was described in media as a ‘heresy trial,’ though this may reflect narrative framing rather than an official designation. On November 25, 2015, Toronto Life published “Q&A: Gretta Vosper, the United Church Minister Who Does Not Believe in God.” In 2016, a Toronto Conference reviewed the question: Can an atheist serve as a United Church minister? This review was unprecedented.
On February 21, 2016, the Toronto Star published “Meet the United Church Minister Who Came Out as an Atheist.” In a March 26, 2016 CBC interview, she estimated that 50% of the clergy, at least in the United Church of Canada, do not believe in a supernatural theistic God. However, according to Richard Bott’s survey, about 95% and 80% of United Church ministers believe in God and a supernatural God, respectively.
On September 11, 2016, the Toronto Star published “Flock Sticks with Atheist United Church Minister.” Congregational support existed despite Vosper’s review. In September 2016, a special Toronto Conference committee declared Vosper unsuitable for the continuance of ordained ministry. The Washington Post ran “Can an Atheist Lead a Protestant Church?” It posed Vosper’s case as an inflection for contemporary faith.
Later, in 2016, the case was referred to the United Church’s General Council. This became the basis for a possible heresy hearing. In 2017, Vosper and allies went on a national speaking tour entitled “West Hill Wants to Talk.” The purpose was to build debate and understanding in the denomination. On November 7, 2018, Vosper and the Toronto Conference reached a confidential settlement. Vosper’s lawyer, Julian Falconer, recognized that both sides saw a place for Gretta. There was no need to separate a minister from her congregation.
She was permitted to remain in ministry. Both affirmed the resolution’s mutual benefits. The United Church stated its belief in God and Vosper’s continued service. On July 9, 2020, Vosper delivered “Falling in Love with Being Together Because We Cannot Afford to Fall Apart.” It was part of the Chautauqua Institution’s Interfaith Lecture Series.
She continues to serve on the Board of Governors of Centennial College, the Oasis Network, and as a Director of the Ecumenical Community of Chautauqua. Vosper remains a prominent and provocative figure in progressive Christianity. She is an active creator of post-theist spiritual communities. She is a figurehead of the ongoing debates about belief, ministry, and inclusion in contemporary faith institutions.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/19
Part 3 of 4
Christopher Louis is a Los Angeles–based international dating and relationship coach and founder of Dating Intelligence. As host of the Dating Intelligence Podcast, Louis draws on intuition and lived experience to guide clients toward authentic selves and meaningful romantic connections. Louis explores how modern dating has become more complex with the rise of social media, dating apps, and ambiguous relationship terms like “situationships” and “cookie jarring.” They contrast today’s indirect norms with the more straightforward courtship of the past, emphasizing the growing difficulty in interpreting romantic interest versus politeness. Louis offers practical advice on body language—like mirroring, eye contact, and physical cues—to distinguish authentic connection from performative gestures. Understanding clusters of signals, not isolated acts, is key to emotional safety and clarity in relationships, especially for those navigating the nuanced terrain of modern dating culture.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Do you think things are more complex or easier now than when you were dating in February? In terms of the social climate, how do people approach connection?
Christopher Louis: It depends on the age range. Some people are adapting well, while others are struggling more. But that’s a big conversation—maybe worth diving into next. Once again, when we’re talking about the younger age groups—people in their twenties—there’s a shift in dating culture. We’re not even talking about teenagers; that’s another thing. But people in their twenties tend to date more in groups. They go out in packs, and if there’s someone they like, it’s often a more casual, side-by-side interaction rather than a direct, intentional one-on-one date.
Dating has become more complicated because of social media, dating apps, and digital communication in general. We’reno longer getting those authentic, spontaneous moments—like meeting someone at a social event and having a real-time connection. Instead, it’s swiping right and swiping left. And even though apps are convenient, they can create emotional distance.
That said, I do appreciate hearing daters say, “You know what? I met someone and just cut through all the texting and said, let’s meet for coffee.” That’s more real than dragging out a three—or four-week text exchange, which often leads nowhere. If someone is genuinely interested, they will want to meet you sooner rather than later.
Suppose they’re not initiating a meeting; chances are. In that case, they are either not interested or are talking to multiple people, which I remind many of my female clients of. They’ll say, “I don’t know why he ghosted me,” I’ll say, “He was probably talking to two or three other women, and he just moved on.” It is a process of elimination for some people. Especially early on, many guys see who flirts the most, responds quickly, and who’s and is most open sexually, and whoever rises to the top of that list is often the one they want to pursue most seriously.
Meanwhile, women who might be intellectually engaging or emotionally deep may get overlooked because the connection takes longer to build. The guy gets bored and moves on to something easier or more exciting.
Jacobsen: The dynamics are different now, but the core behaviours are often the same—just under new labels. Even culturally, this isn’t new. The phenomenon existed before, just with different names. Paul Mooney had a line—”Ain’t nothing changed but the weather.” It’s the idea that things look different on the surface but are fundamentally the same. Like friends with benefits—it used to be hush-hush, but now it is more normalized and even has code names like “Netflix and chill.”
Louis: Exactly. “Netflix and chill” is the number one code for friends with benefits. That phrase says it all without having to explain it.
And then you’ve got what people now call a “situationship.” That’s a big one. A situationship is where two people spend time together—maybe even sleeping—but there’s no clarity on the relationship. They do not define or discuss it, and no one wants to ask, “What are we doing here?”
Back in the day, it was much more direct. A guy might ask, “Do you want to go steady?” Sometimes, even before the first date! Remember that? Then it became writing notes—”Will you go out with me?” Then, it evolved into more casual settings—meeting at parties or the movies.
Now, it’s vague. It’s like, “We’re hanging out… I like this person but don’t know if we’re dating.” And that’s where so many people get stuck—they are too afraid to ask questions. They’re just assuming, hoping the other person feels the same. And that’s how people wind up in these unclear, undefined dynamics we now call “situationships.”
“Netflix and chill” is another big one, of course. And ghosting—ghosting is enormous right now. Someone disappears on you without any explanation. No follow-up, no closure. And what gets me is that people do not even have the courage—or better yet, the decency—to say, “Hey, you know what? I don’t think this is a fit. I’m moving on.” That simple courtesy seems to be lost in modern dating.
Now, there’s also something called “cookie jarring.” That’s a newer term. It refers to someone dating you but also has someone else on the back burner—just in case things do not work out with you. It’s like they’re keeping their hand in the cookie jar, just in case. So they’re not fully invested, but they ensure they have options lined up. And there are tons of these new terms floating around nowadays.
Jacobsen: How can individuals use body language to foster emotional safety and openness in a relationship?
Louis: That’s a great question. Body language plays a huge role in emotional safety and openness—even more than most people realize. Let’s start with one of the most universal cues: the hands-up gesture, like the “stop” signal. You know what I mean—both palms out in front of you. That posture says, No. I’m not ready. I don’t want to go there right now. It communicates boundaries. It’s a nonverbal way of saying, Let’s pause this conversation.
Gesture is one of the most widely understood signals for emotional withdrawal or resistance regardless of culture or language. It says, “This isn’t safe for me right now.” And that is key: recognizing when someone is not emotionally open at that moment and respecting that.
Jacobsen: What does mirroring in terms of body language tell you?
Louis: Mirroring is fascinating. It happens with posture, pace, and movement. When two people are comfortable and connected, they unconsciously mirror each other. It’s almost like a dance—subtle and fluid. You’ll notice it when couples are in sync: they lean simultaneously, their gestures are similar, and even their blinking and breathing might align. People make even this funny observation—like how dog owners sometimes start to resemble their pets. But in relationships, mirroring tells you something important: connection. If I’m talking to someone and gently sway or tilt my head, and they start doing it, too, that’s not a coincidence. That’s a sign they’re tuned in. They’re present.
With my partner, people often comment that we mirror each other in our style—how we dress, walk, and even move around each other. It is not conscious—it’s a natural alignment. And that’s a beautiful thing in a long-term relationship. It reflects harmony. So yes, mirroring is a strong, positive connection and emotional resonance indicator.
Jacobsen: How can someone differentiate genuine romantic interest from performative body language? For instance, many heterosexual men struggle to tell the difference between a laugh that means “I’m into you” and one that’s just polite or nervous.
Louis: That’s such an important distinction. Let’s start with laughter. Many men assume she’s interested if a woman laughs at their jokes. But that’s not always true. Sometimes, a woman laughs because she’s genuinely amused. Other times, she laughs because she’s nervous or trying to ease social tension. And that’s a key thing—the intention behind the behaviour.
One tip I give my clients is to look for clusters of body language cues. Do not isolate one thing like a laugh. Is she maintaining steady eye contact? Is her body facing you? Is she leaning in, or is she pulling back slightly? Are her arms open or crossed? When you combine those cues, you start to see the whole picture.
Genuine interest usually comes with a relaxed, open posture. The person is not fidgeting too much; they’re not checking their phone or glancing around the room. They’re present. On the other hand, performative body language tends to be more mechanical—like checking off social expectations without authentic emotional engagement.
So the takeaway is this: read patterns, not isolated actions. The more emotionally tuned you are, the easier it gets to spot the difference.
Jacobsen: Yes. Everyone—probably often, as far as I can tell—does not parse those signals. The difference between genuine romantic interest and performative body language can be like two universes. So, how can someone tell the difference? It does not necessarily have to be a red flag, a “danger, danger” situation, or a misreading flirtation when someone’s just being polite.
Louis: Right. I understand that. And this is where many men need to learn to read the room better. You’re right—some women are naturally more physical when they talk. Maybe they’ll touch your hand or shoulder during a conversation. To some guys, that can give off flirtatious or even sexual signals. But the truth is that context is everything.
So here’s what I tell men: just because a woman touches you a couple of times, don’t immediately assume it’s an invitation for physical closeness. That’s a giant leap. You have to pay attention to the overall vibe of the conversation. Ask yourself: What’s the tone? What’s her energy like?
For example, if she’s laughing and touches your arm, listen to the cadence in her voice. Does she sound nervous? Is she laughing too hard or in a way that feels forced? What’s her eye contact like? If she’s looking around—scanning the room for a friend or an exit—that’s a sign she might feel uncomfortable or disengaged.
You’ll often see this in how her head turns—like she’s searching for someone to interrupt, rescue, or distract. That’s not a sign of interest; that’s a sign of discomfort. Her breathing might also give it away. Nervous breathing is very different from genuine, relaxed laughter.
So, what should a guy do in that situation? First, don’t make a physical move unless you’re sure. Instead, test the waters verbally. Say something like, “Hey, I just want to say—you have beautiful eyes,” or “Your laugh is amazing.” Then, pay attention to how she responds—not just with words but her body language.
If she smiles, leans in, holds eye contact, and seems more engaged—that’s a green light. But if she pulls back, looks around, or gives short answers, that’s your cue to slow down or change direction. Sometimes, asking a thoughtful or flirtatious question can clarify where the other person stands without putting anyone in an uncomfortable spot.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/18
Part 2 of 3
Pat Merryweather-Arges, Executive Director of Project Patient Care and longtime Rotarian, shares insights from her decades of humanitarian work across over 30 countries. Merryweather‑Arges observes that Pope Leo XIV’s Chicago roots and commitment to the poorest parallel Rotary’s humanitarian ethos. Coupled with the Gates Foundation’s plan to deploy US $200 billion by 2045, she foresees renewed moral momentum toward poverty relief, health access, and technology‑driven development. Although officially nonreligious, Rotary partners pragmatically with trusted faith organizations while enforcing strict ethical standards and rigorous safety protocols. Fellowship and shared altruism unite Rotarians worldwide, illustrated by successful Nigerian hospital planning and her humorous “icebreaker” anecdote.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: You’ve mentioned a sister, a Catholic hospital, and Opus Dei. With the recent election of the new Pope, there have been many Popes, John, Clement, and Leo–and now we have another Pope, Leo—how do you think this kind of elevation, from cardinal to Pope, influences the direction or emphasis of Rotary International’s work?
Pat Merryweather-Arges: You’ve several significant things converging right now. First, this new Pope, Leo XIV, emphasizes caring for the poorest of the poor, which aligns closely with Rotary’s humanitarian mission.
What’s also exciting is that he’s from Chicago—and I’m from Chicago—so there’s a lot of local pride and energy here. The excitement level in the city is remarkable. It feels like an opportunity to drive change in how we treat one another, as a country and as individuals.
At the same time, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation just announced that it will conclude its operations by 2045. Over the next 20 years, it plans to distribute $200 billion toward global initiatives. They’ve outlined key focus areas: ending poverty, increasing access to healthcare and medication, and leveraging technology for international development.
What struck me most was Bill Gates’s statement, “I don’t want to hold onto money while people are dying.” He even called out Elon Musk and others who are hoarding wealth. His stance aligns with the Pope’s emphasis on justice and moral responsibility.
So when you put this all together—the new Pope’s message, the Gates Foundation’s sunset plan, and growing attention to ethical leadership—I think it gives people in the United States hope that we can turn a corner. It’s about values: country, faith, family. And I believe faith, spirituality, and community-based leadership will be more visible in shaping public life.
Jacobsen: He also has a long history in Peru, right? We’ve seen a few powerful movements emerge from Latin America—liberation theology, for example, where Pope Francis had significant influence. And then there’s the broader policy framework coming out of international organizations like the UN under António Guterres, the current Secretary-General and a former Prime Minister of Portugal.
Though Guterres doesn’t use explicitly religious language, he champions evidence-based policies to improve conditions for vulnerable populations. Take decriminalization of substance use, for example—under his leadership, the UN and WHO have both encouraged shifting from punitive responses to public health-oriented approaches.
So on one side, you’ve got the Catholic Church, led by Pope Francis and now Pope Leo XIV, emphasizing a communitarian, almost Augustinian ethos rooted in service and humility. On the other hand, secular international institutions have reached many of the same conclusions, but they are just framed differently.
Do you think this new Pope will continue that trend, aligning with that broader historical trajectory?
Merryweather-Arges: Yes, I do. One of the things he talked about right away—the first words he spoke—was wishing everyone peace. But he also emphasized building bridges. Some literal and metaphorical bridges have been broken due to tariffs, conflict, or global tension.
Jacobsen: Yes, both literal bombing and metaphorical destruction.
Merryweather-Arges: He genuinely sees everyone as one person. He does not know the world in terms of rigid national divides. We all share basic needs and desires—housing, good health, food, and clean water. These are universal. And one of the things I’ve consistently found while travelling from country to country is that parents everywhere want the best for their children.
They will sacrifice anything to ensure their children’s better future. That is something that unites us all. It’s refreshing that this new Pope was selected. He comes from a poor neighbourhood—Dalton, Illinois. My cousin’s wife went to grade school with him, so she’s been appearing on national talk shows and in the media lately.
Dalton is not a typical blue-collar town—it’s working-class, tight-knit, and everyone there looks out for one another. The people there had large families. My cousin’s family had five children, and the Pope’s family had a couple of brothers. The Church was the center of their lives. So, I believe this Pope brings a sensitivity and groundedness that matters.
We talk about Pope Francis and his commitment to living simply. He didn’t need lavish things. He set an example by living humbly and focusing on giving to others. The message was: we don’t need that much to live meaningfully.
Jacobsen: I reviewed some of Pope Leo’s recent statements, and from my analysis, they’re far less ambiguous than those of Pope Francis. It’s not that they differ in moral clarity—they’re quite aligned there—but in rhetorical clarity. With Pope Francis, you often had to interpret or read between the lines. Pope Leo, by contrast, is much more direct.
So, for example, your traditional positions on gender and marriage will be seen, which will spark culture war debates—but in terms of economic justice and social policy, Pope Leo seems ready to advance real-world action.
Merryweather-Arges: Yes, I agree. During his papacy, many meaningful social justice works emerged—practical, on-the-ground efforts.
Jacobsen: What kind of partnerships does Rotary International have with Catholic institutions? Are they more surface-level, or on a case-by-case basis?
Merryweather-Arges: Rotary is officially a nonreligious and nonpolitical organization. It is prohibited from working with religious institutions, whether Muslim, Catholic, Jewish, or other faiths.
The depth of collaboration depends on the global grant’s structure and the specific initiative. We often work closely with faith-based groups, but we don’t sidestep them in a way that becomes religiously affiliated. We keep the focus on shared humanitarian goals.
But again, we do work closely with different organizations. When you enter a community, you always wonder, “Who do people trust here?” Often, even in Chicago, if you want to get something done in specific neighbourhoods, you go through faith-based organizations. They’re the community trusts. So, yes—those relationships are essential.
Jacobsen: What’s the age at which Rotary would feel comfortable sending someone into a high-risk area? Say someone starts as an Interactor and then becomes a Rotarian—what does Rotary permit deployment to dangerous regions?
Merryweather-Arges: Rotary evaluates travel on a case-by-case basis. It depends on the specific project and the region’s risk. For example, when I went to Pakistan, there was a considerable discussion at Rotary headquarters about whether I should go. Most of the conflict was in Islamabad, not Karachi, where I was headed.
Ultimately, they approved the trip, but only with the guarantee that I would have 24/7 security. So, safety protocols are taken very seriously.
During COVID, we faced significant challenges with Rotary Youth Exchange students scattered across the globe. These are often under-18 students participating in cultural and academic exchanges coordinated by clubs and districts.
Some countries wouldn’t allow citizens to return home, and in other cases, students had to quarantine in hotels before re-entry was allowed. Rotary staff worked around the clock to manage the logistics and ensure the students’ safety. We had no significant incidents, but getting everyone home took time and effort.
Jacobsen: In your time, has Rotary ever reported—maybe in a newsletter or internal communication—that a member was injured or killed while serving?
Merryweather-Arges: The only incident I can recall happened about ten years ago. A Rotarian was kidnapped in Northern Nigeria, but they were eventually released safely.
Also, in Panama, there were family members of Rotarians, not Rotarians themselves, who were kidnapped by pirates while on a boat. The Rotarian network helped facilitate their safe release, working closely with the Panamanian government, which negotiated with the pirates.
Jacobsen: Now, we’re touching on some deeper ethical considerations here. What do you consider, not in terms of what’swritten on the website, but in practical reality, what do you think unites Rotarians?
Merryweather-Arges: I think what truly unites Rotarians is fellowship—and more importantly, a shared altruistic drive to do good in the world and within their communities. It’s genuine. It’s about like-minded people coming together, working to make a meaningful difference. That spirit exists—believe me.
Jacobsen: What do you do when there are ethical breaches?
Merryweather-Arges: Most clubs are equipped to handle those situations. Rotary has model bylaws, and clubs typically follow those guidelines. Any ethical issue is addressed seriously. The key is ensuring that issues within a club don’t fester, especially when they involve integrity or trust. So yes, they are handled.
Jacobsen: Hypothetically, what would happen with an ethical breach? Would someone be expelled, or just warned?
Merryweather-Arges: It depends on the nature and severity of the breach. But there’s zero there for certain things, like racist behaviour, attacks based on gender identity, or discrimination. Those kinds of actions result in immediate removal. If there’s any misconduct—someone misuses club funds—that’s grounds for immediate dismissal. Depending on the situation, it may even escalate into a civil lawsuit filed by the injured party.
I’ve participated in polio immunization campaigns in India, Pakistan, and Nigeria. I’ve also worked on other significant projects, like one in Nigeria, where we organized a three-hospital initiative. What was remarkable is that the leaders of these hospitals had never met before.
It all started when the CEO of a large hospital realized they needed a strategic plan. They had been operating in a reactive mode—just responding when something happened—rather than proactively improving outcomes and safety.
We spent two days with hospital staff. Everyone was energized and collaborative. We developed the strategic plan together, and then they took it to the community for input. Afterward, we brought everything back, added timelines and accountability measures, and finalized it. It turned out to be a tremendous success.
I had a guffaw moment.
Subscribe now
Jacobsen: Guffaw? I haven’t heard anything in a while. Which whippersnapper told you that?
Merryweather-Arges: [Laughing] Right? So I suggested we do an icebreaker. But I was in Nigeria, and they had never heard the term. They looked around, confused, like, “What ice? Where is the ice? Are we breaking something?”
Jacobsen: [Laughing] Not much ice in Nigeria.
Merryweather-Arges: But once we got past that, the energy was fantastic. They were excited, vocal, and eager to lead the improvement efforts. The hospital, though, especially the maternity wing, was deplorable. The women’s bathhouse was almost unusable, and the nursing school lacked basic tools, like skeletons for anatomy education. Many medical devices were broken. So we rolled up our sleeves.
We identified what we could fix quickly and what needed external support. We ended up shipping about eight full-size medical supply cartons. We partnered with Mission Outreach, a nonprofit that collects unused hospital equipment, especially from the Midwest. Much of it is new or nearly new, just not the latest model. If it needs repair, they fix it. Then we coordinate the logistics to get the supplies to rural hospitals, like the one in central Nigeria.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/18
Foundation of the British Columbia Firmament
The Father of British Columbia, Sir James Douglas, is worshipped in the community where I grew up. Not for nothing, he had achievements, but he had a “mixed history” in numerous ways. He had a “mixed history” as HBC Chief Factor and colonial governor. He granted monopolistic privileges to his company and family.
This mixed public office and private profit. He imposed property-based voting qualifications, excluding full representation. He set forth unfair First Nations treaties. The Douglas Treaties were signed on blank sheets, with terms inserted afterward—an unusual practice. Unilaterally, these were later signed, resulting in Indigenous signatories having land cessions that were not fully known.
He had a heavy-handed gold rush policy with licensing schemes and delayed enforcement during the Fraser Canyon conflict. These failed to protect Indigenous communities. Violence and village burnings ensued. He recruited black Californian settlers for political loyalty. It was opportunistic rather than principled efforts for the enfranchisement of blacks. A fascinating history to learn about one’s happenstance of contingent past circumstances: his contemporary presentation is not an exercise in false equivalence. It is about a united duality of positive and negative valence.
The living recent history reflects this mixed history in Fort Langley, out of Langley, with the crossovers between hipster farmers and well-educated, well-to-do Evangelical Christians, Trinity Western University, and the political shenanigans of Christians here impacting the federal level of the country. I wanted to cover some of this controversial recent history, as having a singular reference for some of the township’s more noteworthy shenanigans. For clarity, I speak as a former member of one of the heritage committees of an association in Fort Langley and another for the Township of Langley. I can say, “Heritage matters to Langleyites.” As an elder Euro-Canadian lady told me on the committee, a fellow committee member, it was in a sharp snarl once at a meeting, “I know who you are.” These were not isolated events throughout my life while growing up and through there. So it goes.
The contemporary Evangelical Christian story in Fort Langley began with a sexual misconduct allegation of the longest-standing university president in Canadian history: 2005-2006 with former university president Neil Snider. I would rather this notbe the case, but it is the history.
2005–2015: Institutional Unease and Image Discipline
He had the longest tenure of any Canadian university president—32 years–and greatly grew Trinity Western University (TWU) in its early decades. That is a testament to his prowess as an administrator of resources and an inspirer of people at the time.
Unfortunately, an uncomfortable truth was his retirement in 2006 following sexual harassment allegations. Internal reports from TWU and contemporary media reviews questioned the administrative decisions around this. The community is embarrassed by it and tries to cover it up. I understand that. However, as one colleague’s mom said to excuse it, “He was lonely,” because either his wife died or he was divorced. I leave considerations of the stretch of excuse-making to the reader.
ChristianWeek’s “Trinity Western Resolves Human Rights Complaint” documented the 2005 human rights complaint against Snider. The settlement impacted subsequent policy reviews. Former faculty interviews showed early signs of institutional unease. Evangelical leaders have undergone these scandals.
A CAUT Report, “Report of an Inquiry Regarding Trinity Western University,” examined the requirement for faculty to affirm the religious Covenant. You can see TWU’s current Community Covenant. William Bruneau and Thomas Friedman examined the requirement for faculty to affirm the Covenant and possible impacts on academic hiring and free speech. Case studies and personal accounts of faculty are incorporated. It is a referenced report in academic discussions on religion and academia in Canada.
University Affairs via “A test of faith at Trinity Western” provided an analytic retrospective of early administrative policies, linking them to later legal challenges–more on that in 2016-2018. Christian universities are conscious of their public image. For example, in 2011, the Institute for Canadian Values funded an advertisement opposing LGBTI-inclusive education, which was supported by the Canada Christian College. It was published by the National Post and later by the Toronto Sun. A national backlash happened. An apology ensued—a retraction happened by the Post, but not by the Sun.
2005-2015 was a busy few years. Ex-administrators and archival internal memos showed dissent regarding mandatory religious practices. Similar controversies happen in religious universities in Canada, all private, all Christian. The largest is Evangelical, and the largest is TWU, in Langley. After trying to get many interviews with professors and dissenting students in the community, the vast majority declined over many years of journalistic efforts, and a few agreed to a coffee conversation to express opinions. Most opinions dissent from the norm of TWU while affirming the difficulties for the faith with these narrow-eyed executives, who are not reined in, reign with impunity, and rain neglect on their community’s inner Other.
2016–2018: The Covenant and the Courts
Circa 2016, some online commentators mentioned how they felt “bad for the kids that realize they’re not straight” at TWU as “Coming out is hard” and “it’s crazy that people still want to go to this school.” A former student acknowledged some student support for LGBTI peers while warning many feel “quite ostracized” by an “unspoken aura” repressing non-Christian views. An LGBTI student may have to “repress their urges based on a stupid covenant.”
Other online forums include a former student union leader noting the “community covenant is outdated” even by 2013, while another urged the university to rethink the Covenant. Saying there is a “thriving rape culture,” “I know more than five girls who were raped [at TWU], who didn’t report it because they believed they would be shamed and not taken seriously.”
Maclean’s in “The end of the religious university?” talked about the long-standing interest in the national debate around religious mandates in higher education and the central role of TWU. These controversies about academic freedom following Snider’s resignation would echo some other community elements there. BBC Newscommented that Canada approved a homophobic law school in 2013. This would eventually evolve poorly for TWU and reflect terribly on the surrounding community.
Xtra Magazine’s “The Painful Truth About Being Gay at Canada’s Largest Christian University” featured a series of robust testimonies from current and former students on systemic discrimination. The magazine also examined campus surveys, student blogs, and some student activist groups, with a case study of academic panels addressing LGBTI issues within religious institutions. The Supreme Court of Canada issued its decision on TWU’s Law School accreditation in 2018. It was analyzed by legal journals and cited in academic papers. Those looked to religious mandates and the tensions with legal equality.
CBC News in “Trinity Western loses fight for Christian law school as court rules limits on religious freedom ‘reasonable’”provided a comprehensive timeline of developments with constitutional lawyer and civil rights advocacy commentary. Other commentaries looked at policy adjustments following from institutions. The Tyee chimed into the discussion with “Trinity Western University Loses in Supreme Court,” with some parables into the personal narratives on campus, more timeline events, and a more important emphasis on the long-term impact on the reputation of TWU.
Knowing some minority facets of dynamics in this community, many will slander others and lie to protect themselves, particularly their identity as represented via the incursion of Evangelical Orthodoxy into the community via the university. This small township’s controversies went to the Supreme Court of Canada. They lost in a landslide decision, 7-2. The Vancouver Sun had various coverage, with international critiques comparing TWU’s controversy to European and Australian scandals. Regardless, TWU brought global spotlight on a small township, a tiny town.
Global human rights organizations gave commentary. TWU dropped the Community Covenant as mandatory, but only for students, while staff, faculty, and administration maintained it. A TWU student asserted on Reddit:
TWU student here. The only two reasons why the Board of Governors chose to drop the Covenant for students is because a) The recent court ruling, and b) Their other professional programs (counselling, nursing, and teaching) received letters from their respective accrediting bodies which threatened to pull accreditation unless the Covenant was amended or discarded.
TWU’s decision to make signing the Covenant voluntary for students has nothing to do with morality or human rights, but everything to do with their business model. Keep in mind, the faculty still must sign the pledge, and TWU’s mission and mandate of producing “godly Christian leaders” has not changed.
The next era was 2019-2021.
2019–2021: Cultural Stagnation Despite Legal Losses
Xtra Magazine in “I am queer at Trinity Western University. What will it take for my university to listen to me?” provided a more individual story. Carter Sawatzky wrote, “TWU’s decision in 2018 to make the Covenant non-mandatory for students also did not magically change the discriminatory treatment of queer people. After TWU’s 2018 Supreme Court loss, many folks, including myself, had hoped that TWU would finally demonstrate that it can be rooted in faith and radically loving and welcoming. Instead, TWU has doubled down on its social conservatism, at the expense of queer students like myself.” An international scandal and Supreme Court defeat did not change the culture or the school. That is instructive.
Another instructive moment was a student suicide attempt followed by an expulsion of the student. In “Her university expelled her after she attempted suicide, saying she had an ‘inability to self-regulate.’ Now she is fighting back,” the Toronto Star presented the case of a student showing broader systemic issues and a lack of mental health resources and policy failures within TWU. TWU claimed otherwise. Mental health professionals and relatives of students commented. As CBC has noted, mental healthon campuses has been a point of concern for a while.
2021–2025: Repression, Image, and Intimidation
Langley is a township where I am told the murder of the famous atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair was merciful. Saying, “Her murder was an act of mercy.” Langley Advance Times in “Private Langley University rejects LGBTQ+ event request” reported denying an event request, One TWU Stories Night, for an LGBTI group, One TWU. Carter Sawatzky said, “We are sharing our stories, which I think should be a non-controversial thing… It is not a contradiction. You can be queer and Christian… Many people come to TWU and have never heard an LGBTQ story.” That is a reasonable statement. A One TWU piece published on its site claims homophobia is rampant on campus.
CBC News reported on the manslaughter conviction of a TWU security guard. “Former guard at B.C. university found guilty of manslaughter” reported a Fall 2020 event involving “a man wearing all black” who wandered into student residences, rifling through their things. Security guard Howard Glen Hill hit the man, Jack Cruthers Hutchison, “in the head, pulled his hair and spat on him.” Police arrived: Hill was “in a neck restraint, limp and unresponsive. He died in the hospital two days later.” Hutchison was charged with manslaughter. TWU’s statement: “The university has no comment on the court ruling. TWU’s commitment has always been to safeguard our campus community, and we continue to provide a safe place of learning for all our students.”
Langley Union, in “Trinity Western University President’s Son Linked to Prolific White Nationalist Account,” investigated digital forensic evidence of the son of the President of TWU linked to a White Nationalist online account. The son’s actions should be considered separate from the father’s and the institutions. However, they are striking news.
The accounts claimed, among other assertions, “I believe in a white future. An Aryan future. A future where my children will make Indian Bronson shine our shoes. Where brown people cannot secure a line of credit, Black people pick cotton. We will win – this is what we fight for,” and “I am a colonialist. I make no effort to hide this. I believe in worldwide white supremacy.”
The Nelson Star reported in “‘Alt-right’ group uses Fort Langley historic site as meeting place” on the use of the local pub in Fort Langley as a meeting place for a public, so known and self-identified White Nationalist group. As one former boss noted, “I don’t know what is wrong with we the white race.” That is a sentiment, not an organization, however. This microcosm reflects a broader history of Canadian sociopolitics with race and religion, some Evangelicals and occasional allegations of racialism if not racism.
TWU’s policy is Inclusive Excellence. We aim to promote a consistent atmosphere of inclusion and belonging at TWU by establishing a shared commitment to diversity and equity founded in the gospel’s truth. Christ came to save, reconcile, and equip all people (Rev. 7:9), and the incredible array of gifts God has given us is evidence of his creativity, beauty, and love of diversity.” An administrator is reported to have said informally that the event was ‘not in line with Evangelical values.’
In the States, a trend in international Evangelical higher education. Bob Jones University banned interracial dating until 2000, involving federal funding and accreditation debates. In Australia, Christian colleges faced scrutiny for policies excluding LGBTI+ students and staff. Faith-based codes and equality laws produced tensions in the United Kingdom, though less prominently than in Canada. Those American churches want to influence Canada in Indigenous communities. Some Canadian churches can have Ojibwe pastors, for example.
A Medium (Xtra) post entitled “The painful truth about being gay at Canada’s largest Christian university,” commented on the experience of a gay student, Jacob.’ As peers messaged Jacob on suspicion of him being gay, “We hate everything about you and you better watch your back because we are going to kill you on your way to school.” At TWU ‘Jacob,’said, “I loved the community here so much that I did not want to jeopardize those relationships.” That is called a closet.
Another student, Corben, from Alberta at TWU, said, “My parents, I think, kind of wanted Trinity to be for me sort of like reparative therapy, which is why they would only help financially with this school.” Former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau put forth a move to end Conversion Therapy, a discredited pseudotherapy to change sexual orientation and gender identity. Conversion therapy has been banned in Malta (2016), Germany (2020), France (2022), Canada (2022), New Zealand (2022), Iceland (2023), Spain (2023), Mexico (2024), Greece (2024), and Belgium (2024). That is only TWU, however. The community of Langley, specifically Fort Langley, where I was raised, is substantively linked to this place.
Langley Advance Times in “Blackface photo in 2017 Chilliwack yearbook sparks apology from school principal” reported on a blackface incident at a local school. It was part of a “mock trial.” So, bad taste, community, and the excuse for Snider’s example will likely do the same in this case. There are several cases in British Columbia and Canada. The Archdiocese of Vancouver was the first in Canada to publicly name clergy involved in sexual abuse and decades of abuse. At the same time, other prominent cases have arisen, including Michael Conaghan, Damian Lawrence Cooper, and Erlindo Molon, highlighting a pattern of clerical sexual exploitation and inadequate accountability in British Columbia. I would rather this notbe the case, but it is the history.
In 2022, a TWU dean resigned amid pressure over her work on gender issues. One Reddit–and all Reddit commentary should be considered additions, while anecdotal at best–user described how TWU leaders had “tried to make her leave her position as dean because she… stated she was an lgbtq+ ally,” then issued bureaucratic statements of grief based on her departure.
Living there, these excuses likely flowed through social media. At the same time, community intimidation happens, too. It is bad for the community image and bad for the business. As gay students find at TWU, and as outsiders others find in the general community, it is not about moral stances, but about image maintenance and business interests. Money matters because it is a well-to-do area of the country and a well-to-do nation worldwide. There is regular township nonsense where the Fort Langley Night Market gets closed down due to vandalism and alcohol.
Ongoing online conversations about TWU degree quality continue, “So before those say ‘it’s an immigration scam’, it’s not and is essentially useless towards immigrating/coming to Canada. With that said, most of TWU’s programs are also useless to use towards immigrating, even if studied in person, because any non-degree program from a private school does not allow one to apply for a PGWP. However, it offers a couple of degree programs that can result in a PGWP.”
Brandon Gabriel and Eric Woodward have been loggerheads for at least a decade. If you look at the original history, this reflects another fight between an Indigenous leader and the colonial presence in its history. Now, they are a local artist and developer, respectively. Woodward has a camp of supporters for development and a camp of detractors. Another mixed figure in the contemporary period of Langley. Over development concerns and pushback, Woodward got a building painted pink in protest at one point. It is a serious township history full of a minority of loud, silly people imposing their nonsense on a smaller group of innocent bystanders.
Whether LGBTI discrimination ensconced at its university, a blackface principal, homophobia, this isn’t unusual in a way. A constellation of apparent White Nationalist superminority undercurrents popping up, and with worship of a founder in a democracy who was a mixed-race colonialist timocrat married to a Cree woman, it’s a story of a Canadian town and municipality. A tale of how foundational myths, when left unexamined, morph into social realities.
Welcome to Langley–a light introduction: Home, sorta.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/18
Kuty Shalev is the Founder and CEO of Lumenalta. Lumenalta defines emotional intelligence (EQ) in IT as the ability to navigate complex, high-stakes collaborations with empathy, adaptability, and self-awareness, combined with technical communication and problem-solving skills. They integrate EQ into daily workflows through simulation-based coaching and commitment-based communication, ensuring clear articulation of concerns and concrete commitments aligned with business outcomes. This approach fosters stakeholder alignment, reduces ambiguity, and improves client satisfaction. Despite challenges like strict deadlines and remote work barriers, IT leaders report significant benefits. Leadership plays a key role by modeling effective communication and continuously reinforcing EQ through coaching and mentoring. Overall, this strategy transforms IT culture.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: How does Lumenalta define emotional intelligence within IT teams?
Kuty Shalev: At Lumenalta, we see emotional intelligence (EQ) as the ability to navigate complex, high-stakes collaborations with empathy, adaptability, and self-awareness. It’s not just about interpersonal skills—it’s about creating an environment where technical and non-technical team members can align on priorities, manage conflict constructively, and drive innovation.
A key part of our approach is commitment-based communication. This means that instead of vague discussions or assumptions, our teams are trained to articulate their concerns clearly, identify the hidden concerns of others, and create commitments that are specific, validated, and aligned with business outcomes. This structured way of communicating ensures that nothing is left ambiguous—whether in a client meeting, a project plan, or even when prompting an AI model.
Jacobsen: Does this differ much from more general definitions of emotional intelligence?
Shalev: Yes, in many ways. While general definitions of emotional intelligence focus on self-awareness, empathy, and interpersonal effectiveness, EQ within IT teams also encompasses technical communication, problem-solving under pressure, and cross-cultural collaboration—especially in remote environments. IT professionals must translate technical concepts into business outcomes, prioritize conflicting demands, and adapt to evolving requirements—all of which require a blend of emotional and cognitive intelligence.
Jacobsen: How have IT leaders overcome the challenge of strict deadlines limiting the development of EQ?
Shalev: Lumenalta has tackled this challenge by integrating EQ development directly into how teams work. Instead of separating “soft skills” training from technical training, we embed emotional intelligence into real-world practice. For example, our teams participate in simulation-based coaching that mimics high-pressure client scenarios, helping them refine their communication, negotiation, and problem-solving skills in real time. This ensures that EQ development isn’t an extracurricular activity—it’s a core part of how we deliver results.
Jacobsen: What companies have integrated EQ into IT culture to provide measurable improvements?
Shalev: Many forward-thinking organizations have embraced EQ-driven approaches to IT. Our own experience at Lumenalta has shown that when developers are trained to navigate stakeholder dynamics, project outcomes improve. According to our research, 87% of IT leaders reported that
investing in EQ directly improved client satisfaction, and 81% saw a positive impact on technology adoption. Companies that embed emotional intelligence into daily workflows—rather than relying on one-off training—see the most significant gains.
Jacobsen: What factors can blunt the positive effects of improved EQ in the IT workplace?
Shalev: One major factor is a lack of structural reinforcement. If EQ training isn’t backed by a workplace culture that values open communication, psychological safety, and constructive feedback, it won’t stick. Another challenge is time pressure—if teams are constantly in reactive mode, they may default to transactional communication rather than thoughtful collaboration. Finally, hybrid and remote work environments can create EQ barriers if companies don’t establish clear norms for engagement and relationship-building.
Jacobsen: How are facets of emotional intelligence—self-awareness, adaptability, and empathy—quantified and measured to improve workplace productivity?
Shalev: One way Lumenalta measures the impact of EQ training is through the clarity and effectiveness of communication. Are teams making and keeping better commitments? Are they reducing ambiguity in client interactions? Are they proactively uncovering concerns before they become roadblocks?
Interestingly, this same discipline in language and clarity extends to AI development. The best AI outputs come from well-structured prompts, and the ability to construct these prompts effectively comes from the same EQ skills we cultivate in our teams. A great AI prompt, much like a great commitment, is clear, concise, and validated against the outcomes we are targeting.
Jacobsen: Do generational culture differences affect the workforce perception of EQ in IT teams?
Shalev: Absolutely. Younger IT professionals often expect EQ to be embedded into company culture and value ongoing coaching, while more experienced team members may have developed technical expertise in environments where EQ wasn’t prioritized. Our research found that perspectives on
EQ varied based on years of experience, but across the board, IT leaders recognized its importance—90% said it was essential for success.
Jacobsen: How can leadership and management style foster more emotionally intelligent work environments in tech companies?
Shalev: Leadership plays a crucial role in setting the tone for EQ in IT teams. At Lumenalta, we focus on leading by example—our senior engineers and product leads model effective communication, client engagement, and conflict resolution. We also emphasize continuous learning, using both AI-powered coaching tools and human-led mentoring to reinforce key EQ skills. Creating an
environment where engineers feel heard, valued, and empowered to solve problems autonomously is key to long-term success.
Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Kuty.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/18
Part 1 of 3
Pat Merryweather-Arges, Executive Director of Project Patient Care and longtime Rotarian, shares insights from her decades of humanitarian work across over 30 countries. From leading healthcare improvement programs in the U.S. to supporting global initiatives in Kenya, Honduras, and Pakistan, she emphasizes patient-centred care, clean water, and education. Her stories include delivering emergency COVID aid to Honduras, aiding abandoned infants in Kenya, and supporting interfaith housing projects in flood-stricken Pakistan. A former Rotary International Vice President, she champions collaboration across religious, geographic, and political divides. She highlights Rotary’s global mission, especially polio eradication, and praises Pope Leo XIV’s focus on justice and humility. Despite rising global authoritarianism and threats to NGOS, Merryweather-Arges remains hopeful about ethical leadership and grassroots compassion. She reveals what truly unites Rotarians through laughter, stories, and hard truths: fellowship, integrity, and the drive to serve others with dignity and purpose.
Pat Merryweather-Arges, Executive Director of Project Patient Care and longtime Rotarian, shares insights from her decades of humanitarian work across over 30 countries. From leading healthcare improvement programs in the U.S. to supporting global initiatives in Kenya, Honduras, and Pakistan, she emphasizes patient-centred care, clean water, and education. Her stories include delivering emergency COVID aid to Honduras, aiding abandoned infants in Kenya, and supporting interfaith housing projects in flood-stricken Pakistan. A former Rotary International Vice President, she champions collaboration across religious, geographic, and political divides. She highlights Rotary’s global mission, especially polio eradication, and praises Pope Leo XIV’s focus on justice and humility. Despite rising global authoritarianism and threats to NGOS, Merryweather-Arges remains hopeful about ethical leadership and grassroots compassion. She reveals what truly unites Rotarians through laughter, stories, and hard truths: fellowship, integrity, and the drive to serve others with dignity and purpose.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we are here with Pat Merryweather-Arges. She is a seasoned healthcare leader and humanitarian with over three decades of experience in healthcare quality improvement, nonprofit leadership, and global service. She is the Executive Director of Project Patient Care (PPC). This nonprofit organization enhances healthcare quality, safety, and equity through collaborative initiatives involving patients, families, caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Her work supports national healthcare transformation and promotes authentic patient engagement across all care settings.
Before her current role, Pat held several prominent positions, including Executive Director of Medicare’s Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) programs in Illinois, Iowa, and Colorado, and Senior Vice President at the Illinois Hospital Association. In these capacities, she led statewide and regional initiatives to improve the quality and safety of care.
Pat has made extensive contributions to the Rotary community. She was a Rotary International Director (2022–2024) and Vice President (2023–2024). She is currently the Chair of the Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Rotary Action Group (2024–2025) and serves on the Mental Health Rotary Action Group Board (2024–2026). She also serves on the board of the International Rotary Fellowship of Healthcare Professionals and has held various leadership roles within Rotary District 6450, including District Governor.
Her Rotary service includes leadership in global humanitarian projects, focusing on healthcare, clean water, sanitation, women’s empowerment, and peacebuilding in Kenya, India, Jordan, Haiti, and others. She is the recipient of the Rotary Foundation Meritorious Service Award and the Rotary International Service Above Self Award. She also married George Arges, a fellow Rotarian. They have four sons, three daughters-in-law, and now eight grandchildren. Are any of them honorary Rotarians?
Merryweather-Arges: Some are Paul Harris Fellows, yes.
Jacobsen: Can they officially become Rotarians yet?
Merryweather-Arges: Not until they are older. However, there are Rotary programs for youth.
Jacobsen: Is there a fun name for kids of Rotarians? Like “Rotors”?
Merryweather-Arges: [Laughing] Not quite—but there is Interact, which is for high school students, and Rotaract for young adults aged 18 and older. Both are focused on leadership development and service. It is like being part of a student-led community service organization.
Jacobsen: Great. So, of all the countries you have worked in, which one, either at the time or even now, has faced the most significant humanitarian challenges? How has Rotary International helped?
Merryweather-Arges: There have been many, depending on the moment in history. Some countries experience a deep crisis, and you return later and see signs of recovery. Honduras stands out to me. I was there during great hardship. Rotary’s work focused on education and school development. Supporting access to quality education has been key to helping communities overcome systemic challenges and build hope for the future.
When children do not have access to education or schools are not adequately equipped to meet educational standards, it creates deep, generational challenges. In Honduras, a Rotarian named Chuck Newman conducted a comprehensive study of schools nationwide. He found that most were severely lacking—lacking in facilities, lacking in trained educators, and lacking in basic resources.
We have tried working in Honduras, but it remains a challenging country. The government is genuinely trying to improve conditions, but it is difficult for them to address every region equally. On top of that, high crime rates and gang activity create serious obstacles, especially in some urban areas. So, we often have to work around those challenges to be effective.
During COVID, we received an urgent email from a physician in San Pedro Sula pleading for any assistance. He worked at a hospital where almost every patient who came in with COVID was dying. He asked for respiratory equipment and medications to help save lives.
We could turn that request around quickly—within a week, we sent the equipment and medication he needed. He later wrote a scientific paper describing its impact on his hospital and the patients. Our Rotary club had sponsored the funding. He joined us on Zoom during a club meeting and cried. He sobbed, saying, “You do not know what this meant to our community.”
Moments like that stay with you.
Another region in which I have worked extensively is Kenya. Since I became a Rotarian, we have partnered with the same community for years—Upendo Village in the Naivasha area. We started by providing HIV rapid testing kits and then moved on to water wells, fluoridation systems, and other essential infrastructure.
When I visited one of the nearby hospitals where most women went to give birth, I was shocked. They were delivering on cement slabs, not hospital beds. After delivery, the staff would hose down the slab and prepare it for the next person. Women would sleep head-to-toe, two to a bed, with their newborns beside them. It was heartbreaking.
What stayed with me was a visit to the burn unit, which was also where abandoned infants born to mothers with HIV/AIDS were left. The hope was that someone—anyone—might take them in. I saw a stillborn baby lying on a shelf in the sun. It was surreal and tragic. Many of the surviving babies were lying in cribs soaked in urine, some crying without tears—they were so dehydrated that they could no longer cry properly.
I went to the nursing unit in a nearby building to raise concerns. We were working with Sister Florence Mwewa, a remarkable community leader, and I told her, “I cannot believe what I have just seen.”
I asked, “Why are not the babies in the nursing unit?” The nurses said, “Oh, we would love to have the babies—most of them are HIV-positive or were abandoned.” So I told them, “We will find a way.”
I spoke with Sister Florence, and she had to push for municipal changes in the law to allow babies who were abandoned or born with HIV to be cared for in the nursing unit. Moreover, you see something like that—it seems so fundamentally human, yet it requires changing laws to make it happen.
Sister Florence is what I call a hero. She went up against the municipal government, which is no small feat in parts of Kenya. In some regions, women cannot legally own land. When a husband dies, the land and house do not go to the widow—they go to the husband’s brother, who can then decide whether to let the widow stay or force her out.
In getting to know these challenges, you understand the depth of communities’ issues. However, you always come across local heroes, like the doctor in Honduras who was so determined to save lives or Sister Florence, who has just been extraordinary.
When we installed a water well in Upendo Village, she ensured it was open to the community. People use it for gardening and other basic needs. Later, we helped develop a community business center—a shared space where small businesses could rent and grow.
Then Sister Florence had another idea. She said, “I want to start a bottled water distribution business.” So she started a small-scale water bottling plant.
I said, “There are already so many companies in the market.”
She replied, “I will undercut them. I will charge less and earn their business.”
And she did. She is a strict nun.
Jacobsen: You know what they call nuns with attitude who get things done? They do not call them sisters; they call them sassters.
Merryweather-Arges: [Laughing] Then yes, she is a sasster!
I was in Pakistan almost two years ago, during an agitated time. The former Prime Minister had just been jailed, and there were protests all across the country. In September 2022, Sindh Province flooded a third of the country. It was devastating. Everything was wiped out.
As we drove through Sindh, I saw people still living on cardboard boxes along the highway, as far as the eye could see. It was heartbreaking. In response, Rotarians there launched an initiative called Smart Villages. Fez, an architect, started it. He designed structures for communities to rebuild in safer, more sustainable ways.
Each Smart Village includes about 100 housing units. When I say “housing units,” I mean small cement and mud huts—modest but solid. Families paint and decorate them, making them their own. Each village also includes a community center and a water station.
In that area, mud ovens and many features were designed for everyday living. What surprised me was that the first Smart Village was explicitly built for migrants from India. These families were Hindu, and the local Muslim Rotarians also constructed a Hindu temple where they could worship.
They said, “These are our friends.” That level of interfaith compassion—Muslim Rotarians building housing and a temple for Hindu migrants—was profoundly moving. Witnessing such devastation and finding these lights of hope in the most unexpected and remote places leaves a lasting impression.
A Further Inquiry is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Jacobsen: That reminds me—did you ever hear about what Noam Chomsky shared after his first wife passed away? Some community deep in the forest planted a forest in her memory. They had never met her. Those kinds of acts—small, quiet, deeply human—stay with you.
Merryweather-Arges: Yes, exactly. It is very moving.
Jacobsen: You mentioned travelling with armed guards while in Pakistan. Was that a common experience, or was it unique to that trip?
Merryweather-Arges: The only other place that happened was in parts of Mexico, where we were escorted by armed police in trucks and jeeps. However, no—Rotarians usually meet you at the airport, waiting for you when you get off the plane, and they escort you safely. I’ve rarely had issues.
Well, I should add that in Nigeria, there was one time when things were agitated. We were working with Bishop Shanahan Hospital, a Catholic hospital, and nearby, in a local village, the Fulani herders came through and killed dozens of people. Tragically, they also removed the victims’ hearts. The bodies were brought to the hospital for identification by family members.
We were travelling through the region at the time. Security checkpoints were along the road—every few blocks, not even every mile. They would radio ahead at each one or call the next checkpoint to say, “We have the group now—expect them in X minutes.”It was a tightly coordinated effort. But it was not Rotarians watching over us that time—it was the local police.
Jacobsen: Was that in northern or southern Nigeria? Generally, the north is predominantly Muslim, and the south is primarily Christian.
Merryweather-Arges: It was in Nsukka, near Enugu. So not exactly north or south—it’s more south-central. That area is quite mixed. But where we were, it’s very blended.
Jacobsen: Was this around the height of the Boko Haram media coverage?
Merryweather-Arges: Yes. We had visited Opus Dei Hospital, a Catholic facility in Enugu, an incredible place and one of the best hospitals in Nigeria. About fifteen minutes after we left, Boko Haram came in and kidnapped the head of the hospital, who was a physician. This was around Easter, and everyone was praying for him. One of their own had been injured, and they wanted medical help. That was the reason for the abduction. So he was taken to keep the injured person alive. After about seven days, he was released. But yes, it was a dire situation.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/13
Part 2 of 4
Christopher Louis is a Los Angeles–based international dating and relationship coach and founder of Dating Intelligence. As host of the Dating Intelligence Podcast, Louis draws on intuition and lived experience to guide clients toward authentic selves and meaningful romantic connections. Louis explores the crucial role of “reading the room” in long-term relationships. They emphasize how misreading cues—like ignoring body language, emotional withdrawal, or passive-aggressive behavior—can erode connection over time. Louis underscores the importance of eye contact, presence, and nonverbal communication, especially for introverts or those less attuned to emotional signals. Through personal stories and therapeutic insight, they reveal that maintaining awareness, checking in regularly, and developing attuned body language are key to preserving intimacy and emotional safety. Relationships thrive when both partners stay emotionally and physically present.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What about reading the room in a relationship, not just while dating?
Christopher Louis: Absolutely. This applies even more in long-term relationships. Everyone’s had moments where they misread a partner’s signals. Whether it’s misreading sexual cues—like making an advance when your partner isn’t in the mood—or going in for a kiss too early in a new relationship and getting that “Whoa, I wasn’t ready” response.
Misreading usually happens when focusing only on one’s feelings or expectations. One is not tuned in to the other person, and that’s a critical mistake. For example, say you come home, and your spouse is drained after a long day. Still, you immediately start bombarding them with questions or problems. That’s reading the room wrong.
Or maybe your partner is mad at you, and you’re unaware. You walk in the door and ask, “What’s wrong?” They look at you like, “Really?” Suddenly, doors slam, sighs are heavy, and things are being moved forcefully. That’s body language—loud, emotional, nonverbal communication—but many people miss it.
Why? Because they are stuck in their heads. They are not present. They are not projecting awareness outward. You must consciously observe the signals your partner sends—verbal and nonverbal.
Jacobsen: It’s interesting—fighting, like language itself, is partly innate and partly learned. Structurally, we all have the capacity for language, but what we speak and how we use it is shaped by our environment. Body language in conflict is the same—culturally layered but personally developed over time.
Louis: It’s the same with conflict styles. That’s why we talk about different “fighting styles.” Over time, you and your partner develop your way of arguing—hopefully resolving things. You figure out what works and what doesn’t, whether it’s with verbal cues or nonverbal ones. It becomes a learned rhythm, and if done right, it’s balanced. Even fighting can have its emotional intelligence when both people are attuned.
When you walk into a room and your partner is mad—but they’re completely quiet—that’s one of the most powerful body language cues. Silence can be just as expressive as words. If you’re asking questions and getting nothing but a quiet “Mmmhmm” or a cold shoulder, that’s a signal. But many people are too afraid to say, “Hey, what’s wrong?” because they fear the answer or do not know how to handle the tension.
Silence—whether someone is sad, mad, or withdrawn—is honestly one of the most complex forms of body language to interpret but also one of the most important to recognize. It can speak volumes without saying a word.
Jacobsen: That reminds me of an episode of House, M.D.—the show with the sarcastic, brilliant, but abrasive doctor. In one of the final episodes, House turns around and snaps, “Life is pain.” It was like a burst of unspoken emotion building since Season 1. Left unspoken for too long, that emotional repression can become unhealthy.
Louis: That’s exactly it. Many people bottle things up, and then it bursts out in unhealthy ways. But those silent moments become easier to read when you’re in a healthy relationship and know your partner well. You start to pick up on subtle cues. It is all trial and error. You win and lose some, but hopefully, you learn from the missteps and better recognize the signals.
Especially when you’re dealing with someone who’s passive-aggressive—that’s a big one. That passive-aggressive behaviour becomes a pattern whether it’s a partner, child, or close friend. At some point, you realize this is how they operate. But if you want to break through that, you have to create space for direct communication.
I tell people to start naming it gently. Say something like, “I see that you’re being quiet,” or “I notice you’re doing this or that—do you want to talk?” That’s how you start building better communication habits. Passive-aggressive behaviour is a form of body language, and if both people are passive-aggressive in a relationship, it can lead to serious communication breakdowns.
Jacobsen: Now, shifting a bit—how does body language evolve from early dating into long-term relationships? Older couples often seem more emotionally regulated and calmer. But are there consistent patterns in body language over time, or is it more individualized? Can you tell from observation whether a long-term relationship is healthy or not?
Louis: Great question. Everyone goes through the “honeymoon phase” at the beginning of a relationship. That’s when you’re on a euphoric high. Everything feels exciting; physical touch is frequent, eye contact is constant, and energy flows.
During that phase, body language is almost always positive—open posture, leaning in, smiling, touching, and verbal affirmations. But eventually, that honeymoon phase fades. That’s when the real work begins.
And here’s where it gets interesting: in healthy relationships, even after the initial spark cools, the couple develops a new, deeper layer of body language. It becomes more nuanced, more attuned. They might not always touch as much, but it is intentional and meaningful when they do. Their eye contact might be softer, less intense, but more grounding.
In contrast, in unhealthy relationships, body language becomes either avoidant—closed off, minimal physical connection—or reactive—short fuses, crossed arms, avoidance, or defensiveness. So yes, there are general patterns. You can often tell the state of a relationship just by watching how a couple sits together, how they respond to each other, and how they lean—or do not—toward each other.
That long-term body language isn’t about fireworks anymore; it is about safety, presence, and emotional alignment. That’s the gold standard. My wife—my partner—told me something that stuck with me the other day. She said, “Chris, I was watching this movie, and a couple was kissing on screen. It reminded me of us when we first started dating.” And I said, “Well, we still kiss like that.” And she replied, “No… not like that.” And I was like, “Oh… okay. Yes.”
She meant that spark—that energy you have initially during the euphoric honeymoon stage. It made me pause and think over the past few days: How do I bring that back?What must I work on to help her feel that way again? And that’s me paying attention. That’s the work.
So, to answer your question—about long-term relationships and how body language evolves—I think what happens is that many couples, over time, get complacent. It is normal. It happens. But I always say that couples need to check in with each other intentionally.
At least once a month, sit down together and ask, “How are we doing sexually? How are we doing emotionally? How’s our communication? How are we handling finances?” That regular check-in helps maintain that emotional connection, and when you’re emotionally connected, your body language tends to stay positive—more open, more attuned, more affectionate.
As time passes, your ability to read one another improves—whether it is subtle tension, playful flirting, or just spotting when something feels off. And when that’s nurtured, your relationship doesn’t flatline—it grows deeper.
Jacobsen: That makes sense. Relationships are dynamic—they ebb and flow. Sometimes, one partner is doing well, and the other is down. Other times, you’re both flying or struggling. But you stay aligned as long as there’s mutual awareness and ongoing conversation. It is like a relational system of checks and balances.
Louis: If you are not checking in regularly, what happens? The couple becomes more like roommates. You lose each other. You drift. That spark fades. And sometimes, if that goes on too long, it leads to separation or divorce. But here’s the truth-finding your way back is not hard. You need to notice before it is too late.
Jacobsen: Some people are naturally gifted at this—reading signals and knowing how to respond. But others might need guidance. For those who are not naturally intuitive or in the early stages of a relationship, what are some foundational things to focus on?
Louis: Great point. First and foremost, I always come back to listening. That’s number one. But listening is not just with your ears—it is with your presence. It is about showing that you are fully engaged, including body language. Eye contact, posture, turning toward your partner—these are all part of active listening.
So, I encourage my clients who are shy or introverted—maybe socially reserved—to start small. Make eye contact when your partner speaks. Nod, smile, and respond. These little things send a clear message: I’m here. I’m with you.
That level of attentiveness creates connection, and everything else—trust, affection, communication—can start to build. For introverts, body language can be complicated to get right. Many introverted people tend to close themselves off physically. Their heads are often down, their arms crossed, and their body language tight. And even though they want to engage—they’re interested—they may be afraid to project outward. They are not naturally expressive in an extroverted way.
So I tell my introverted clients this: first, you must keep your head up and make direct eye contact with the person you’re speaking to, especially when that person is talking to you. Eye contact is crucial.
Sometimes, I work with clients over Zoom; they talk while looking at the sky or all over the room. And I have to say, “Hey, I’m over here. If your eyes are darting everywhere, I will start wondering, What are you looking at? What’s going on over there?” It becomes distracting, and you lose your listener’s attention.
Jacobsen: Right—where your eyes go, their focus goes.
Louis: So I coach both my male and female clients—especially those who are shy or anxious—on this one simple habit: when you’re on a date, keep your eyes on the person you’re with. Direct eye contact shows presence and interest. It says I’m here, I’m engaged, and you matter.
If your eyes shift, your head is bobbing like a bobblehead, and your attention is scattered, it sends mixed signals. You may be interested, but you’re not showing it. And that gap between intention and expression is where connection gets lost.
So, I actively work on this with my clients, especially introverts. I see it even in everyday situations: I make it a point to maintain direct eye contact with my partner or talk with friends. And sometimes, I have to remind myself, “Stay focused. Pay attention.” It is something we can all improve.
And here’s the thing—sometimes just that eye contact and body language is enough to get you a second date. Unless…
Jacobsen: Unless the guy says something too stupid?
Louis: That’s what many women say: “He’s in—unless he says something dumb.” [Laughing] There’s an old Chris Rock bit about that. He jokes, “I was gonna give him some… then he started talking.” And he just yakked himself out of it.
Jacobsen: The “yacking man-child” syndrome.
Louis: Yep, that’s the one. To sum it up, eye contact is number one. It sets the tone. If you can’t get that right, the rest of the conversation won’t matter much.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/11
Keta Kosman is the owner and publisher of Madison’s Lumber Reporter, a leading resource for softwood lumber pricing and market analysis. Based in Vancouver, British Columbia, Keta holds a BA in Political Science and Philosophy from the University of British Columbia and has extensive experience in graphic design, publishing, and the lumber industry. Since 2008, she has provided critical insights into North American lumber markets through Madison’s Lumber Reporter and related publications. A recognized industry analyst, Keta specializes in lumber pricing, sawmill capacity, forestry trends, and trade between Canada and the U.S. She is also active in environmental initiatives. Kosman discusses factors behind the U.S. South surpassing Canada in softwood lumber production. Seasonal cycles influence lumber pricing, with low prices in winter and rising demand by spring. Southern yellow pine’s volume increase outpaces Canada’s SPF due to U.S. homebuilding demand and investments in U.S. sawmills. Trade barriers like duties disproportionately affect Canadian mills, driving diversification to Asia. Environmental events such as wildfires and hurricanes impact timber supply and reconstruction needs. Kosman emphasizes the divisive nature of duties, driven by U.S. special interest groups, and highlights the opaque negotiation process over settlements involving billions in duties.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: What factors are involved in the U.S. South surpassing Canada in softwood lumber production capacity?
Keta Kosman: The volume of lumber is a key factor in determining pricing at any given time. U.S. and Canadian housing markets generally follow seasonal cycles, which cause annual fluctuations in lumber prices. The year’s lowest prices typically occur toward the end of the year, during winter. Around this time of year and into February, prices rise as homebuilders prepare for spring. Large companies, especially those constructing 100 to 150 homes at a time, aim to have the lumber they need onsite before breaking ground. Consequently, whether on the supply side or the demand side, stakeholders are always looking ahead. They base their current purchases and investments in log procurement on their expectations for the next three months.
Jacobsen: Is this generally done seasonally? Do they start planning at the beginning of the year and then project for spring, summer, fall, and winter?
Kosman: Yes, that’s correct. Even though housing construction data may still indicate strong activity in June, most companies have already purchased the lumber they need by then. As a result, while construction continues, demand slows, and prices typically soften around June.
Jacobsen: What are the most important factors regarding how the U.S. South surpasses Canada in softwood lumber production capacity?
Kosman: There are several factors to consider. When you see claims that southern yellow pine manufacturing exceeds western spruce-pine-fir (SPF) production in volume, it’s important to note that such comparisons are not always apples-to-apples. To make a fair comparison, you should compare the entire U.S. South to the entire North or the U.S. Southwest to the Northwest.
Generally speaking, the volume increase in southern yellow pine lumber manufacturing has been significantly greater than in eastern or western spruce species, such as northern varieties.
One major factor is that large operators in British Columbia anticipated a reduction in timber supply due to the mountain pine beetle infestation. To compensate, they shifted some of their manufacturing focus from SPF by acquiring and taking over mills in the U.S. South.
As I mentioned, U.S. homebuilding is by far the largest consumer of lumber. However, one critical point often overlooked is that homebuilders do not typically prefer southern yellow pine for construction framing. They tend to avoid it because of its physical properties.
To explain in detail, the relationship between the raw log and its final application is quite direct. Homebuilders find that SPF lumber from the Pacific Northwest, eastern Canada, or the northeastern U.S. is straight, clear, and strong—qualities essential for framing. In contrast, southern pine studs are more likely to split or warp when nails are driven into them, particularly when applying drywall. For this reason, southern pine is not widely used for framing construction.
Instead, southern pine wood is primarily used for finishing, siding, outdoor purposes, and decking. Its porous nature allows it to take treatment well, and its attractive yellow grain makes it ideal for outdoor applications.
Therefore, the volume of 2×4 manufacturing using southern pine does not serve the same purpose for end users as SPF 2×4 lumber. I hope this distinction is clear.
Jacobsen: Regarding investments in new sawmills in the U.S. South, have these developments influenced the overall distribution of lumber production capacity?
Kosman: Southern pine lumber is almost entirely a domestic U.S. product, with very little, if any, making its way into Canada. In contrast, SPF lumber, whether from Washington State, Oregon, British Columbia, or Alberta, is widely transported. SPF travels across Canada and the U.S. and is also exported overseas. Eastern SPF typically goes to Europe, while Western SPF is shipped to Asia. Southern pine, on the other hand, is not commonly exported as lumber. However, southern pine logs are significantly exported, particularly to Asia. This dynamic illustrates the difference in the movement and utilization of these products.
Regarding investments in U.S. sawmills, it’s important to understand that timber in the U.S. South often comes from plantation-style forestry, which is more similar to practices in Europe or Japan. These plantations involve thinning, pruning, fumigating, and watering. In contrast, forests in the Pacific Northwest and Canada are natural. While replanting is done in Canada, silviculture practices like thinning and pruning are not typically employed. In the U.S. South, private timberland owners often supply mills; in some cases, mills own the timberland themselves. In Canada, the timber supply comes predominantly from public lands designated for forestry, excluding parks, Indigenous lands, or other protected areas. The British Columbia Interior now has more lumber production in the U.S. than in Canada.
Jacobsen: How does this influence the dynamics of manufacturing and distribution? Can you explain how larger operators manage their operations geographically and nationally?
Kosman: When discussing production volume, it’s essential also to consider value. For instance, the price of a Southern pine 2×4 compared to an SPF 2×4 can vary significantly. Companies operating cross-border, such as Interfor, Canfor, and West Fraser, have substantially invested in U.S. facilities. Understanding why they invest in these areas requires considering a few critical factors.
First, all lumber in North America is sold in U.S. dollars, even when a Canadian buyer purchases lumber in Canada. Suppose the Canadian dollar is weak, as it has been for much of the past decade. In that case, this creates an enormous advantage for Canadian producers. For example, the exchange rate is around 75 cents, which has been for several years but falls to 69 cents. In that case, Canadian producers gain additional profit from the currency difference.
However, production costs in Canada are generally higher. To address this, companies have shifted investments to U.S. facilities, where costs can be lower. These companies assess multiple factors, such as log supply, log costs, production costs, market prices, demand, housing starts, and geographic advantages. This allows them to decide where to produce for a particular period strategically.
Jacobsen:Trade policies and tariffs also play a significant role. Do these policies have a real impact on lumber production and distribution?
Kosman: Yes, absolutely. Softwood lumber has been subject to tariffs and duties for decades. We’re currently in what’s referred to as Softwood Lumber Dispute #5. Historically, around 85% of Canadian lumber was sold into the U.S., but this has dropped to between 60% and 65% over the past 20 years. This shift is largely due to Canada diversifying its markets, with significant new exports to Asia to avoid U.S. duties.
When duties are imposed, as happened after the expiration of the previous softwood lumber agreement in 2016, it creates challenges for Canadian mills. During economic slowdowns, such as after the 2006 housing crash, mills often cannot pass the cost increases caused by duties onto consumers. This forces mills to absorb the losses. By contrast, when the market is strong, as in the 1990s, mills can better offset duty costs by increasing prices for end users.
Currently, duties remain a significant constraint for Canadian mills, as the housing market is not robust enough to absorb additional costs effectively.
Jacobsen: Environmental challenges, such as pine beetle infestations and wildfires, are significant factors affecting lumber production. Wildfires, for example, are currently in the news, particularly in Los Angeles. However, why is the U.S. housing market potentially more important than these environmental challenges? This is not to diminish the effects and importance of wildfires and infestations but rather to explore the broader context.
Kosman: It’s important because these events, like wildfires or storms, can have two primary impacts. First, they can reduce the timber supply available to mills. For example, if a wildfire occurs in a timber supply area—not a park—it directly affects the volume of timber that can be harvested. Second, events like hurricanes can create an immediate need for reconstruction.
For instance, at the end of last year, Hurricane Helene caused significant damage in the Appalachian region, including the Carolinas and parts of Florida, particularly in low-lying areas prone to flooding. The homes affected were already occupied, so this reconstruction demand was separate from new housing construction driven by demographic trends, such as young people entering the housing market.
Hurricane Helene also impacted timber areas and sawmill operations. Three major sawmills—two West Fraser mills in Florida and one Canfor mill in Georgia—suffered disruptions. These included power outages lasting nearly two weeks and destroyed roads, which affected production and transportation. We’ve seen similar scenarios, such as during the atmospheric river event in 2022, where environmental disasters impacted sawmills and the need for rebuilding in affected areas.
In contrast, the fires in Los Angeles are primarily in parklands, which are not part of the timber supply basket. While it is devastating to see forests burn, these trees were never intended for sawmills. The primary loss in such cases is livable structures, not timber resources.
Jacobsen:So, when interest rates decrease, home sales and construction tend to rise, creating a larger demand for lumber. Is it fair to say that this trend in interest rates outweighs the short-term effects of environmental factors, such as wildfires or pine beetle infestations?
Kosman: Yes, that’s correct. Interest rates have a much broader and more sustained impact on housing and lumber markets than seasonal events like wildfires or infestations. For example, from 2006 to 2017, the U.S. housing market was depressed due to the fallout from the zero-interest mortgage crisis, which caused many people to lose their homes.
During that time, the U.S. was underbuilt, requiring around 1.5 million annualized new housing starts to keep up with population growth. That figure has now risen to 1.7 million, meaning we’re still not meeting the basic housing demand—not considering speculative investments or second-home purchases, but purely demographic needs.
With inflation easing and interest rates loosening up, we’re seeing an uplift in housing markets. It’s not a dramatic jump but rather a moderate, sustained increase. Last year, we expected housing construction to pick up, and I anticipate a noticeable increase this spring. This trend will likely continue over the next few years, driven by the basic need for housing, compounded by reconstruction efforts following storms and other disasters.
Jacobsen: What about U.S. trade barriers, such as duties and tariffs, which have been entrenched in the industry for a long time? You mentioned that the industry has acclimated to these mechanisms. Are these trade barriers fair or primarily designed to serve domestic interests?
Kosman: Trade barriers like duties and tariffs on softwood lumber are longstanding issues in the industry. The U.S. has implemented these measures for decades, and we’re currently in what’s referred to as Softwood Lumber Dispute #5. Over the years, Canadian producers have adapted to these policies by diversifying their export markets.
Historically, 85% of Canadian lumber was sold into the U.S., but that figure has dropped to between 60% and 65%. Much of the difference is now exported to Asia to avoid U.S. duties. These trade barriers often serve domestic U.S. interests under the guise of protecting local industries, but whether they’re fair is a complex question.
In an economic slowdown, such as after the 2008 housing crash, duties can severely constrain Canadian mills as they struggle to pass on the increased costs to consumers. In stronger markets, mills have more flexibility to offset these costs. However, these policies often create inefficiencies and distortions in the market, affecting producers and consumers on both sides of the border.
The benefit primarily lies with the United States, but I must be careful about framing this. U.S. lumber industry analysts at timberland investment conferences have said that the softwood lumber duty functions as an “every ten-year dividend” for U.S. timberland owners.
A special interest group that lobbies Congress to implement the softwood lumber duty. While this group includes some sawmills, it primarily represents timberland owners. They argue that Canada’s timber supply largely comes from public land and is not governed by free-market mechanisms. They claim that because the government sells Canadian trees, the prices are artificially lower, effectively subsidizing Canadian sawmills and allowing them to sell lumber in the U.S. at lower costs than U.S. producers can achieve.
In Canada, timber is owned federally by the Crown, but the provinces manage access to it. The two largest provinces for timber supply are British Columbia and Quebec. Historically, especially in the 1980s, British Columbia set timber prices based on provincial budget needs, which was not a market-based approach. This practice gave the U.S. a legitimate grievance. However, British Columbia has adopted a more market-responsive pricing system over the past decade. Timber prices are reassessed every three months and tied to lumber prices. When lumber prices go down, the cost of logs decreases, and when lumber prices rise, log prices increase.
Despite these changes, the U.S. special interest group continues to push for duties, largely disregarding the market reforms.
Another critical aspect, often overlooked, is the financial dynamics behind these disputes. Historically, negotiations for settlement only begin when the amount collected from duties reaches approximately US$5 billion. Observers who have followed the issue for decades argue that the dispute is less about policy, pricing, or subsidies and more about dividing this significant financial pot.
For example, during the last settlement, the U.S. Commerce Department had collected US$5 billion in duties. Although the U.S. lost the case at both NAFTA and the WTO and was ordered to return the money, they refunded only US$4 billion. The remaining US$1 billion was retained and distributed among members of the Softwood Lumber Coalition. Furthermore, due to exchange rate fluctuations, the returned US$4 billion was worth only US$3.6 billion at the time, adding to Canada’s financial losses.
I’ve heard that the amount collected is approaching US$7 billion, which exceeds the usual threshold for initiating settlement discussions. Canada and the U.S. may be already negotiating a resolution. Still, these negotiations typically remain confidential until a deal is finalized.
Jacobsen: Why do these negotiations only become public knowledge at the final phase, after settling everything?
Kosman: Regarding transparency during the negotiation process, I don’t know why it’s so tightly controlled. Sometimes, if I speak to someone personally at a conference—someone directly involved as a petitioner, subject to the duty here in Canada—they’ll provide some insight.
The duty itself is applied based on specific data. When lumber crosses the U.S. border, the duty is calculated on the pro forma invoice presented at customs. It depends on the shipment volume, whether it’s in a truck or railcar, and the price. Companies must show their invoices detailing the volume and sales price of the wood.
Companies know what’s happening because the government asks them for this information. Occasionally, I’ll hear from someone kind enough to share updates, like “there’s some movement on this issue.” However, for the most part, even those involved don’t know the full details. It’s a very unusual and opaque process.
I can tell you this: many sawmill manufacturers in the U.S. do not support the duty. Their perspective is, “If Canadian wood is better and priced higher, let the market decide. Customers can choose whether to pay for Canadian wood or a domestic product.” This issue is incredibly divisive.
The driving force behind the duty is a special interest group—it’s not a widespread, public initiative. It’s not as though individuals like Joe Smith in Alabama are part of the softwood lumber duty. This bilateral issue is negotiated directly between Trade Canada and the U.S. Commerce Department.
That’s quite an unusual and complex situation. Many people hold strong opinions about it, but most people do not explain this level of depth.
Jacobsen: Do you have any final points or questions?
Kosman: No, this was far more detailed than what I usually hear.
Jacobsen: Glad to hear it! Thank you for your time. I appreciate it.
Kosman: Okay, talk to you later.
Jacobsen: Bye.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
Share this:
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): A Further Inquiry
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/06/11
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 2(b)
The University is a public body… subject to the Charter. The actions taken to discipline the students for their online comments infringed their right to freedom of expression.
Pridgen v. University of Calgary, 2010 ABCA 347
Colleges and universities must implement a free speech policy that conforms to the principles of free expression as expressed in the University of Chicago’s Statement.
Ontario Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, 2018 Directive
Academic freedom includes the right to teach, learn, study and publish free of orthodoxy or threat of reprisal… and to express one’s opinion about the institution, its administration, and the system in which one works.
Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) Statement on Academic Freedom
Prelude to Controversy: Free Expression in Higher Education
Over time, controversies may settle, particularly in Canadian academic culture.
Lindsay Shepherd’s academic case began in November 2017. It involved academic freedom and freedom of expression. The debate originated at Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU). What happened?
Shepherd showed a video of Jordan Peterson in class. Shepherd filed a lawsuit in June of 2018. WLU later apologized. The case was cited in national debates about freedom of expression policies at Canadian universities. Ontario mandated policies in 2018. Let us go into some of the details and further outcomes.
2017: Context and Early Developments in the Shepherd Case
In late 2017, Lindsay Shepherd was a Canadian graduate student and teaching assistant. On November 1, 2017, she showed two TVOntario’s The Agenda clips of Dr. Jordan Peterson speaking on Bill C-16. Shepherd presented the Peterson video to engage students. She reported no firm opinion of him. She did this in a first-year communications class. The action appeared intended to illustrate a debate on gender-neutral pronouns. This triggered administrative action. Bill C-16 amends the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. “Gender identity” and “gender expression” are added to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination. It also extends protections against hate speech and hate propaganda.
Following the class on November 8, 2017, a student approached WLU’s Rainbow Centre. They had concerns about the clips shown. The Centre contacted the university administration. The specifics of the complaint are uncertain; no formal complaint was ever filed. Shepherd was called into a supervisory meeting with Nathan Rambukkana (Shepherd’s Supervisor), Adria Joel (Gender Violence Prevention), and Herbert Pimlott (Program Head). The processes followed leading to the meeting are uncertain. The meeting lasted 40 minutes. The three expressed concerns that her actions had created a ‘toxic climate.’ The reason: Neutral presentation of clips. Shepherd was asked to pre-approve all lesson plans in the future. Shepherd recorded the meeting on her mother’s advice after receiving a vague email about the meeting.
On November 10, 2017, Shepherd released a meeting recording to the National Post. She believed the issue was of public interest because universities hold a societal role and garner taxpayer funding, so she contacted the media after the private meeting. The recording emphasized freedom of expression, Bill C-16, and the Canadian Human Rights Code. It garnered national attention. The incident sparked ongoing national debates on academic freedom at WLU and beyond.
On November 21, 2017, WLU President Deborah MacLatchy and Nathan Rambukkana published public apologies. They stated that Shepherd had done nothing wrong. Rambukkana and Pimlott emphasized the need for a “safe learning environment” and criticized ideas lacking “academic credibility.” MacLatchy acknowledged an “institutional failure.” (Later, Shepherd described Rambukkana’s apology as “disingenuous” in her lawsuit.)
On December 18, 2017, Robert Centa conducted an independent inquiry. Centa concluded that no formal complaint was filed, the two clips shown did not violate policy, and the meeting represented “significant overreach.”
2018: Litigation, Legislative Response, and Public Discourse
In January 2018, Shepherd founded the Laurier Society for Open Inquiry with two other students. LSOI invited controversial speakers and faced some challenges, including high-security costs. In May 2018, Canadians for Accountability awarded Shepherd the Harry Weldon Canadian Values Award. WLU also approved a Statement on Freedom of Expression. The policy outlines student discipline via the Non-Academic Code of Conduct. It requires compliance for group recognition and funding. It directs unresolved complaints to the Ontario Ombudsman. Also, the policy mandates annual implementation reports starting September 1, 2019.
In June 2018, Shepherd filed a $3.6 million lawsuit against WLU, Rambukkana, Pimlott, Joel, and a student. She alleged constructive dismissal, harassment, and negligence. Independently, Peterson filed a $1.5 million defamation suit against WLU and involved staff based on the comments in the 2017 meeting. It was filed separately from Shepherd’s.
In August 2018, Ontario mandated publicly funded colleges and universities to adopt free speech policies based on Chicago Principles, based on a broader debate on academic freedom and free speech, which included Shepherd’s case. All institutions are required to report annually to the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.
In December 2018, Rambukkana and Pimlott lodged a third‑party claim against Shepherd as part of legal proceedings related to Peterson’s lawsuit. The professors argued that Shepherd should be liable for damages from releasing the recorded meeting. They argued that Shepherd was responsible for recording and publishing a private meeting. Privacy and free speech rights conflicted.
In response to Ontario’s 2018 mandate, publicly funded universities were mandated to establish free speech policies by January 1, 2019. Enforcement is overseen by the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO). Institutions that are non-compliant may face reduced funding. The Campus Freedom Index, published annually since 2011, documented persistent institutional failures. In 2018, WLU and six other universities earned an “F” grade on free speech.
2019-Present: Lindsay Shepherd Lawsuit Dismissal, Twitter Ban, and Ongoing Free Speech Debate in Canadian Universities
2019, the University of Ottawa and the University of Alberta provided unconditional protection. The rest had caveats. In 2020, thirteen universities earned an “F,” and 21 student unions failed. As of 2025, there have been no significant developments in these policies, though they remain actively debated. The 2018–2019 frameworks are still in place.
On February 7, 2019, Shepherd became a Campus Free Speech Fellow at the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. On July 14, 2019, Twitter (now X) banned Shepherd. The exchange became public and controversial, leading to media scrutiny of both parties. The exchange was deemed “abusive behaviour.” The ban stemmed from a Twitter exchange involving comments related to reproductive health and public figures. Later that July, her account was reinstated.
Shepherd’s teaching contract was cancelled in early 2020. As a teaching assistant, not a faculty member with a formal academic contract, non-renewal can be common and not necessarily punitive. Peterson’s lawsuit was dismissed in April 2024 on legal grounds and procedural merit. The full judgment text is not public. On November 8, 2024, a court dismissed the $3.6 million lawsuit. As of May 23, 2025, the dismissal has been noted in public summaries, but the ruling text is not publicly available yet. National discussions on the balance between free speech equity, diversity, and inclusion continue on Canadian campuses. The 2018–2019 policy frameworks are extant.
Now, Shepherd’s case remains central to debates over academic freedom. WLU and other universities continue to publish annual free‑speech reports, and others, like the Campus Freedom Index, track compliance and campus speech environments. Shepherd’s memoir, “Diversity and Exclusion: Confronting the Campus Free Speech Crisis,” offers a detailed presentation of opinions on academic freedom.
The chronology reveals an ordinary pedagogical decision leading to national debates, legal battles, and policy changes. The case and the lawsuit’s impacts on Shepherd’s academic career and professional legacy remain unclear. Its long-term impact remains to be seen.
Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.
In-Sight Publishing 