It’s not just the Olympics. Even when a woman is murdered, she’s reported as Relative of Famous Athlete Man. Being murdered is a lot worse than being disappeared in the reporting of your murder, but still – it’s an extra indignity, and it’s not great for the murdered woman’s loved ones, either.

Reuters last Sunday:

The headline: Two Chicago brothers on parole charged in murder of NBA star’s cousin

That’s an appalling headline.

First para:

Chicago police on Sunday said they have arrested two brothers and charged them with the fatal shooting of basketball star Dwyane Wade’s cousin as she pushed a baby in a stroller, a murder that has stunned a city plagued by a surge in gang-related violence.

Still bad. Puts the basketball star first, and leaves the murdered woman as just a nameless “cousin.”

The story doesn’t get to her until the second paragraph:

In a case that has emerged as a talking point in the U.S. presidential race, Darwin Sorrells Jr., 26, and Derren Sorrells, 22, are facing charges of first-degree murder and attempted murder in the death of Nykea Aldridge, a 32-year-old mother of four, police said.

I get that more people will read it if there’s a famous person hook, but then more people will read a story on climate change if you put a photo of Kim Kardashian at the top, too, and that’s not a reason to do it.

The European Commission ruled yesterday that Ireland’s deal with Apple was a good deal too sweet for Apple (and thus sour for Ireland and the Irish people).

Ireland should recover up to €13bn (£11bn) from Apple in back taxes, the European Commission has ruled.

After a three-year investigation, it has concluded that the US firm’s Irish tax benefits are illegal.

The Commission said Ireland enabled the company to pay substantially less than other businesses, in effect paying a corporate tax rate of no more than 1%.

“Member states cannot give tax benefits to selected companies – this is illegal under EU state aid rules,” said Commissioner Margrethe Vestager.

“The Commission’s investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other businesses over many years,” she added.

The standard rate of Irish corporate tax is 12.5%. The Commissions’s investigation concluded that Apple had effectively paid 1% tax on its European profits in 2003 and about 0.005% in 2014.

I wonder why Ireland did that. Hoping it would contribute to Ireland’s status as a tech hub?

Dominic O’Connell explains:

Individual governments appear impotent in their attempts to apply their tax laws to multinationals like Apple. They have systems designed to deal with the movement and sale of physical goods, systems that are useless when companies derive their profits from the sale of services and the exploitation of intellectual property.

In Apple’s case, 90% of its foreign profits are legally channelled to Ireland, and then to subsidiaries which have no tax residence. At the same time, countries can scarcely afford not to co-operate when Apple comes calling; it has a stock market value of $600bn, and the attraction of the jobs it can create and the extra inward investment its favours can bring are too much for most politicians to resist.

But 13 billion euros? I would think politicians would find that hard to resist too.

There is an echo here of the tycoons of the early 20th Century who bestrode America. Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt and John Rockefeller were judged so powerful that they were almost above the law, something that successive US administrations sought to curb.

The European Commission’s attempt to bring Apple to heel is on the surface about tax, but in the end about the power of the multinational and the power of the state. There is more to come; Margrethe Vestager, the Danish commissioner who is leading the charge against Apple, is warming up to take on Google.

Europe versus the giants of corporate America will be a battle royale, and one that will run and run.

Colonialism rides again, disguised as a hipster.

This is several years old, but it makes the point neatly.

Look, if posing naked were empowering, then the rich men who run the world would be lining up for it. We would be awash in naked dick shots of Warren Buffet and Bill Gates and Barack Obama; magazines would be filled with male politicians and financiers and moguls with their bits hanging out. Softly lit, perhaps; head coyly tilted, bunny tail on the ass. Power.

But we’re not awash with those, are we. No Trump, no Putin, no Erdoğan – no generals, no CEOs, no bankers. No one telling men that selfies are empowering. Hmm.

A UK charity called the Children’s Society does an annual report, and this year’s report shows a rise in misery among girls.

Among 10 to 15-year-old girls, the charity’s report says 14% are unhappy with their lives as a whole, and 34% with their appearance.

Researchers were told of girls feeling ugly or worthless.

The figures for England, Wales and Scotland for 2013-14 represent a sharp rise in unhappiness on five years before.

By contrast the study found that boys’ sense of happiness remained stable.

What explanation came to mind before I read more? Twitter. Twitter, Facebook, selfies, Redditt – and how they all enable and amplify abuse.

It follows research recently published by the Department for Education which showed the mental well-being of teenage girls in England has worsened, compared with their counterparts in 2005.

The study highlighted the growing pressure of social media and suggested that a tough economic climate had created a more “serious” generation of young people.

…

The proportion of girls reporting being worried about their looks rose from 30% for the period as a whole, to 34% in the year 2013-14 – while the proportion of boys unhappy with their appearance remained unchanged at 20%.

Social media have made it so much more obvious than it used to be that female people are constantly and ruthlessly judged on their appearance.

In another study, childcare professionals have published evidence that children could be worrying about being fat or ugly at a younger age, with girls particularly affected.

The Professional Association of Childcare and Early Years says staff have noticed children as young as three being worried about their appearance.

That sucks.

Martha Mills at the Guardian has thoughts on Dan Bacon’s how to intrude on women advice:

Here’s Dan’s interpretation of how the conversation goes once a man has used his infallible five-point Jedi mind trick to bludgeon a woman from her blissful state of aural security:

You: [Smile in a friendly, confident manner] Hey – I know it’s not normal for people to talk to someone with headphones in, but I was walking along and saw you and thought – wow, she’s a cutie, I have to say hi. I’m Dan, what’s your name?

Woman: [Usually flattered by the compliment and impressed by your confidence to approach her like that] Jessica.

You: [Add in some humor] Cool…nice to meet you Jessica. I don’t normally talk to girls with headphones, but your big green headphones were just calling out to me.

Woman: [Most likely laughing, smiling and enjoying the interaction].

You: [Let her know that you have something to do/somewhere to go, so she understands that you’re not going to stand there talking to her for 30 minutes] Anyway, so I’m just out doing a bit of shopping at the moment. I’m on my way to a store up the street. How’s your day going so far?

In his scenario, Jessica has just been waiting her whole life to be blessed with the attention of a complete stranger who mistakes hunched shoulders, darting eyes and rictus for laughing and smiling.

Here’s how it plays out in real life. Trust me, I’ve been it, seen it and spoken to the survivors:

Him: I see you don’t want to be talked to but I find you physically attractive and I’m making that your problem.

Her: Please leave me alone.

Him: FUCK YOU, YOU STUCK UP BITCH, I DIDN’T FANCY YOU ANYWAY.

Then she explains how threatening and insulting all this really is:

I appreciate the world of mating is hard but please, for the love of humanity, learn this: just because you want, doesn’t mean you can have. Women are not commodities to be hunted and won, and if you have no luck finding someone to bump pink bits with, that’s your problem, not our fault for not adhering to the playbook rules. It’s a playbook we never signed up for and it’s only a game if both teams actually know they’re playing.

Nowhere in his advice does Dan tell his frustrated man-babies how to handle rejection with grace, because the advice is simply not to accept it. This attitude is why I and countless other women have been been chased down the street, followed home, physically restrained, spat at, verbally abused and generally made to feel like garbage, merely for trying to exist.

So when, I hear the whiny pissbabies ask, when am I allowed to approach hot single women? Simple.

If a woman has her headphones in, the answer is never – and before you bleat on about “ooh, what if there’s a fire?”, she’ll smell it, even through all your bullshit. If you’re in a bar or party, her flirtatious smile may be the come-on you’re looking for, but be prepared to accept that you read it wrong, politely wish her a good evening and toddle back off out of her life without 20 minutes of awkward pawing, insisting she let you buy her a rohypnoltini. But how about this; take up a hobby, ask your friends if they know of someone looking to date or (brace yourself for a whopper of a revelation) if you’re looking for a horde of single, eligible women all looking for friendship-maybe-more in one convenient place, try a dating site.

Here’s a tip from me: don’t assume you have a “sense of humor” in the sense of being amusing to other people. It’s not something you can just assume and it doesn’t included along with the testicles.

Today’s trending jackass is an Australian “dating expert” called Dan Bacon, who wrote an expertise-filled piece on how to make some bitch take her fucking headphones off and let you try to get in her pants. It’s full of quite startling delusion (or dishonesty). Like:

Some women like to test to see how confident a guy is by ignoring his attempts to converse with her and then seeing what he does next.

Does he become nervous and awkward? Does he walk away in shame, or does he remain calm and continue talking to her in a confident, easy-going manner?

If a guy gives up at the first sign of resistance, a woman like her will lose interest because he lacks the type of confidence that she looks for in a guy.

He’s very keen on confidence as the way to get a woman to stop doing what she’s doing and pay attention to him instead. Beware of these common mistakes:

3. Not leading the conversation

If a shy guy stands in front a woman and is lost for words, she’s most likely going to just put her headphones back in or say, “Nice to meet you. Bye” as she walks away to get away from him.

You have approached her, so you can’t expect her to be the one making all the conversation. You’ve got to lead the way.

Leading a conversation with a woman is not about bossing her around, being arrogant or being too assertive as you talk to her. Instead, you simply need to remain confident and keep the conversation going in a relaxed, easy going manner.

4. Sticking to polite or reserved conversation

If a guy gets a woman to take off her headphones to talk to him and then only engages her in a polite, reserved conversation, she’s probably not going to be very enthusiastic about talking to him for long.

So, make sure that you have the confidence to talk to her and be real. Just let your natural personality and sense of humor come through as you talk to her in a confident, easy going manner, rather than trying to be too polite or reserved.

I trust you’re getting the hang of it? Don’t be polite, be confident and easy going and let your sense of humor (which it goes without saying is killer) come through. Women love that. A little confident, easy going explanation goes a long way, too. Ask her what she does, and when she tells you, explain it to her.

Also you have to understand about who does what. It’s hard-wired, you know. That’s science.

As you may have noticed, women usually don’t go around actively approaching men in public places or even in bars or clubs.

Women know that is the man’s role to be confident enough to walk over and talk to a woman he finds attractive, so they have a chance to meet. If he doesn’t do that, a woman will rarely walk over and talk to him first.

So, don’t ever think that you’re doing a bad thing by approaching and talking to a woman in a confident, easy going way.

Most single women are open to being approached by a confident guy, so that they can have a chance to meet a potential new lover or boyfriend.

Right. There’s no chance at all that the reason they’re not actively approaching you is that they don’t want to approach you – no no, it’s that their mating-wiring tells them to stand very still and wait for you to approach in a confident, easy going way.

And in conclusion –

The key to talking to a woman who is wearing headphones (or who has her face buried into her smartphone and checking Facebook) is to be confident, relaxed and easy going as you talk to her.

Of course, not all women who wear headphones are open to being approached or hoping to be approached. However, you can only find that out by starting a conversation and seeing what happens.

Who knows, she might just be your perfect girl, so go ahead and talk to her.

Yes! Never hesitate to interrupt and bother a woman. Women are public property, after all, so if you see one you want to talk to fuck, interrupt and bother her! It’s your right!

The BBC has a useful backgrounder on the subject of US “flag etiquette” which we’ve been puzzling over lately. It’s good to get it from the Beeb, as a neutral party.

The Flag Code covers all aspects of etiquette in relation to the Stars and Stripes, including how to behave when the anthem is played. The code is never enforced, however, and there is no punishment for breaching it.

The link is to a government site. What the government is doing issuing etiquette codes that aren’t enforced, I don’t really understand.

What to do if someone picks the Flag Song on the jukebox?

The code states that persons present are expected to stand and face the flag, if there is one. Civilians should stand to attention with right hand over heart, while military personnel in uniform and veterans should salute throughout. A recent amendment to the code said that military personnel out of uniform could also salute.

So it’s actually codified somewhere that we are supposed to put our hands on our chests when we hear that tune. I did not know that. I say it’s none of their business.

How long has the Flag Code been around?

Experts say that US flag etiquette is important because [it] was created out of respect for the country’s historical heritage.

But the code was first drawn up only in 1923 under the auspices of the American Legion, and only became law when the US was at war, in 1942.

The American Legion isn’t the boss of us.

Now the law, in 1942…I sort of get that, up to a point. In 1942 they didn’t know that Hitler would fail. They thought it was a lot more likely than it was before Germany invaded Russia and before Pearl Harbor, but they didn’t know. That was scary. I sort of get the urge to do everything they could think of to make sure Hitler failed, including motivational inspirational patriotic flapdoodle. But the fact remains that it’s none of their business. And it’s not 1942 now.

Robert Reich:

Not only is Trump raising the specter of electoral fraud by Democrats, but today Senate minority leader Harry Reid said Russia may try to manipulate voting results in favor of Trump. In calling for an FBI investigation, Reid noted (1) the threat of Russian interference “is more extensive than is widely known and may include the intent to falsify official election results;” (2) Vladimir Putin’s “goal is tampering with this election;” and (3) Trump’s former and current advisers are closely connected to the Russian leadership.

“Trump and his people keep saying the election is rigged,” said Reid. “Why is he saying that? Because people are telling him the election can be messed with.” If Russia concentrates on “less than six” swing states, it could alter results and undermine confidence in the electoral system.

So that national anthem thing – first Gabrielle Douglas, now Colin Kaepernick of the San Francisco 49ers (US football). Jon Schwarz at The Intercept explains something about the anthem.

“The Star-Spangled Banner,” Americans hazily remember, was written by Francis Scott Key about the Battle of Fort McHenry in Baltimore during the War of 1812. But we don’t ever talk about how the War of 1812 was a war of aggression that began with an attempt by the U.S. to grab Canada from the British Empire.

However, we’d wildly overestimated the strength of the U.S. military. By the time of the Battle of Fort McHenry in 1814, the British had counterattacked and overrun Washington, D.C., setting fire to the White House.

And one of the key tactics behind the British military’s success was its active recruitment of American slaves. As a detailed 2014 article in Harper’s explains, the orders given to the Royal Navy’s Admiral Sir George Cockburn read:

Let the landings you make be more for the protection of the desertion of the Black Population than with a view to any other advantage. … The great point to be attained is the cordial Support of the Black population. With them properly armed & backed with 20,000 British Troops, Mr. Madison will be hurled from his throne.

Whole families found their way to the ships of the British, who accepted everyone and pledged no one would be given back to their “owners.”

Men were trained to fight along with the British.

Then on the night of September 13, 1814, the British bombarded Fort McHenry. Key, seeing the fort’s flag the next morning, was inspired to write the lyrics for “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

So when Key penned “No refuge could save the hireling and slave / From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave,” he was taking great satisfaction in the death of slaves who’d freed themselves. His perspective may have been affected by the fact he owned several slaves himself.

Oooooooooooookay then – that’s not something I want to stand up for either, or stick my hand on my chest for, or sing.

In fact we need a new national anthem, yesterday.

(No, I didn’t know this. I’ve never really sung it much. It wasn’t a thing at school, and I don’t go to football games. I knew some of the first stanza, and that’s it.)