The Confidence Man

In 1849, the New York Herald reported on the arrest of a gentleman by the name of William Thompson.

I use the term ‘gentleman’ here broadly. As the Herald reported:

For the last few months a man has been traveling about the city…he would go up to a perfect stranger in the street, and being a man of genteel appearance, would easily command an interview. Upon this interview he would say after some little conversation, “have you confidence in me to trust me with your watch until to-morrow;” the stranger at this novel request, supposing him to be some old acquaintance not at that moment recollected, allows him to take the watch, thus placing “confidence” in the honesty of the stranger, who walks off laughing and the other supposing it to be a joke allows him so to do. In this way many have been duped…

To those who had heard of these strange interactions, Thompson was known as the “Confidence Man.”

He was, in fact, the first “confidence man” – a term which has sense been colloquially shortened to “con man.”

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Gender and Politics

Women, historically, can’t seem to get a fair shake.

For centuries, women in the west have been subjected to a sinner/saint duality. That is, any woman who fails to live up to an idealized construction of womanhood must automatically be relegated to the lowest depths of depravity – there is no middle ground, no subtly to society’s judgement of femininity.

As one author puts in examining this trend in Victorian literature, “When a woman deviated from the Victorian construction of the ideal woman, she was stigmatized and labelled. The fallen woman was viewed as a moral menace, a contagion.”

A contagion. For a woman, that’s how serious any momentary personal failing – or perceived failing – might be.

In modern times, this duality has haunted women seeking positions of leadership and power. Female leaders must be confident but not assertive; nurturing but not emotional, dedicated mothers and dedicated employees. In short, women must fulfill masculine ideals of leadership without losing an ounce of idealized femininity.

This is not challenging: it is downright impossible.

Victoria Woodhull was the first woman in the U.S. to run for president. She ran in 1872, a good 50 years before U.S. women won the right to vote. Woodhull, who was married twice and held the radical notion that women ought to have the right to marry and divorce as they choose, was widely accused of being a prostitute.

No doubt, this was simply a term for a woman who spoke her mind.

Ultimately, Woodhull spent election night in jail, arrested with her husband and sister for “publishing an obscene newspaper.”

“Obscene” in this case meant highlighting the “sexual double-standard between men and women.”

That is the history that has led us here. To the second president run of the most viable female candidate our nation has ever seen.

(I would, of course, be remiss here if I didn’t mention the dozens of other impressive women who have run for this office.)

And make no mistake, Hillary Clinton has suffered from the same old-fashioned double standards which have plagued women for generations. But solidarity on that issue is not enough to determine a vote.

When Clinton entered the 2008 race her campaign miscalculated a core fact about her base. Women, she expected, would be with her. Women of all ages.

This was not true.

As Abraham Unger, Assistant Professor of Government & Politics at Wagner College, wrote of the 2008 primaries, “Senior women, who came of age during the pioneering period of the feminist movement, did vote for Clinton, while younger women were drawn to Obama. Women in the middle were split between the two.”

With Barack Obama running a historic campaign of his own, it became impossible to disambiguate the effects of race, gender, age, and class in determining a person’s political affiliation. A vote for someone other than Clinton wasn’t a vote against womanhood; it was a vote for something more.

Women, it seemed, would have to wait.

When Clinton launched her current bid for the White House, I wondered what tactics she would take to close the age gap. Surely, she had learned that young women weren’t unquestionably in her court.

And yet here we are – watching the surprising rise of an old, white man – matching Clinton beat for beat; capturing the hearts, minds, and votes of younger voters.

Again, we see young people – men and women alike – drawn to the upstart, outsider candidate. The one who encourages us towards hope; towards radical change of a broken system.

Clinton supporters are not impressed.

I’ve been floored by some recent comments. Gloria Steinem said that young women supported Sanders because they were thinking “Where are the boys?” Meanwhile, Madeline Albright warns that “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.”

Is this the feminism we are supposed to be defending?

To be clear, we’d do well to be mindful of the subtle impact of sexism. Anyone who doesn’t support Clinton should do some careful thinking about their reasons and motivation, watching out for the impulsive and flippant urge to deride her voice, pantsuits, or (lack of) emotions.

At least we can take comfort in the scrutiny of Marco Rubio’s boots.

But let’s never use gender as litmus test – one way or the other.

The truth, I suppose, is that feminism is changing.

I can’t truly appreciate the feminism of women who are older than me. Women who were mistreated or outright fired explicitly because of their gender; much less the feminism of women who were pushed into loveless marriages, who were forced upon by their husbands and who had no voice or recourse in the matter.

We should not forget the fight of Victoria Woodhull, nor of countless other women who have pushed relentlessly towards gender parity. There has been much to fight for, and the fight still goes on.

But right now, right here in this moment, thankful for all the women who have come before me – I am not looking for boys nor concerned about hell. I am simply looking for the candidate who most closely speaks to my diverse political concerns.

In this race, for me, it happens that person is man. But how lucky for me – I have a vote in the matter.

And no one can take that away.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Private and Public Voting

So here’s a fun thing. At the Iowa Caucuses next week, following the discussion and speeches for candidates, some voters will cast a secret ballot while others will vote publically.

In a caucus setting, with its ideals of community and dialogue, a public vote doesn’t seem too jarring. Yet – it is a little strange. Voting, in this country, is almost synonymous with a private act.

So why the divide in private and public voting at the caucus?

Well, first of all – regardless of how you feel about the ideological differences of the parties – they are in fact different organizations. Each party has their own infrastructure, history, and traditions.

We often forget this as we consider them two halves of the same whole – but the simple truth is that at Republicans have a private caucus ballot while Democrats do not because the parties evolved separately and have different bureaucratic structures.

Interestingly, most voting in the U.S. used to be done publicly – and out loud. Amidst what I can only imagine was great fanfare amongst the old boys’ network, voters would cast their vote by publicly announcing their candidate preference.

Your neighbors knew who you were for and you knew who your neighbors were for. Party pride ran high.

Of course, corruption was also rampant, as – pre-prohibition – voters were often rewarded with alcohol.

The so-called “Australian ballot” – a secret ballot printed at the public’s expense – didn’t become popular until the late 1800s. It was first, adopted, of course, in Massachusetts.

The secret ballot didn’t become universal in the U.S. states until 1892. …and prohibitions against paying people for votes weren’t instituted until 1925.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Honoring Dr. King

Every year, the great Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is commemorated in communities around the country. Officials gather to emphasize the importance of diversity. People participate in service days to help their fellow man. Quotes from the venerable Dr. King can be found everywhere.

I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.

It is all very beautiful, meaningful, and inspirational.

There’s just one problem: it’s all just a little too nice. A little too practiced. A little too…superficial.

Particularly among the white community, Martin Luther King Day is too often a day of self-praise and hollow gestures towards justice. As if we can cram all our care into one day and thoughtlessly continue with microaggressions the next. It’s okay cause I celebrated Dr. King. I proved I am not a racist.

 

Too often in the white community we fail to truly grapple with the complex legacy of Dr. King and the dark history of racism in this country. We share inspirational quotes about love and brotherhood, while glibly glossing over King’s valid and harsh critiques of white privilege.

Rather than praise the great man that was, Martin Luther King Day should be an opportunity for critique and introspection. An opportunity to truly ask ourselves, which side are we on?

Consider Dr. King’s brilliant Letter from a Birmingham Jail (I especially recommend listening to the audio version here.)

One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: “Why didn’t you give the new city administration time to act?”…Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

As King addresses the criticism of his own actions, it’s easy to hear the critiques of today’s activism. It is too untimely. It is too disruptive. Too aggressive.

As we find these same arguments slipping from our mouths, we’d do well to remember this as the popular white response Dr. King received. King goes on:

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

To truly honor the legacy of Dr. King, those of us in the white community should reflect on his life not with platitudes about justice, but with a critical eye to our own role in the current struggle for social justice. Despite our good intentions, are we indeed a white moderate, standing on the sidelines of change?

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Gender Representation in Comic Books

For one of my classes, I have spent this semester cleaning and analyzing data from the Grand Comics Database (GCD) with an eye towards assessing gender representation in English-language superhero comics.

Starting with GCD’s records of over 1.5 million comics from around the world, I identified the 66,000 individual comic book titles that fit my criteria. For each character appearing in those comics, I hand coded the gender for those with a self-identified male or female gender.

From this, I built a bipartite network – comic books on one side and comic book characters on the other. A comic and a character are linked if a character appeared in a comic. The resulting network has around 66,000 comic titles, 10,000 characters, and a total of nearly 300,000 links between the two sides.

From the bipartite network, I examined the projections on to each type of node. For example, the below visualization contains only characters, linking two characters if they appeared in the same issue. Nodes here are colored by publisher:

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 4.05.50 PM

The character network is heavily biased towards men; nearly 75% of the characters are male. Since the dataset includes comics from the 1930s to the present, this imbalance can be better assessed over time. Using the publication year of each comic, we can look at what percentage of all characters in a given year were male or female:

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 4.16.49 PM

While comics were very gender-skewed through the 1970s, in recent years, the balance has gotten a little better, though male character still dominate. If anyone knows what spiked the number of female characters in the early 2000s, please let know. I looked at a couple of things, but couldn’t identify the driving force behind that shift. It’s possible it just represents some inaccuracies in the original data set.

If you prefer, we can also look at the various eras of comics books to see how gender representation changed over time:

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 4.32.29 PM

I was particularly interested in applying a rudimentary version of the Bechdel test to this dataset. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the data to apply the full test, which asks whether two women (i) appear in the same scene, and (ii) talk to each other about (iii) something other than a man. But I could look at raw character counts for the titles in my dataset:

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 4.07.23 PM

I then looked at additional attributes of of those titles which pass the Bechdel test. For example, when were they published? Below are two different ways of bucketing the publication years: first by accepted comic book eras and the second by uniform time blocks. Both approaches show that having two female characters in comic books started out rare but has become more common, coinciding roughly with the overall growth of female representation in comic books.

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 4.38.07 PM

Finally, I could also look at the publishers of these comic books. My own biases gave me a suspicion of what I might find, but rationally I wasn’t at all sure what to expect. But now you can see, Marvel published an overwhelming number of the “Bechdel passed” comics in my dataset.

Screen Shot 2015-12-11 at 4.43.56 PM

To be fair, this graphic doesn’t account for anything more general about Marvel’s publishing habits. Marvel is known for it’s ensemble casts, for example, so perhaps they have more comics with two women simply because they have more characters in their comics.

This turns out to be partly true, but not quite enough to account for Marvel’s dominance in this area. About half of all comics with more than two characters of any gender are published by Marvel, while DC contributes about a third.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

The More Things Change…

When I was in 8th grade, a newly hired teacher came into our classroom after lunch one day and announced that a parent had seen a student throwing rocks at passing cars. The parent wasn’t sure who the student was, so had simply given a description when reporting the matter to the principal.

Someone was in trouble. It just wasn’t clear who.

To deal with the matter, the teacher pulled all the kids fitting the description out of class and sent them to the principal’s office. The students were to remain there until further notice.

To all of us kids, it was clear that this plan was foolish. How would detaining an essentially random group of students really help anything? How did it make any sense to hold a whole group responsible for the actions of one unknown assailant? And furthermore, it was grossly unfair – why punish innocent students for simply looking like someone who misbehaved?

As it turns out, the whole thing was an elaborate set up introducing Japanese internment in the United States.

Following the bombing of Pearl Harbor, fear of people of Japanese ancestry mounted. Lieutenant General John L. DeWitt, head of the Western Command, testified as much to Congress in 1943, saying:

I don’t want any of them (persons of Japanese ancestry) here. They are a dangerous element. There is no way to determine their loyalty. The west coast contains too many vital installations essential to the defense of the country to allow any Japanese on this coast. … The danger of the Japanese was, and is now – if they are permitted to come back – espionage and sabotage. It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen, he is still a Japanese. American citizenship does not necessarily determine loyalty. … But we must worry about the Japanese all the time until he is wiped off the map.’

Ultimately, between 1942 and 1946, 120,000 people were forced to relocate to U.S. internment camps “as a result of the military evacuation of the West Coast.” Some 62 percent of those detained were American citizens.

It was a dark chapter in our nation’s history. A moment whose only saving grace was the indelible stain left by these camps, pockmarked across the west. Haunting testaments to the nation we should never let ourselves become again.

I’d like to think that we have all learned something from those darker days. Learned to love our neighbors and to not let fear drive us towards hate. I’d like to think that’d we’ve learned that all people truly are created equal, and are all equally endowed with our most sacred inalienable rights; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Feminist Data Visualization

I just had the opportunity to attend a talk by Lauren Klein of Georgia Tech on Feminist Data Visualization: Rethinking the Archive, Reshaping the Field.

Her work, she argued, is feminist not because it includes the works of female data scientists – though it does – but because it seeks to examine the cultural and critical dimensions of data visualization.

Data visualization has the ability to call attention to the scholarly process, and a feminist perspective on data visualization highlights the presence or absence of certain modes of scholarly thought.

Klein began her lecture by exploring the work of Elizabeth Peabody. Quietly at the center of America’s Transcendental movement, Peabody was the business manager of The Dial, the main publication of the Transcendentalists, and is credited with starting the nation’s first kindergarten. She was friends with Emerson and Thoreau. Nathaniel Hawthorne and Horace Mann were her brother in laws.

An educator herself, Peabody’s work probed the question: who is authorized to produce knowledge?

Through the creation of elaborate mural charts, Peabody captured complex tables of historical events as aesthetic visualizations intended to provide historic “outlines to the eye.”

Her charts were challenging to create and to decipher – but that was an intentional pedagogical technique. Peabody believe that through the act of interpreting her work, a viewer would create their own historical narrative – they would have a role in generating knowledge.

Her large mural charts, intended to be physically be spread out on the floor, each took 15 hours of labor to create. Klein commented that this work is reminiscent of quilting – “a system of knowledge making that was considered women’s work and so has been excised from history.”

Klein compared Peabody’s work to that of William Playfair. Widely considered “the father of data visualization,” Playfair is credited with wth creation of the bar chart and the pie chart. His works are recreated by aspiring data artists and new data tools use his work to demonstrate what they can do.

Playfair’s work is beautiful and easy to read.

But, Klein asked, are we losing something by unquestioningly accepting that approach as the standard?

Klein pointed to the work of one other data visualizer – Emma Willard – who created a beautiful graphic, Temple of Time in 1846.

Her work is explicitly framed from the viewers perspective. The viewer stands at the fore as the history of time recedes into the past.

Willard’s work makes the implicit argument that data visualization is inherently a subjective process. While we take our bar charts and graphs to be unquestionable factual – Willard argues that data is inherently subjective.

In that way, we are indeed losing something by neglecting this alternative forms of data visualization and by not questioning the perspectives we take in interpreting data.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

Senator Sasse’s Moving Senate Speech

Senator Ben Sasse. Link goes to the video of his maiden speech in the Senate.

Public Policy Leadership alumn Elliott Warren kindly sent me a link to this maiden address from Senator Ben Sasse, Junior Senator from Nebraska (R). It was an incredibly kind compliment for Elliott to say that this Senator’s speech reminded him of my classes here at the University of Mississippi. Senator Sasse calls for a renewal of the virtues of deliberation that the Senate is supposed to embody. He explicitly points to Socrates for insight, and to the methods of Socratic dialogue. He calls on his colleagues explicitly to avoid straw man fallacies and other errors of reasoning. It was the most elegant speech I have heard from a Senator in years.

The speech is 29 minutes long. You may not have that time right now. At some point, though, you will be glad that you watched Senator Sasse’s speech. I urge you all to find the time. Here’s his speech on C-SPAN.

A Brief History of Daylight Savings Time

I’m watching the sun set, shortly after 4pm on a Monday afternoon.

Winter is all downhill from here.

Officially, we are now back on Standard Time, but the luxuriously long days of summer make the idea of “daylight saving” seem trivial. In Boston, the 2015 Summer solstice enjoyed 15 hours and 17 minutes of daylight. Our Winter solstice will see just 9 hours and 4 minutes of natural light.

No amount of adjusting the time will create more sunlight in a day.

So why do we do this terrible dance from Standard time to Daylight Savings, and tragically back to Standard?

In April 1916, residents of the German Empire were the first to turn their clocks back – this “summer time” schedule was intended to conserve energy for the war effort. (Interestingly, Berlin’s Summer solstice sees nearly 17 hours of daylight!).

The idea was presumably effective, as it was adopted by other European countries shortly thereafter. (Though there are some indications that the move wasn’t entirely popular outside the major cities.)

In 1918, the U.S. Congress passed the Standard Time Act, an “An Act to save daylight and to provide standard time, for the United States.”

Summer time was generally discontinued after the war.

Daylight Savings was so unpopular in the United States that Congress overrode a Presidential veto and repealed its implementation effective the last Sunday of October, 1919.

In 1942, Congress implemented “war time,” which established that “the standard time of each zone…shall be advanced one hour [until] 6 months after the termination of the present war.”

After the war, many cities and states kept the adjusted time for summer months. While others dropped the adjusted time all together. As Wikipedia comments, “In the 1964 Official Railway Guide, 21 of the 48 states had no DST anywhere.”

In 1966, things began to change. The Uniform Time Act was the first to set national dates for transitioning to and from Daylight Savings Time. It encouraged states to participate in the time change, though states did have the right to opt-out.

Interestingly, the Act transferred management of the time change from the Interstate Commerce Commission to the Department of Transportation.

The specific times and dates of change have been adjusted a few times since then, but it’s that 1966 Act which really established Daylight Savings Time as we know it.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail

A Ride Through History

I’m rather enjoying being back to daily commutes downtown. It’s been particularly interesting being primarily on the Green Line – having previously commuted primarily by Red.

The Redline is perhaps the most polished of the MBTA lines. It is certainly the youngest. The section of track from Park Street to Harvard was opened in 1912. Followed by the later extension to Porter, Davis, and Alewife as recently as the early ’80s.

The Green Line, on the other hand, is the MBTA’s oldest line – making it the single oldest public transit line in the United States. While the Lechmere terminus – where I now board the train – wasn’t opened until 1922 – much of the tunnel work was initially done in the late 1890s.

So every time the train squeals while going through one of those sharp turns I think of it as a little bit of history.

Perhaps even more interesting about the Green Line tunnels, though, is that there are places where you can actually see good portions of the track. With the current re-construction of Government Center station, there’s a whole section that’s well lit and open for viewing. It’s fascinating.

The MBTA boldly claims to have ” a history longer than that of American independence,” dating the city’s history of public transportation back to the family-operated ferries of 1631.

Public transit as we know it, though, really started to emerge in the mid-1800s. While initially stage coaches carried passengers between Boston and surrounding cities, in the 1820s “omnibus” (OMNI – a bus for all, everywhere) service emerged. “Longer than a conventional stagecoach, it had lengthwise seats along either side rather than cross seats, and a door at either end. Stagecoaches went directly from one city or town; omnibuses made several stops along an assigned route.” The OMNIs were, of course, still horse-drawn.

Around the sometime, street railways – horse drawn cars on tracks – began to appear in concert with the nation’s railroad boom. As one historian notes, these street railways “were not envisioned purely to provide transportation within the city, a need as yet not pressing or obvious in the small, compact cities of that day.”

By the 1850s, there were horse-drawn street cars throughout Boston and nearby cities, with service that competed with, and sometimes duplicated, that of the OMNIs. In 1887 the state consolidated all lines into the West End Street Railway, which then oversaw the expansion of the system and the introduction of electrified street cars.

Eventually, the streets became so crowded with street cars that the “Tremont Street Subway” – now the Green Line – was conceived to alleviate traffic in the city’s busiest disctricts.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail