Is this the new 'thrifty' Globe and Mail? Ian Hunter, The National Post, and kilts

Can’t find a link to it on The National Post’s website, but what appears to be a 2010 article by Ian Hunter (that appears here) contains large swaths virtually identical to one by the same author in the Globe and Mail today. 

Is that filler behind the pay wall?

National Post 2010:…no one can deny that the kilt is an impressive rig-out…a scenic contribution to social intercourse. On any occasion, however formal, the smartest dress remains the kilt.

Globe and Mail 2013:  No one could deny that the kilt is an impressive rig-out… a scenic contribution to social intercourse. On any occasion, however formal, the smartest dress remains the kilt.…

National Post 2010:  In recent years some Scottish kilt-for-hire companies have imposed a new restriction; specifically, customers are forbidden to (as it is said) “go regimental,” which means following the ancient custom of wearing nothing under the kilt. One kilt-maker has written a clause into their lease agreement requiring that underwear be kept on at all times. Another Edinburgh company requires that the kilt be dry-cleaned prior to its return. Even though all companies dry-clean kilts before they are rented out again, this was not enough; at this company employees objected to handling a returned kilt even for the limited purpose of sending it out to the cleaners.

This new campaign is being fought under the banner of “hygiene,” a favourite rallying call of the nanny state that Scotland has sadly become. One store manager said: “From a personal point of view, I certainly would wear underwear with a hire kilt for my own hygienic reasons and most hire companies do encourage it….”…

Globe and Mail 2013:  In recent years, some Scottish kilt-for-hire companies have taken to imposing restrictions – specifically, customers are forbidden to (as it’s said) “go regimental,” which means following the ancient custom of wearing nothing under the kilt. One kilt-maker has written a clause into the lease agreement requiring that underwear be worn at all times. Another Edinburgh company requires that the kilt be dry cleaned before its return. Even though kilt-rental companies already dry clean their kilts before renting them out again, this was not enough; at this company, some employees apparently objected to handling a returned kilt even for the limited purpose of sending it to the dry cleaners.

The campaign against “going regimental” is fought under the banner of “hygiene,” a favourite rallying cry of the nanny state. One store manager in Scotland said: “From a personal point of view, I certainly would wear underwear with a hire kilt for my own hygienic reasons, and most hire companies do encourage it.” …

National Post 2010:  The kilt originated as 16th-century battle dress. Made of worsted wool, it originally included a cloak draped over the shoulder, as well as the more familiar short (or “walking”) kilt. After the defeat of the Scots fighting for Bonnie Prince Charles at the Battle of Culloden in 1746, and the subsequent pursuit and butchery of highlanders by the savage Duke of Cumberland, the wearing of tartan or kilt was considered a sign of Jacobite sympathy and outlawed. Only gradually, about three decades later, did the hairy knee slowly make its reappearance in the drawing rooms of polite Scottish society.

The tradition of wearing nothing beneath the kilt is also an ancient and honourable one, just the kind that modernists detest. In the First World War, regimental inspections of the Black Watch included walking over a mirror to ensure against cheating; an officer then found with underwear was fined a bottle of port.

Globe and Mail 2013:  The kilt originated as 16th-century battledress. Made of worsted wool, it originally included a cloak draped over the shoulder, as well as the more familiar short (or “walking”) kilt. After the defeat of the Scots fighting for Bonnie Prince Charles at the Battle of Culloden in 1746, and the subsequent pursuit and butchery of Highlanders by a savage Englishman, the Duke of Cumberland, the wearing of tartan or kilt was considered to be a sign of Jacobite sympathy, and it was outlawed. Only gradually, about three decades later, did the hairy knee slowly make its reappearance in the drawing rooms of polite Scottish society.

The tradition of wearing nothing beneath the kilt is also an ancient and honourable one, just the kind that modernists despise. In the First World War, regimental inspections of the Black Watch included walking over a mirror to ensure against cheating; an officer found wearing underwear was fined one bottle of port.

National Post 2010: The tale is told that as one highland regiment marched into a Scottish village, a woman watching from the sidelines turned to her neighbour and inquired: “Tell me, is there anything worn under the kilt?” To which one marching soldier called out: “Nay, lassie, dinna fret — it’s all in good workin’ order”

Globe and Mail 2013:  The tale is told… that, as one Highland regiment marched into a Scottish village, a woman watching from the sidelines turned to her neighbour and sweetly asked: “Tell me, is there anything worn under the kilt?” To which a marching soldier, on overhearing her, called out: “Nay, lassie, dinna fret – it’s all in good workin’ order.”

Terence Corcoran: A punch line without a joke

In a “letter” in The National Post, Mr. Corcoran provided some selected excerpts he believes prove  I have “accused” Margaret Wente of “sexism”.   This is silly.  In fact I sometimes agree with her on gender issues, were it not for the arrogance with which the views are delivered.

Of course things taken out of context can be made to do almost anything.   Corcoran’s examples omit essential context, such as hyperlinks and the errors the comments were intended to address.   I’ll take them here (in reverse order):

3) In example 3, Corcoran highlights what he feels is the smoking feminist gun, quoting this:

 “In the meantime, perhaps the Globe could do their part to address the situation by hiring a young male editor for Margaret.

In the column in question, Ms. Wente had written, "More U.S. men have gone on disability than found work" (adding little to a previous Hanna Rosin feature on ‘The Death of Men’ and the disappearance of traditional male jobs). The point of my post was to show that her figures appeared to be wrong, and should read, as they do in this Fox report:

Fox News:  More Americans went on disability than found jobs over the last three months, according to fresh figures crunched by the Senate Budget Committee. 

There is a difference between the ‘number of Americans’ quoted in an official statistic and the ‘number of men’.  Wente’s sentence appears to be a mis-quote or statistical error, as deserving of a correction from the Globe as any mis-spelling.

Mr. Corcoran, in his zeal to find a  feminist under every bed (post), omits  the post's point – the altered statistic.  He focuses instead on a passing line  in relation to the error, which suggests that if Wente needs an intern to verify a quote, she might hire a male, since her version of the stat may have had the effect of increasing the number of unemployed males.  I also make an observation about whether the ‘Republican war on women’ (widely quoted term – didn’t invent it) has any relation to resentment about disappearing male manufacturing jobs.  This is hardly "accusing" Wente of “sexism”.  

2) National Post readers would be unaware of the hyperlink in relation to the word "female" in the sentence "This blogger's female" that Corcoran highlights (perhaps that was the intent).  Links provide context.  Omitting them changes the meaning by removing its reference.  In this case “female” links to a widely discussed Margaret Wente column in which she claims blogging is a uniquely guy thing - that bloggers are male - not an article I found objectionable, but sort of funny in that it was a female "anonymous blogger" involved in the  controversy  under discussion. Corcoran removes the irony by removing the link to Wente’s previous column.  

1) Oh, come on. Does this amount to an "accusation" of "sexism"?  Using Ms. Wente's description of Stephen Pinker, I asked about a serious omission on her part:

Why are statistics from the same organization (the U.S. Bureau of Justice) “the best there are” when Steven Pinker uses them, but “ridiculous” when used by the American Association of University Women?

That post refers to a problem given more scope here; Ms.Wente’s failure to cite the source of statistics used to disparage a women’s organization.  Here are the relevant ethical guidelines: 

 “It is dishonest to base an editorial on half –truth”, says the code of conduct of the Ontario Press Council. “The Press Council supports free expression of opinion that purports to be based on statistics but believes that readers have the right to know where the statistics come from.”

Half-truths are indeed dishonest, as are quotes taken out of context.    

Mark Steyn, David Frum, and The National Post: Accidental Plagiarism/Attribution

Probably just a mistake - but this bit of previously recycled Steyn seems to be attributed to David Frum in the National Post.

Here, the Opinion Journal/New Criterion version of the repurposed Steyn paragraph is not presented in quotes like the preceding bit, but seems to be part of Frum’s text. That’s not how it appears on Frum’s website.

"Live Free or Die", Imprimis, April, 2009:

When President Bush talked about promoting constitutional democracy in the Middle East, there was a phrase he liked to use: “Freedom is the desire of every human heart.” Really? It’s unclear whether that’s really the case in Gaza and the Pakistani tribal lands. But it’s absolutely certain that it’s not the case in Berlin and Paris, Stockholm and London, New Orleans and Buffalo. The story of the Western world since 1945 is that, invited to choose between freedom and government “security,” large numbers of people vote to dump freedom every time — the freedom to make your own decisions about health, care, education, property rights, and a ton of other stuff. It’s ridiculous for grown men and women to say: I want to be able to choose from hundreds of cereals at the supermarket, thousands of movies from Netflix, millions of songs to play on my iPod — but I want the government to choose for me when it comes to my health care.

"Tough Days for Freedom", National Review, Sept. 23, 2007:

…comes from George W Bush: “Freedom is the desire of every human heart.”

When the president uses the phrase, he’s invariably applying it to various benighted parts of the Muslim world. There would seem to be quite a bit of evidence to suggest that freedom is not the principal desire of every human heart in, say, Gaza or Waziristan. But why start there? If you look in, say, Brussels or London or New Orleans, do you come away with the overwhelming impression that “freedom is the desire of every human heart”? A year ago, I wrote that “the story of the western world since 1945 is that, invited to choose between freedom and government ‘security,' large numbers of people vote to dump freedom — the freedom to make your own decisions about health care, education, property rights, seat belts and a ton of other stuff.”


"The state despotic", Opinion Journal, July 1, 2009:

When President Bush used to promote the notion of democracy in the Muslim world, there was a line he liked to fall back on: "Freedom is the desire of every human heart." Are you quite sure? It's doubtful whether that's actually the case in Gaza and Waziristan, but we know for absolute certain that it's not in Paris and Stockholm, London and Toronto, Buffalo and New Orleans. The story of the Western world since 1945 is that, invited to choose between freedom and government "security," large numbers of people vote to dump freedom every time—the freedom to make their own decisions about health care, education, property rights, and eventually (as we already see in Europe, Canada, American campuses, and the disgusting U.N. Human Rights Council) what you're permitted to say and think.