Megan McArdle at the Washington Post has news of a free-speech victory in Tewksbury, where the public library first cancelled then uncancelled an invitation to a professor who dared to give a virtual talk titled “Males and Females Are Different, and That Matters in Sports,” following a prior virtual talk by pro-trans-in-sports speaker. … It’s a small, bruised victory. But still a victory.

From a friend in an email group I belong to, on the possibility of all-out war between Israel and Iran:  “It is a bit like Guns of August, watching them all trip forward one stumble at a time towards a major war.”

From another emailer, who I don’t agree with on all points:  “In my opinion, Netanyahu has fallen into the same trap as George W after 9/11.  Intelligence failures by both directly led to horrific terrorist attacks on their own people.   … George W lashed out at Iraq after 9/11 and now Netanyahu is fixated on Iran.  I am no fan of Iran or its proxies, but as with Iraq in 2003, I think Netanyahu’s strategy is fraught with danger.  War has a way of taking on a life of its own – once unleashed, it rarely can be controlled.”

And from yet another emailer: “Netanyathu’s true motive may be the Iranian nuclear program. The Iranian missile strike on Israel was what he was working towards.”

Fyi: I don’t like Netanyahu and most of his pre-Oct. 7 policies. The only tool he seems to know is a hammer. Still, Iran crossed a clear line when it fired hundreds of missiles at Israel proper, escalating its previous proxy war against Israel. Until recently, the two sides were indirectly sparring (to put it mildly), largely using third parties, spies and assassins against one another. That changed this week. … I hope Israel finds a way to forcibly respond, if it must, in a way that averts all-out war. But I’m not sure I trust Netanyahu’s ability, or desire, to find that way.

It sure looks that way, based on this Times story. … What will Russia do? Iran has been a major ally of late, arguably more important than the Syrian regime that Putin militarily rushed to defend in 2015. … If all-out war happens, Israel’s likely first and/or main target: Iran’s nuclear facilities. They’ve been itching to hit them for years. …

The real campus outrage isn’t about administrators telling pro-Palestinian protesters to stop acting like jerks. Nor is the real campus outrage that poor pro-Palestinian students are just misunderstood Marxists. The real campus news and outrage is that, at Harvard, professors and students are afraid to speak their minds, according to a new Harvard working-group report.

And, as we all know, this has been a problem at Harvard and other colleges since long before the Israel-Hamas War – and only now is Harvard getting around to openly acknowledging it.

They thought they were safe in Asheville, an inland city in western North Carolina. They were wrong. … It’s just a matter of time before similar intensified storms hit here, based on our own hurricane track record.

There are only 160 dockworkers in Boston. But the strike that they’ve launched could have surprisingly far-reaching effects on the local economy, reports CBS Boston. International Longshoremen Association members in 13 other East Coast cities also went on strike yesterday. … Just fyi: Among other things, longshoremen are demanding an end to further port automation. Automation has long been a thorny labor-management issue in a wide variety of industries. But one has to wonder if this is an early-stage skirmish in the robotics revolution we’ve heard so much about. Hey, they’ve aggressively automated warehouses. Why not docks?

Update – The Globe has more on the expected local impact of the strike.

“And there is one sure thing about the fall of gods: they do not fall a little; they crash and shatter or sink deeply into green muck. It is a tedious job to build them up again; they never quite shine. And the child’s world in never quite whole again. It is an aching kind of growing.” — John Steinbeck

I’m referring, of course, to them. 

Just like that. The BBJ has the scoop on the quick collapse of Burns & Levinson. … There’s a great story waiting to be written here. How did it happen? Why the sudden exodus of attorneys? A changing legal landscape is not a good enough explanation. In the end, there seemed to be an element of hysteria/panic at play, in addition to market and management issues.

Here’s a prediction: polyamorous relationships will eventually become a major culture-war issue, an issue that Republicans will inevitably demagogue to the max and that Democrats will inevitably get hammered on if they don’t disassociate from aspects of it tout suite.

I base this on an op-ed in the Globe the other day (“Polyamorous relationships are a good thing”) by Alexander Chen, founding director of Harvard Law School’s LGBTQ+ Advocacy Clinic, and Christina Mulligan, a professor of law at Brooklyn Law School. Despite what some have argued in the past, polyamorous relationships do include polygamy and its offshoot, polygyny (i.e. a male with multiple female wives/mates), as the authors note both in the op-ed and in the academic paper they link to in the piece. But they dismiss concerns and fears about polygamy and polygyny, saying evidence “indicates” that polyamory “will not lead to widespread polygamy.” 

In other words: there will be some polygamy, just not a lot. 

As mentioned, polyamorous relationships, and polygamy, will eventually become a major culture-war issue. It sure looks like the authors themselves are expecting it.

Update – From a reader:

“When I read the Globe column you cited today in Hubblog I had 2 thoughts:  

“1- we’ll look back on this in several years as the official start of a new social movement, despite the understated tone.

“2- somewhat surprised there hasn’t been more call for acceptance of polyamory before.   There was a cable docuseries on Showtime covering polyamorous relationships over a decade ago.   While non-traditional, it’s not as extreme and irreversible as transgender treatments.   If there is a Harris Administration, I suspect the quiet progress will continue.” 

There are few things as intellectually satisfying as discovering you’ve long been wrong about an issue or person. It can be a pleasant, eye-opening, refreshing experience, one that makes you want to explore and learn more. Anyway, something akin to this recently happened to Michael Dukakis after he began studying the life and accomplishments of Calvin Coolidge, the former president and fellow former governor of Massachusetts. The Globe’s Jeff Jacoby has the details.

Btw: Jeff lists public figures who he formerly only criticized but has since learned to respect for their positive qualities – such as George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey and Jimmy Carter. … I might come up with my own list, but I need to give it some more thought. Off hand, I’ve recently learned to respect the positive qualities of George W. Bush and Mitt Romney, among others. As far as distant historic figures go, I can still recall my pleasant surprise at learning the truly great personal and military qualities of Ulysses S. Grant, who I formerly viewed in a highly negative way.