Archaeopteryx

What's Happening to My Party?

2006-05-08T14:06:00.000-07:00

There's definitely something wrong with the world when Monroe County, Indiana chooses to elect the pro-war advocate Baron Hill as the Democratic Candidate for US Congress (IN district 9). Perhaps the rest of the 9th district follows the conservative persuasion, so Pseudo-republican Hill might appeal to them. But in Monroe County, which contains the so called "Berkeley of the Midwest" (Bloomington), more than half of the voters considers Hill (a man who voted for the Iraq war, the Patriot Act and has recently announced his agreement for preeminent action in Iran) a better representative of Democratic values than Gretchen Clearwater (a woman who believes in real family values, such as job availability and better health care)? Baron Hill, who lost this seat to Mike Sodrel once already in 2004, who did nothing to address the suspicious practices surrounding that election (e.g. disenfranchisement), and who did absolutely no campaigning for this primary election, is favored over Gretchen who worked her ass off to meet people all over Southern Indiana and listen to their concerns about current policies?

Even if I hadn't invested so much time in that particular race, the results from last Tuesday's Primary Elections are still a huge disappointment. The city of Bloomington elects for IN State Representative, Peggy Welch, who is outspoken on her anti-choice views. And Monroe County elects for Sheriff, Jim Kennedy, who ran for this position several times previously on the republican ticket. So, suddenly Kennedy sees the light and considers himself a democrat? And the Monroe County Democrats see nothing wrong with this?

If one of the most liberal counties in the Midwest (which isn't saying much, I know) considers these people to be representatives of Democratic ideals, how much more fucked up are the really conservative areas? More importantly, what is the incentive for voting for Democratic candidates in the general elections in November?

The 9th district seat is expected to be one of the most contested races in the country this Fall (so I've heard). Baron Hill lost the 2004 election by less than 2000 votes (I think) and for this primary election, 68,000 people voted in the Democratic primary versus about 36,000 people voted in the Republican primary. I'm not sure how well primary election turnouts reflect voting tendencies in the general elections, but if these are indicative, the 9th district doesn't look nearly as competitive as people are saying it will be.

Similarly, Indiana's 4th district where I live, looks like it will be a pathetic and flimsy battle. Poor David Sanders (D) is looking at a slaughter. Almost 70,000 people turned out for the Republicans in the 4th, compared to a measly 14,000 for the Democrats. I work and live in the 9th district, but thanks to last year's redistricting, my house is technically in the 4th district, missing the 9th district boundary by about 0.25 miles. My house, in Bloomington, is in the same district as someone living in West Lafayette about 120 miles away rather than in the same district as the rest of the city. The funny thing is, Baron Hill probably doesn't see any problem with this sort of gerrymandering, being as conservative as he is - truly the embodiment of Democratic values. It isn't really voter fraud to change my address just to vote against Hill in November. I might consider it except just about the only person more nauseating than Hill is Mike Sodrel. It's really disheartening that elections come down to "the lesser of two evils". When are we going to have a real democratic candidate?

Clearwater for Congress!!

2006-03-28T08:57:00.000-08:00

Indiana's 9th District is currently represented in the U.S. House by Republican Mike Sodrel, who is up for re-election this Fall. Most people following Hoosier politics will agree that Southern Indiana is ready for a Democratic representative. For example, Indiana is first in the nation in foreclosure rates. Some of this is due to extreme accumulation of medical debt as a result of the very poor state of health care. Some is the result of the severe rates of job loss that we've been experiencing the past, oh, I don't know, five years or so. Yes, southern Indiana is ready for a Democratic representative.

Statistics show that most people reading this post live outside Indiana's 9th district, but every state is important and every seat counts. So, I'd like to introduce you to exactly the kind of person we need representing us and someone who is truly "just like y'all" (not the Dubya definition). Gretchen Clearwater is a very solid, progressive candidate in the Democratic primary for this seat. Her platform is simple: Putting People First. She is concerned about the state of health care, education, job loss, social security, privacy, voting reform and ending the War is Iraq. She is a strong advocate for campaign finance reform, which means, of course, that she has a lot less campaign money than the Republican incumbent or her lukewarm Democratic opponent, Baron Hill, who would probably be better served by the term "crypto-Republican."

She spent a portion of her childhood in Nigeria around the time of the Biafran war, so she is a candidate who understands the reality of war and knows the meaning of poverty, diversity, tolerance and peace. From her biography:

I have been involved in politics nearly all of my life. I became aware of poverty and world affairs at an early age in Nigeria, and foreign policy and civil rights during the Vietnam war. Martin Luther King inspired me as a high school youth to speak up for what was right and I have been doing so ever since.

I've known Gretchen personally for the two and a half years since I've been in the Biology Department at Indiana University. She is the graduate student advisor, so I've had the great pleasure of interacting with her on a regular basis. I can say with confident resolve that no time is a bad time to knock on her office door. She is outwardly caring and concerned with the welfare of the graduate students and her love of people will only strengthen in serving an entire district.

If you are so moved, visit her campaign website (or even her donation page) and show some progressive lovin'. She will heavily benefit from the support and she will definitely show the current administration the meaning of the word "compassionate." Besides, the color of her posters and buttons will match so well with your spring wardrobe!

Also at Liberal Avenger

Sensitive or Manly?

2006-03-23T12:32:00.000-08:00

I've seen this false dichotomy before, but when exactly did "manly" and "sensitive" become antonyms? ABC news:

Ladies, if faced with the decision of picking between a Humphrey Bogart in "Casablanca" - the cool, independent, self-sufficient type - or a Tom Hanks in "Sleepless in Seattle" - the sensitive, supportive, thinking type - who would you choose?

One Harvard professor argues that if you said Hanks, that's just because you have been brainwashed by feminism.

"Women may say they want a sensitive man but they don't always love one," said Harvey Mansfield, professor of political philosophy at Harvard and author of "Manliness." "They are sometimes much more attracted to a manly man. He may be more oblivious of their needs and their desires but impresses them more."

...

In his controversial book, Mansfield argues that manliness has been hijacked by feminism and advocates of gender-neutral society. He defines manliness as confidence in the face of risk, and says America is on the verge of a manliness crisis.

How about a little less generalization and a little more room for individuality? I am a woman and I like 'em beefy, cool mannered with a 3-4 day beard growth and perhaps a little man-stench every now and then. But why does that have to come pre-packaged with insensitivity and complete oblivion to anything not related to sports or TV bloodbaths?

And why do all women have to prefer the same thing and share the same opinions? I guess we are all just so easily categorized. A different, slightly related article:

Women are such strange creatures. It is both a complaint and a compliment. They want their full independence and are totally dependent. They insist on parity of rights and expect the men to do more than their share. When men cross the gender divide and choose to wear their hair long, pierce their earlobes and dress as metrosexuals, women say they still like their men the old-fashioned way-rough, gruff and not too fluffy. Vanity it seems is still the domain of the fairer sex. While women have certainly gone beyond their former roles, men have not been remotely successful the other way. We are so trapped. Men who stay single and grow old are suspected of being gay. (This reflects our present bias against the third sex). Men can't hold hands; neither can they go to the toilet together. In fact, we are expected to hold our own against the strongest alpha women and cradle them like a baby when they're down. Life is tough these days for men.

Awww, poor guys. I've never heard a woman make a rude comment about men holding hands. I always got the impression that it is other MEN who point fingers, call names and maintain a bias against "the third sex."

Men's liberation movement above all is the recognition that men can choose to be a woman not only in the physical sense to fulfill traditional roles, which some women abhor in the name of feminism. It means a man can be who he wants to be and not be stigmatized for the soft decisions he takes. He can baby sit, get hurt and cry, stay home and cook and not be tagged a sissy, or a "takusa."

Come on, make up your mind. Has feminism has made girly, sensitive men (as illustrated in the first linked article) or does feminism abhor them (second article)?

I think the real answer is neither. There is no feminist conspiracy to make men more or less "masculine." I think the non-issue of "manly vs. sensitive" is entirely an intra-sex battle that reflects some men's own struggle with venturing outside old-fashioned, traditional male roles. Some women prefer Tom Hankses, some prefer Humphrey Bogarts, or maybe both or neither. Some Tom Hankses prefer Humphrey Bogarts. It will always be that way.

Survey: Which do you prefer to be and/or be with?

A Step in the Quadrupedal Direction, part II

2006-03-15T10:26:00.000-08:00

The story about the five siblings in Turkey who use quadrupedal locomotion was pretty slow to gain attention, but this Friday (3/17/06) there is supposed to be a BBC documentary about the family and perhaps the accusations of scientific misconduct issues that surround the research. BBC news:

The four sisters and one brother could yield clues to why our ancestors made the transition from four-legged to two-legged animals, says a UK expert.

But Professor Nicholas Humphrey rejects the idea that there is a "gene" for bipedalism, or upright walking.

...

The siblings live with their parents and five other brothers and sisters. They were born with what looks like a form of brain damage.

MRI scans seem to show that they have a form of cerebellar ataxia, which affects balance and coordination.

However, scientists are divided on what caused them to revert to quadrupedalism (walking on all fours).

The method of locomotion used by the Turkish children and by our closest relatives chimpanzees and gorillas, differs in a crucial way, said Professor Humphrey.

I understand that almost nothing is controlled by just one single gene; why would bipedal locomotion be any different? It seems more likely that, if a mutation was involved, it caused the brain damage (cerebral ataxia) and then the siblings learned a gait that works for them. It doesn't necessarily imply anything about our ancestors. But a "bipedal gene" seems utterly ridiculous to me.

I first read the story on World Science, which turns out not to be a tabloid (apologies for the implication). They've been great about posting updates on both the science and the ethical controversy. Their original report gives a link to a video of the quadrupedal humans.

To Be Last Place

2006-03-13T10:30:00.000-08:00

When I was growing up in South Carolina, my home state was consistently last in education in the country. Every now and then, we pulled ahead of Mississippi (or was it Alabama?), but I considered this just random fluctuation and not a sign of any progress. The State, a SC newspaper, printed this opinion which in may, in part, explain why the state's education seems irreparably bad:

ONE REASON our state has done such a poor job of educating all our children is that each new governor or Legislature offers up a new approach, and scraps the one that hasn't yet had time to work.

But in 1998, when lawmakers adopted what was then a cutting-edge idea of using a standards-based accountability system to improve education, they vowed to stick to it this time. So they created the Education Oversight Committee, composed mainly of business leaders and ordinary citizens, not politicians. The group's primary purpose was to insulate school reform from the political cycle and to map out and follow a farsighted path to fundamental improvement.

The EOC recommended that schools give equal weight to those apparent "gaps" in evolutionary theory. This is what we get for constructing an education committee of people from the general populace. So they aren't politicians; big deal. They are also not informed and give credence to an unsubstantiated side of a nonexistent debate. Plus, it's the buckle of the bible belt. Business leaders and ordinary citizens alike are going to attack evolutionary theory just because they have been told that the idea contradicts their faith, despite the fact that they don't know the first thing about it. Luckily, the SC State Board of Education has some sense and didn't take the EOC recommendation in their decision last week.

Even if you consider "natural selection" a blasphemous assault on Christianity, you simply cannot argue that teaching other origin-of-life ideas will increase the number of students who graduate from high school, or the SAT scores of those students, or the reading ability of any students.

Think those who reject natural selection are ignorant throwbacks? You still cannot argue that defeating their "critically analyze" language will produce the better-educated workforce we need to attract better jobs, pull up our incomes and make South Carolina a state that's no longer last where we want to be first and first where we want to be last.

The first part of that quote makes a great point. The legislature and EOC running on an ID rampage will only serve to distract from real issues of education. However, introducing concepts of faith into a science classroom is doing a great disservice because it undermines the very idea of critical thinking and the scientific process. And yes, helping the kiddies to develop skills of logical thinking and reasoning will make them better, more informed citizens even outside of science-related fields.

There is no debate to be had over ID vs evolution. There is no controversy in the scientific community as the IDers would have people believe. Big deal if the Discovery Institute collected just over 500 signatures expressing dissent from typical evolutionary theories. The effort was/is entitled "A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" and it took over 5 years to find people willing to attach their names to it and most of them aren't biologists. To discredit this ridiculous petition, well over 7000 scientists signed a counter-petition, "A Scientific Support for Darwinism," in just four days.

In states that are well-off in terms of educational standing, the people can afford to fight it out if they want. But in states that are hurting already, these non-debates only serve to distract from real issues behind failing pedagogical strategies. Of course, the highest ranking states probably tend to be more liberal and would never dream of entertaining the ID circus in the first place.

International Women's Day

2006-03-08T10:22:00.000-08:00

In the clogosphere, this day is dedicated as Blog Against Sexism Day and since time is crunched, and my brain is too tired to be creative, I'll just send the readership elsewhere for valuable insight...hey, lazy are people, too.

I Blame the Patriarchy has a list of readings in celebration...or condemnation... This one especially made my blood boil a little...almost enough to make me write my own post about it:

From a Russian news service comes this charming summary of the day’s significance: “Russia and other former Soviet republics along with several other countries around the world are currently celebrating March 8, International Women’s Day, on which [are you sitting down?] men show their appreciation for women by giving them flowers and gifts.”

Not in Armenia, though. They cancelled International Women’s Day, and replaced it on March 7 with—I shit you not— “Day of Motherhood and Beauty.”

Materialism is what being a woman is all about!! Flowers and gifts definitely help distract from any blatant sexism and mistreatment. Jeeeeeeesus. I read it just in time for an ethics class. For the record, giving flowers is unethical...and a cop-out besides.

"Our Inner Ape"

2006-03-04T19:10:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, I went to a lecture given by the renowned and highly influential primatologist, Frans de Waal, author of Our Inner Ape. Among other things, he argued that most of the study of the evolution of behavior has focused on antagonistic interactions, promoting the idea that evolution favors competition, aggression, violence and dominance. But, there's a whole range of behaviors that have been ignored because of this, including "cooperation, reconciliation" and altruism. He is right, of course, that those types of behaviors have received less attention, but I just assumed this was partly because the people who study those behaviors tend to assign human attributes to their subjects and the rest of us have trouble taking it seriously. So, when de Waal talked about cognition in capuchin monkeys, the anthropologists all creamed their panties, while the ethologists just rolled their eyes. I, personally, think there are huge problems with giving animals human characteristics in the context of research. In other contexts, though there's a 50/50 chance that it'll be just as annoying...but it's alright on rare occasions.

The reverse is even more frustrating: analyzing human behavior based on what we know of animals, which was one of the main points of this lecture and his recent book (linked above). I tend to have a visceral reaction when people say things like "humans are supposed to be (fill in the blank) because (insert generic primates) are that way." Behavior is hugely diverse, even among our closest related primates, for one thing. And, I think, human behavior is even more diverse and accounting for all of the social/ economic/ political/ genetic/ emotional factors that contribute to making us individual seems too impractical and impossible to even try.

However, under certain circumstances, I am willing to concede that there are things we can learn about ourselves from animals. De Waal told a story about a chimpanzee, Yeroen, who was displaced from his alpha position. Later, Yeroen teamed up with a second male, Nikkie, and together they took the leadership back. Yeroen helped Nikkie maintain the position, and in return, Nikkie let Yeroen reap the benefits of holding a high position (insert video of Yeroen getting it on with a female, while Nikkie sat by and watched...yes he watched). In an effort to argue for our inner ape, de Waal dared to make the comparison between the Yeroen/ Nikkie relationship:

to another more familiar King/ Kingmaker relationship:

and I must say, he's definitely got a point here. I can see the resemblance now. Maybe I'll have to rethink this whole anthropomorphism thing...maybe.

If looking like Paris Hilton is your goal...

2006-02-28T12:45:00.000-08:00

...you might be a bad feminist. (Apologies for the bad Foxworthy reference.) By owning a pair a playboy bunny panties, you might be a female-male chauvinist pig...if you're female that is. If you are male and own panties...that's called something else. Ariel Levy writes:

Women had come so far, I learnt, that we no longer needed to worry about objectification or misogyny. Instead, it was time for us to join the frat party of pop culture where men had been enjoying themselves all along. If male chauvinist pigs were men who regarded women as pieces of meat, we would beat them at their own game and be female chauvinist pigs: women who make sex objects of other women and of ourselves.

How is resurrecting every stereotype of female sexuality that feminism endeavoured to banish good for women? Why is labouring to look like Paris Hilton empowering? And how is imitating a stripper or a porn star - a woman whose job is to imitate arousal in the first place - going to render us sexually liberated?

Time out. Too much imagery. Who the hell wants to look like Paris Hilton? I always felt sorry for her because she had the misfortune of looking like herself...slightly amphibian, but with too-close-together eyes. If we are going to lend ourselves to objectification, I think we raise the bar a little higher than that. Ok, time in:

If we believed that we were sexy and funny and competent and smart, we would not need to be like strippers or like men or like anyone other than our own specific, individual selves. That won't be easy, but the rewards would be the very things female chauvinist pigs want so badly, the things women deserve: freedom and power.

Oh, believe me, I agree wholeheartedly. But the problem is not that there aren't other options available. It's just that no one takes them. I think most women (excluding co-eds with IQs moderately equal to their bust size) would agree that they don't need to adhere to the status quo to feel sexy or sexually liberated. The problem is finding partners who agree with them. All the cool kids stick with the chauvinist "sexy means looking airbrushed" tactic.

That said, I think there is a major cultural attempt to disguise rampant sexual objectification as feminist liberation. Ladies, if you want to go to the male-target strip clubs, or if you like to kiss other girls, that is completely your business and more feminist power to you. But if you do these things just for approval, get your goddamn head out of your nipple tassels and realize that the joke is on you... ... ... and you are a bad feminist... ...

A Step in the Quadrupedal Direction?

2006-02-27T15:33:00.000-08:00

I'm a little behind in my extra-curricular science reading, so this is about a week old, but it's still bizarre:

An editor of a noted scientific journal says he has discovered a genetic defect that seems to set back the clock on human evolution by more than a million years.

Its victims walk on all fours and mouth a primitive language, the scientist reported. He added that the syndrome may literally undo eons of evolution, and thus reflect with some accuracy what our ape-like ancestors were like.

The researcher, Uner Tan of Cukurova University Medical School in Adana, Turkey, has posted an online video clip of an affected woman walking on all fours, her face blurred.

So, I hate to display my ignorance because there is really so little of it. But has anyone ever heard of World Science? It looks like a science tabloid site.

But I guess if the anti-Evilutionist crowd believes the Discovery Institute, why wouldn't they believe World Science? Think about it, ID-ers: the story really explains a lot. From The Huge Entity:

'Backward' humans: "...were not aware of time and space. For instance, they did not know where they live (which country, which village, which city)." - link

Bush comparison: "Wow! Brazil is big."

"But we've got a big border in Texas, with Mexico, obviously - and we've got a big border with Canada - Arizona is affected." - link

...

'Backward' humans: "...were mentally retarded..." - link

Bush comparison: "I understand small business growth. I was one."

"I know that the human being and the fish can coexist peacefully."

Commenting on the name of a reporter's son: "Can you imagine if my name had been Mungo Bush?" - link

I'm still holding off on the celebration until we finally locate the mutation that makes people watch Bill O'Reilly.

How Do You Dispose of 6400 Tons of Mustard Agent?

2006-02-27T14:49:00.000-08:00

Well, if you're the U.S. Army, you burn it:

Incineration is the only method being considered for destroying more than 6,400 tons of mustard agent at the Tooele Chemical Agent Disposal Facility (TCDF) according to a senior executive for the U.S. Army at TCDF.
...
[The Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah] would prefer that the Army use a neutralization method to destroy the agents. "Neutralization is a safe, proven method for destruction of mustard agents. Its low temperatures prevent the formation of dioxins, and heavy metals like mercury can be segregated from the waste stream and not released into the air," reads the press release.

Neutralization was used by the Army to destroy a mustard agent stockpile in Aberdeen, MD.

Read the rest at the Tooele Transcript Bulletin Online [Link]. Even to the casual observer (and I'm among them) this is a reprehensible plan. Chemical neutralization, i.e. converting the chemical weapon into a more disposable form, is the safe alternative. If the Army goes along with the current plan, they might as well dump a few tons of mercury into the Great Salt Lake for good measure.

Friday Random Ten: Functionalized Nanotubes Safe Edition

2006-02-17T03:24:00.000-08:00

C&EN reported this week on a PNAS article (that I can't seem to access) dealing with the absorption of functionalized carbon nanotubes to mammallian tissues. It looks like they may, in fact, be safe for drug delivery engineering:

In the study, mice were intravenously administered water-soluble carbon nanotubes, either single-walled or multiwalled. Electron microscopy analysis revealed that both types of nanotubes are excreted intact in urine.
...
"This is the first time carbon nanotubes have been administered intravenously and fundamental pharmacokinetic parameters have been obtained," Kostarelos tells C&EN. "It is also the first description of carbon nanotubes circulating in the blood of live animals and the first report showing blood clearance and urine excretion of the nanotubes."

OK. On with the music!

Morphine - "Shame" [mp3]
RZA - "Fuck What You Think"
Mindless Self Indulgence - "Daddy"
Creedence Clearwater Revival - "Up Around the Bend"
Le Tigre - "I'm So Excited"
David Bowie - "Young Americans"
De la Soul - "Buddy"
Cars - "Touch and Go"
Gorillaz - "Kids with Guns"
Tomandandy - "Ambient Dixie"

"I love you, but..."

2006-02-14T11:42:00.000-08:00

While there's something to be said for love and romance, they so very rarely meet the expectations we hold for them. So why try to fool ourselves with sweet treats and misleading lyrics? They just set the bar too high. Here's a mix I put together to celebrate The True Meaning of Valentine's Day. I think you'll find it much more realistic.

1. Debra - Beck
2. Until the Real Thing Comes Along - Billie Holiday
3. Good Thing He Can't Read My Mind
- Christine Lavin
4. You're the Reason Our Kids are Ugly
- Conway Twitty, Loretta Lynn
5. My Funny Valentine - Chet Baker
6. Kind Hearted Woman - Robert Johnson
7. Ilovetoloveyourlovemylove - Self
8. When I Change your Mind - Cherry Poppin' Daddies
9. Saw Red - Brad Nowell
10. It's Not Love but It's Not Bad - Merle Haggard
11. Buggly Eyes - NoFX

Bonus Track: Get Your Biscuits In the Oven and Your Buns in the Bed - Kinky Friedman, 2006 Gubernatorial Candidate of Texas. Seriously.

The Smackdown

2006-02-13T11:51:00.000-08:00

Even with all the Intelligent Design hype, the proportion of American adults who believe in the creation story has held consistently at about 50% for decades. Despite the evidence we get from the media, even many Christians don't see a real "controversy" that needs to be settled publicly. From Science (I think subscription is required, sadly):

[Randy Moore of the University of Minnesota] says students don't necessarily know how to define ID, which asserts that there must be a "designer" because life forms are too complex to have arisen solely from the process of random mutation and natural selection. But when Moore presents them with a range of beliefs, 15% to 20% side with the ID movement. And "virtually none" has changed his or her mind by the end of the semester, he notes. Colbert [Iowa State University] agrees that although postcourse surveys show students have learned a good deal about evolution, they tend to stick to their views on God's role in creating humans.

This is likely because people view their faith as a personal issue and if there is any controversy between ID and evolution, it is a personal struggle. When I teach evolutionary concepts, I give my students the evolution smackdown without remorse. I've found most students keep to themselves and don't really care to express what their personal beliefs are because they are personal beliefs and don't belong in a science class. My experience seems to be the norm:

But teachers say they rarely have in-class clashes with such students. Rather, says biologist Robert Dillon of the College of Charleston in South Carolina, students will come by "several times a semester" to express their concern that "if there was no Adam, that means Christ died in vain for our sins. We'll have a theological discussion," he says.

Wooo-hooo! My alma mater mentioned in a science magazine article! I actually took a genetics class with Dr. Dillon at CofC and I recall one lecture where he had to field some crazy questions from an outspoken member of the Campus Crusade for Christ. (Too bad I can't recall any of the questions.) He did a great job of keeping his own faith out of the classroom (I got the impression that he was Christian when he showed up to a test review session in his Boy Scout's Uniform and sang campfire songs to us. Maybe I'm wrong.)

Lately, some representatives of my home state have embarked on their own ID escapade, endorsed by Governor Sanford. United Press International:

"The idea of there being a, you know, a little mud hole and two mosquitoes get together and the next thing you know you have a human being is completely at odds with, you know, one of the laws of thermodynamics."

But College of Charleston physics professor Bob Dukes and biology associate professor Robert Dillon Jr. criticized the governor for his statements. They told the Charleston (S.C.) Post and Courier there aren't "chinks in the armor of evolution," and Sanford's citation of the second law of thermodynamics was also incorrect.

Well, even though I have to claim nativity of a state where people think humans may have descended from mosquitoes, there are at least some liberal (i.e. intelligent) safe-havens like CofC, which had the decency to expand the Darwin Celebration to more than just one day. It's currently hosting its 6th Annual Darwin Week.

ID RIP?

2006-02-13T08:28:00.000-08:00

In the latest issue of Science, Elizabeth Culotta asks, "Is ID on the Way Out?" She tells the story of El Tejon (CA) Unified School District's decision to pull a slated course titled "Philosophy of Design":

Last month, a teacher in a rural southern California high school began a monthlong course on the "Philosophy of Design," exploring issues such as "why is intelligent design [ID] gaining momentum?" In response, 11 parents, with help from Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, sued the El Tejon Unified School District on 10 January. Fresh from a decisive December win over proponents of ID in Dover, Pennsylvania, evolution's defenders geared up for another court battle.

But they didn't get one. Facing projected legal costs of $100,000, the school board agreed to a settlement, ending the course early and promising not to teach any course that "promotes or endorses creationism, creation science, or intelligent design."

After the ID defeat in Dover, it seems that proponents of Intelligent Design education have softened their stance in an attempt to win the support of skeptical parents. The slogan, "teach the controversy", may gain them some mileage, but this only seems to rile the nerves of the informed. So far, cooler heads have prevailed, and the intended goals of the IDists may in fact come back to bite them.

[T]he battle over teaching evolution "isn't over," says Alan Leshner, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which publishes Science. "These people are well-financed and ideologues in the true sense, and they are not giving this up."

I would argue that they would be wise to give it up. Parents across the country, wary of the manufactured outrage may be motivated to win back their school boards, running on platforms centered around keeping religion in the churches and out of the classroom. If it comes to that, the anti-evolutionists will only have themselves to blame for bringing up the "controversy" in the first place.

Some Good Friedan 'Dialogue'

2006-02-10T12:19:00.000-08:00

I put 'dialogue' in quotes, of course, because the Men's Rights Activists don't really make for good intellectual discourse. But, bless their angry little hearts and their dense, impenetrable heads, they do try their damnedest. This article gives a nice tribute to Friedan, but it's really the comments that I wanted to share. Here are some of the MRA's comments that particularly make me chuckle:

Woman who have embraced feminism are largely bitter, soulless, materialistic skanks! It should come as no surprise that the two people most responsible for destroying the moral fiber of America, Freud and Friedan and degenerate talmudic jews.
Viva La Raza Blanco!!
Posted by: Ian Santiago | February 09, 2006 at 10:10 PM

Friedan was an evil talmudic-bolshevik and I hope that she burns in hell.
(the rest of the comment not presented because, in typical MRA fashion, it's exhaustivly long and boring).
Posted by: Ian Santiago | February 09, 2006 at 12:09 PM

All feminists from Western nations should be exiled to Saudi Arabia and that would cure them of their nonsensical philosophy.
V.L.R.B!!
Posted by: Ian Santiago | February 09, 2006 at 07:17 PM

Wow! People don't know her history. She is a known communist and everything she said about her husband beating her and having to slave in the kitchen was all lies.
She came from a very wealthy family and never cooked and cleaned in her life. She had maids and even had other people raise her children.
She was also a stout anti-lesiban, so much for women's progress as she shut out many women.
She also try to defect to the USSR, but they rejected her as a radical. No! She wasn't a feminist, she was a hard core socialist and just wanted women to join her in that political cause.

[link]

I have no respect for liers that use it for their ends. Sorry. She deserves nothing but the dirt on her grave.
Posted by: Joe Williams | February 09, 2006 at 06:40 AM

Notice how, in the last comment, Joe is trying to invalidate Friedan's ideas because she's never done any "women's work?" He's just proving why we celebrate women like Friedan for providing opportunites outside of traditional sex roles. What a dork! Thanks for proving our point Joe-"all women should be barefoot and pregnant"-Willams! Here's a response that made my heart swell

Joe, how is it that a woman must cook and clean in order to have validity? So what if she came from a wealthy family? How does that diminish what she stood for? Who questions a man's motives just because he comes from wealth and enjoys the perks that come along with it? How many successful men are the primary caregiver for their children? Think about it.

Posted by: Damoon | February 09, 2006 at 08:24 AM

I Should Have Read the Fine Print

2006-02-08T23:17:00.000-08:00

We all know the good benefits of being a feminist, right? Fornication, education, etc. But I was never fully aware of the consequences like suicide:

Dear Friends,

This article is written mostly for my sisters in Christ who are struggling with the fruit of feminism. What is the fruit of feminism?

* Discontentment
* Broken marriages
* Depression
* The murder of preborn babies by abortion
* Couples living together without marriage
* Fornication and adultery
* Homosexuality
* Suicide
* Neglected and abused children
* Unemployment and loss of jobs for men

I guess I didn't read the fine print. When should I plan to do myself in? I think I'll try to squeeze it in between my next abortion* and abusing the neighborhood children.

*note: I am my aborted fetus' mom.

Dietary Masochism

2006-02-08T22:47:00.000-08:00

Just another reason to never, ever, never substitute low-fat cream cheese for the real thing. Never. It's just painfully disgusting. Why would anyone do that to themselves?

From the Common Cold to Gene Therapy

2006-02-08T22:30:00.000-08:00

Uh-oh. Gene therapy resulting from the forced evolution of viruses?

In a project that could benefit human health, scientists forced the evolution of a common virus so that it can avoid the human immune system, making it potentially useful as a delivery vehicle for gene therapy.

You know what this means? That's right, the anti-evolutionists can't have any.

Evilution for Dummies

2006-02-06T06:59:00.000-08:00

South Carolina Senator Mike Fair is proposing a few changes to his state's Evilution curriculum . Just to keep the people informed like a good newspaper should, thestate.com set South Carolinians straight on exactly what evilution all about by defining The Terms:

Evolution: The theory developed by scientist Charles Darwin nearly 150 years ago and detailed in his book “The Origin of Species.” It says man developed from lesser species over millions of years through a series of genetic mutations. Darwin theorizes that through a process called natural selection, simple cells mutated into more complex cells and eventually mutated into animal life. Darwin’s theory says man evolved from animals, with man’s closest kin being lesser primates such as apes and monkeys.

Creationism: In the Bible, the book of Genesis says God created the heavens and the earth and all the animals within it. And on the sixth day, the Bible says, God created man in his own image.

Intelligent Design: This theory has gained popularity in recent years as an alternative to teaching evolution. The theory of intelligent design doesn’t dispute much of what evolution concludes about the origin of man. But intelligent design says natural selection cannot explain certain features of the universe and of living things. It says the universe has a clear and obvious design, and thus a designer.

Now don't get us wrong, we appreciate the gesture, but since when did journalistic research translate to pulling "facts" out of one's ass? Here, let me help. It's easy. Step 1: Go to Wikipedia. Step 2: look up the word of interest. Step 3: report. Thus:

Evolution: the process by which populations of organisms acquire and pass on novel traits from generation to generation. Its action over large stretches of time explains the origin of new species and ultimately the vast diversity of the biological world...The idea of biological evolution has existed since ancient times, notably among Hellenists such as Epicurus and Anaximander, but the modern theory was not established until the 18th and 19th centuries, by scientists such as Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Charles Darwin.

Creationism: In Abrahamic religions, creationism or creation theology is the origin belief that humans, life, the Earth, and the universe were created by a supreme being or deity's supernatural intervention. The intervention may be seen either as an act of creation from nothing (ex nihilo) or the emergence of order from pre-existing chaos...Many who hold "creation" beliefs consider such to be an aspect of religious faith which is compatible with (or otherwise unaffected by) scientific views...

Intelligent Design See Creationism.

Choice Feminism: I Choose to be Judgmental

2006-02-05T21:33:00.000-08:00

Reflecting on how the late Betty Friedan's "The Feminine Mystique," helped resolve her struggle between career and family, Joan Walsh concludes that we have no choice but to be Choice Feminists. However, Linda Hirshman has a different interpretation of Friedan's ideas:

Instead, Hirshman argues, feminism should rebuke the affluent educated women who are increasingly (in what numbers is disputed) abandoning careers for family life. She even cites Friedan as an example of how radical the feminist movement once was on these questions, a radicalism she thinks the movement should return to. She notes that in her movement-inspiring 1963 book "The Feminine Mystique," Friedan went so far as to compare housework to animal life...

Unfortunately, Hirshman lamented in her must-read American Prospect piece, "Homeward Bound," after Friedan's bold rejection of animal labor for women, "liberal feminists abandoned the judgmental starting point of the movement in favor of offering women 'choices.'" Feminism has to get back to "judging," Hirshman insists, and it should judge the choice to stay home as flat-out wrong. As Hirshman writes: "To paraphrase, as Mark Twain said, 'A man who chooses not to read is just as ignorant as a man who cannot read.'"

Of course Walsh is right that a woman should be allowed to lead her life however she damn well pleases without criticism. But I think both Walsh and Hirshman are missing the point. We should not blindly adopt Choice Feminism because there is cause for public criticism of certain life choices that counter the progress of feminism. Rather than condemn the stay-at-home moms, we should chastise:

1) the men who willingly start families then refuse to take on any domestic responsibility and demand that their wives be detained in culinary servitude without any remote possibility of reaching compromise between bread-winning (i.e. having fun) and diaper-changing for both of the supposed partners.

2) and THE WOMEN WHO MARRY THEM!!

What self-respecting woman would reproduce with a man who would have so little respect for her that he wouldn't even do his share of the laundry? Single parenthood notwithstanding, the solution to the struggle for balance between career and family might just be to recruit more help; you know, the paternal help that created the little varmints in the first place. In fact, I suggest that this should probably be written straight into matrimonial vows just to make sure there is no misunderstanding. "I promise to love and honor you, cook dinner 3-4 nights a week, scrub the toilet every other weekend, pick up the kids after school...till death do us part."

From an older-ish article by Louise Story:

"My mother always told me you can't be the best career woman and the best mother at the same time," Ms. Liu said matter-of-factly. "You always have to choose one over the other"

Back to Walsh:

Then I found myself in my early 30s with a baby I loved to distraction, a career I treasured almost as much (yes, almost), and a marriage falling apart due to my volcanic anger at being unable to manage both gracefully, and all my feminist certainties dissolved for a while.

I rest my case. No one can manage both, and if they can, it probably isn't gracefully. But women shouldn't have to choose between 'one or the other.' It should be possible to have both with a little bit of ethically mandated assistance. It takes two people to make the rabid little critters, it should take two to clean the baby turds off of the carpet.

My feminism is about choice: A woman can choose to marry a dimwit-deadbeat dude who considers the her full potential to lie somewhere between the frying pan and the bedroom. And I can choose to stand in judgement of their anti-feminist lifestyle.

Friday random ten: The "I wonder if I can still do it bloggy-style" edition

2006-02-03T23:23:00.000-08:00

Or "How Archaeopteryx got its groove back."

Well, it's the weekend,it's between field seasons, and it's as good a time as any to start blogging again. The "Arrested Development" marathon I'm having doesn't hurt either. Plus, there's a lot of great stuff that will be happ'nin' soon that should be of interest the general Archaeopteryx readership (for example).

Alright! Here it goes; this time with feeling!

1. Bubble gum - Brigitte Bardot
2. KRS-one [live] - Bradley Nowell
3. Planet telex - Radiohead
4. My funny valentine - Tony Bennett
5. Detachable penis song - The Cramps
6. Sweet little duck - Kathleen Edwards
7. La musique adoucit let moeurs - MC Solaar
8. The bag - NoFX
9. Hail Satan! - Mindless Self Indulgence
10. And your bird can sing - The Beatles

.45 (2003)

2005-08-22T16:33:00.000-07:00

A couple of years ago I took a class in Film Noir: German Exile Cinema, which was an utterly fascinating topic. For my final project, I made a little homage to Film Noir and German Expressionism; a short film entitled .45. It was a group project with Ryan of LA and was shared with our class, local film critics, family and friends. Here's a screen shot:

Just lately, I have discovered a film being made with the exact same title and an almost identical plot. Now, it could be a coincidence, but I am naturally pessimistic. So, lest anyone overlook the original .45, here is where our movie can be downloaded in its entirety (approximately 17minutes, 30Kb). We've also provided some links to information on the upcoming .45 knockoff.

Feel free to watch it, enjoy it, and spread the love. Here are some more screen shots for your viewing pleasure:

Update: Ryan remembers our film-making experience fondly, as well.

It Can't Get Much Better Than This

2005-08-16T18:28:00.000-07:00

Media Matters for America:

LIMBAUGH:...I have long told you, for example, Undeniable Truth of Life No. 24, written back in 1987: Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society. And even to this day, people pooh-poohed this and say it's insensitive: "How can you possibly say something like that?" Well, because I mean it, because I believe there's something to it. And now, lo and behold, the California Supreme Court ruled 4 to 2 that the supervisor could sue the company for allegedly retaliating against her with poor evaluations and job requirements because she was ugly. She didn't fit their mold of hot.

(Forehead slap accompanied by irrepressible groan of irritation.)

The Real Victims of EVILution

2005-08-14T13:36:00.000-07:00

Yes. Monkeys. We need to stop teaching our children the Evilution Lie and spare the monkeys their last bit of dignity.

No creation? No evolution

Schools in Washington County, Va. are set to begin again. Let’s hope that the evolution lie will not be taught to our young people. If the creation truth cannot be taught then let’s not teach a falsehood. Ministers of the gospel should sound off like the one who stood up for Larry Booher of John Battle High School who had taught the truth and had been castigated by the school board and superintendent. We as citizens should not bow down to the ACLU. Those who believe that man descended from the monkey family should not insult the monkey any longer. Tell the truth, it will set you free. God created all things.

Andy Raines
Bristol, Va.

Here's the link to this gem of a letter, but I posted it here in it's entirety. Emphasis added.

Friday Bird Blogging: Backyard Edition

2005-08-12T12:40:00.000-07:00

Check out what I found foraging in my backyard this week:

I know, it's the worst possible picture, but I could only get as close as the kitchen window. I feel like a Bigfoot hunter. "Really, it was right there in my backyard. See, I have this blurry photo!" In case this makes it any more apparent:

Is it a Cooper's Hawk or Sharp-Shinned? Not like anyone can tell from the photo; everyone will just have to take my word for it. It's likely not exciting to many, but I've never seen a bird of prey up close, so I was ecstatic. If the RSPB Geltsdale nature reserve has any influence, we might see more like them in the future. Hooray for the Baby Boom for Birds of Prey!

Of course, wild fauna are captivating, but what Friday Bird Blogging would be complete without a glimpse of the rare and majestic Martingale enjoying a stroll in the backyard?

Smile, dammit! Smile!

2005-08-10T15:20:00.000-07:00

On the 'shift' in female body size in advertizing:

This stirring trend utilizing "average women," "'real' women," and the go-to "sizable" gal Queen Latifah in fashion magazines is designed to "reflect the population" and "help self-conscious teens (and adult women) see that not everyone is perfect;" although if you are a "real" woman, you are still "flabby" and should hide your "defects" at all costs. Hooray for progress!

The recent Dove campaign, which the AP also notes, illustrates perfectly this faux feminist have-your-cake-and-throw-it-up,-too attitude towards women who look like women. The campaign features "'real' women," sizes 6 to 14, wearing nothing but their skivvies and smiles, oh, yes ma'am, it does; and what are these unapologetically, proudly curvaceous women smiling about? Why, Dove's firming collection, of course; "lotions and creams meant to reduce the appearance of cellulite."

Telling women that they, too! can be proud of their naturally round, feminine figures as long as they look neither round nor feminine -- wear black! tone up your arms! lay off the carbs! firm up your thighs! and smile, dammit, smile! -- is not a progressive new fat-friendly trend: It's hypocrisy.

Blogging Hiatus

2005-08-01T18:57:00.000-07:00

Ah, deadlines...Grrrrr...

Insane in the Hussein

2005-07-27T23:42:00.000-07:00

Have you ever thought of something really clever, only to google it and find out you've been scooped? The title of this post, which has little to do with the rest of this snarkiness, is one of those instances. Check it. Those damn fantasy footballers. Anyway.

It's pretty much common knowledge that Saddam Hussein was Osama's personal secretary and Vice President of Acquisitions at al-Qaeda, Inc. And in that capacity he dismantled his WMD programs on top of writing checks to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Not exactly a prolific terrorist, but he tried.

Oh, did you hear about the Brazilian man who got his head completely blown off by a British death squad? Turns out that he wasn't wearing a heavy coat; he didn't even jump the turnstile. But I think we should trust the well-trained officers and assume that Jean Charles de Menezes was acting suspiciously. I'm feeling better already.

I just hope the British government doesn't get to feeling "philanthropic" and pay the grieving family some kind of settlement. It may just encourage more brown skinned men to act suspiciously on 15 minute bus rides. Seriously, the guy should have known better.

[Crossposted @ The Liberal Avenger.]

Impossible Pie

2005-07-23T18:43:00.000-07:00

Finally, a recipe for the crust-o-phobes. With guest art by Alix Lambert!!! Check it out.

What's Wrong with Polygamy?

2005-07-21T19:50:00.000-07:00

I know this is a scare tactic from the right, but...CBN.com:

The stakes are high because if same- sex marriage becomes legal, polygamy may be next.

And?

Kurtz asked, "Where does it stop? If we allow same sex couples to marry, why wouldn't we allow groups to marry? Why wouldn't we allow classic Mormon old-fashioned style polygamy? There's really no limit."

Don't forget about the new-fashioned polygamy. Fun for everyone!

Why shouldn't three or more consenting adults (of any sex) proclaim their love publicly? You know, like same-sex marriage, if polygamy is legalized it won't be mandatory.

Fairy Tale for Adults

2005-07-18T21:19:00.000-07:00

Don't worry. This post is rated PG. It does, however, contain adult concepts that may be difficult for children and some Christians to understand.

From the title of this article, Evolution theory supports a series of hoaxes and frauds, I expected a half-assed infantile attempt to 'discredit' evolution, but the author couldn't even do that right. For instance, when he can't figure out why anyone would believe something so outrageous as evolution, he offers this as a possible explanation:

Some believe or support this “fairy tale for adults” because they have been taught it all their lives. These people have never seriously studied all sides of the controversy. They have been successfully brainwashed by the intense evolutionary propaganda of the last 100 years.

Actually, we evolutionists are still trying to catch up. The Genesis Storybook has been brainwashing its followers for millennia. Plus, there is this phenomenon in the Christian faith that effectively prevents any good little boy or girl from analyzing what was drilled into their heads. If cult members start to stray from groupthink and begin to piece together actual facts, their Christian guilt is likely to make them repent.

They are taught to be ashamed for asking God hardball questions. When they do ask questions that the bible doesn't explain, or better yet, when they come across contradictory scriptures, the leaders admonish 'It is God's will' or 'God knows best' or, best of all, they just pull out the 'miracle' card. If they can't explain something, they just call it a miracle and move on. Speaking of, aren't miracles more common in fairy tales than are natural phenomena? Which sounds more like a fable: observable natural phenomena forming life at random over billions of years or a talking snake in a tree?

And the telltale sign of a really weak position? Yup, the Hitler reference.

As Hitler said, “If you tell a lie long enough, and loud enough, and often enough the people will believe it.”

Is 6000 years long enough? Are Crusades and Inquisitions loud enough? The more insecure the author is in his own beliefs, the more Hitler cameos you'll find:

Sadly, some people support evolutionism for social-political reasons. These people (like Karl Marx, Stalin, Hitler and a host of others) understand that the teaching of evolutionism is foundational to their socialist cause. They know that it plays a vital role in the great struggle for the elite to enslave the masses under a new world order.

The people who believe this elementary propaganda are the same people who think that The Enlightenment was a step backwards or that it is unpatriotic to question authority. Believing in the Genesis Fable takes blind faith yet believers are so insecure in their faith that they must try to undermine the beliefs of others (but fail miserably), such as:

Neanderthal man was just an old man with arthritis.

and make laughably bold claims about their own beliefs. For example:

The Bible still stands firm: “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” That is real science.

Birds Kick Ass!

2005-07-18T19:24:00.000-07:00

Another reason why birds are superior to mammals.

"The birds have an uncanny ability to mimic these ring tones. This has picked up in tandem with the boom in mobile phone ownership," Richard Schneider of the NABU bird conservation centre near the university city of Tuebingen here said.

...

The birds were simply adapting to their environment in imitating human sounds in what he termed an "evolutionary playground".

Well, some mammals may rival, but most don't stand a chance to match the awesomeness.

The Good Ol' Days

2005-07-17T20:48:00.000-07:00

I thought I wanted to be feminist, but then I realized how dark and scary the world is outside my kitchen. Give me a flower arrangement instead:

I also find, to my alarm, that there are a number of things I don't want to do and I don't care if they do lead the way to the androgynous, so-called feminist paradise. Bury cats (I'm talking about dead cats: I don't think anyone should be burying live ones). Investigate noises made by possible burglars in the middle of the night. Take things down from very high shelves. (OK, I admit it: I don't want to do much that can't be done while sitting). Cricket. I fail to see what can be the point of the children having a father if I have to get my head around batting averages and be forever on top of the test score.

I know what she means. Batting averages make my brain hurt, too. I only watch sports to admire the beauty of the playing field and of course, hope for a glimpse of a hottie athlete adjusting himself while a streak of brown chaw is propelled from his mouth. It makes all my feminist ideals slowly fade away.

The world has got too complex. I long for the time when we women knew where we were and what we were for, when we had a real, recognisable role. Bring back flower arranging and piling up pyramids of profiteroles.

Yeah! Fuck voting!

Ah, the Double Standard

2005-07-14T21:36:00.000-07:00

From a letter to the editor about the 'theory' of of Evolution:

Is this fact, fiction, or scientific conjecture? If it is fact, who was there when this occurred? Perhaps a reporter could make an interview.

Does the public prefer to be lied to on these matters rather than be confronted with the truth that it is theory and not fact.

Well, I would like to see this person's indisputable evidence that there is a Creator. Ah, but to accept IDC one is allowed to use a certain degree of faith to fill in the gaps. I see how their game works.

Another Puzzle Piece

2005-07-14T20:45:00.000-07:00

Seattle Post Intelligencer:

Writing in the journal Nature, researchers from Ohio and Harvard universities report that rather than reptilian lungs, dinosaurs sported a much bigger and more complex system of air sacs similar to that found in today's birds.

...

The exact function of the skeletal modifications is not understood, but scientists think the gaps in the bones evolved to lighten bone structure, allowing dinosaurs to walk upright and made it easier for birds to fly

Booyah!

The Clogosphere

2005-07-12T12:24:00.000-07:00

Finally, bloggers are getting the recognition we deserve.

The Best Page in the Universe:

If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.

Blogger: Term used to describe anyone with enough time or narcissism to document every tedious bit of minutia filling their uneventful lives. Possibly the most annoying thing about bloggers is the sense of self-importance they get after even the most modest of publicity. Sometimes it takes as little as a referral on a more popular blogger's website to set the lesser blogger's ego into orbit.

...

Blogging: If minds had anuses, blogging would be what your mind would do when it had to take a dump.

...

In observation of all these shitty phrases and acronyms, I've decided to coin another phrase that can be used for "blog" called: comment-log or CLOG for short. What users do is labor over documenting their inconsequential lives, trivializing man's greatest invention, the microprocessor, until the Internet is so CLOGGED that commerce comes to a screeching halt. Anyone contributing to the congestion would be known as a CLOGGER. I hate blogs.

Goddamn, that man cracks me up.

You're either with it or you're against it

2005-07-12T10:32:00.000-07:00

I've always felt that the rape/incest exemption adopted by anti-choicers burns a hole their arguments and is, above all, a telltale sign of their true intentions: They are not concerned with the right to life and protection of 32cell embryos, they are merely trying to maintain pregnancy as punishment.

Beyond the frailty of their argument, there are severe logistical problems with trying to uphold a law that outlaws abortion except in certain cases. Here is an excellent discussion on the topic by Dadahead (posted at The liberal Avenger). Just a taste:

Those who hold this position should be asked one important question: how, exactly, would you discriminate between those pregnancies which are, and those which aren't, the result of rape? That is, how would the state go about determining which cases are legitimate exceptions?

None of the options seem plausible. One possibility is to simply ask each woman how she got pregnant. If she says it was because of a sexual assault, then she's allowed to abort; if not, then she can't. For obvious reasons, this is not a very good policy; an abortion ban under these circumstances would be utterly toothless, requiring only that a woman say she was raped. While this would be an odious indignity to impose upon women, it wouldn't do much to prevent the abortions it was supposed to. Years ago, the state of Pennsylvania would pay for abortions if they resulted from rape, requiring only that the woman claim that she had been raped. This apparently resulted in a 'wink-wink' kind of practice among clinic workers who knew that an affirmative answer to the rape question was necessary to get state funding. There's no reason not to expect that this phenomenon would become even more common if the rape claim was necessary not only for funding but to procure the abortion itself.

And speaking of feeble arguments, here is a perfect example of how anti-choicers don't base their opinions on logic and reason and in fact don't really think their arguments through. Watch the video on Goddess Musings (via feministe).

Call the FDA

2005-07-10T19:52:00.000-07:00

Feminists want to supersize you.

[Mark] Klein's basic argument is that Heinz is a company going nowhere. Like other food companies, it's in a bind over what he says is an epidemic of obesity and diabetes, diseases more Americans are inflicted with because their moms aren't home to prepare and serve home-cooked meals.

There is an ill-health epidemic and both parents are responsible for keeping their children well-nourished. But no excuses, adults shouldn't be relying on their mommies to cook for them. Doesn't Klein know how to operate a stove? (By the way, both my parents worked full time and both my parents helped cook dinner every night. I don't think the decline in healthy eating is a by-product of 'feminist careerism'.) Doesn't matter, he's headed for higher ground:

Klein says he's considering entering the Republican presidential primaries in 20 08 because "the collapse of the American family is such a catastrophe that we in this country need new leadership, and I'm prepared to do that."

Hilarious. Watch out Femerica, Klein's gonna lay the old fashioned smack down on y'all.

Kill the Tiny Terrorists

2005-07-09T23:38:00.000-07:00

I think this could work.

Dear Confused

2005-07-09T22:43:00.000-07:00

Dr. Kelly Hollowell asks the question we've all been too afraid to ask: Do conservatives see women as inferior?

I sat in church on Mother's Day and listened to the pastor build his sermon around the book of Proverbs. Sadly, one point of emphasis was that "it is better for a man to live in the corner of a roof than share a house with a complaining wife." The pastor predictably joked that "his point was scriptural and not personal." But then went on in poor taste to make other jokes concerning his wife's shopping habits and the number of shoes in her closet.

Yeah! Way to celebrate women on Mother's Day! I know I like to show appreciation with tasteless remarks in front of a congregation. After reading this and two other examples, I was utterly shocked that Hollowell answered her own question completely contradictory to my expectation:

...I don't think conservatives regard women as inferior. Rather, it is a liberal spin that has over-capitalized on a rather obvious (although not exclusive) area of appreciation conservatives have for women.

...

The worst part of the conservative's failure to correct this perception is that liberals have usurped and distorted the very meaning of feminism. Today, it has been successfully spun so far left that it is epitomized by women willing to kill their own children in the womb.

Whaaa? Are we thinking of the same liberals? I think the very core of feminist movements, the very definition, opposes conservatism. And spin? Hasn't this woman been paying attention? It is conservatives that smear the good name of feminism (they can't help it-- it's chapter one of their manifesto).

Right before I diagnosed Hollowell with minor cognitive dissonance and conservative brainwashing, she shows signs of life:

First, it would be good for conservatives to give a few more kudos to women called outside the traditional roles and – dare I suggest it – support them along the way. Second, it might help in some cases for the more traditional leaders to take a class on sensitivity training … OK, OK, at least a class in 21st century communication skills. Third, and I have to say it, it would help if the old codgers among us who do hold rather blatantly chauvinistic views stepped into the 21st century and recognized that women can think outside the cake box.

I daresay these are progressive statements. I can just hear conservative men belching objections at her request for finding their feminine sides. Yet Hollowell claims to be a conservative woman. She must be living in an alternate reality (i.e. watching Fox News) or she has her ideologies confused.

It's okay, Kelly. Come towards the light, come see the ways of liberal truth. We'll let you be a feminist.

Values of the Heartland of America

2005-07-08T21:34:00.000-07:00

I eat fast food under rare and urgent circumstances, tonight being one of them. I sat down to inject my arteries with Hardee's Brand ^TM trans-fats and cholesterol and I was welcomed to the dinner table by this image:

Sex on TV is old news. Now you can grip your 3D softcore porn and feel the sweat of the plastic cup as it drips through your eager fingertips (free with purchase of large soft-drink, all rights reserved, woman is not guaranteed to have sex with you). It makes for a good wholesome family dinner. Collect them all!!

Evolutionists are Nazis

2005-07-08T01:00:00.000-07:00

Nazi sympathizers at least.

I could go on by noting that if atheistic evolution is true, Marx was correct and Locke was wrong, there is no justification for condemning the Nazis, and so on and so on...

When did 'atheist' and 'amoralist' become synonymous? I don't believe in the existence of a higher power, but I am compassionate human being even if my compassion did evolve by chance. One does not need to believe in a higher power to believe that genocide is abhorrent.

Further, if atheistic evolution is true, then there will be no accounting after this life is over for how one's life has been lived. In other words, Stalin, Hugh Hefner, and Mother Theresa all receive the same recompense - absolutely nothing. What is the value of choosing one path over the other, except to satisfy one's own personal desire?

Exactly. Call me a pessimist, but justice in the afterlife is not a guarantee. This is why is important to ensure a real and earthly punishment for the criminals here on earth. There is a problem, though, with theistic anti-evolutionists crusading for universal acceptance in God when there is a complete lack of evidence to support it.

Embrace the Random.

Santorum-Soaked Moral Fiber

2005-07-08T00:35:00.000-07:00

Rick Santorum blames feminism for the destruction of America's traditional values:

"In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might find they don't both need to," Santorum writes.

"Sadly the propaganda campaign launched in the 1960s has taken root," said Santorum. "The radical feminists succeeded in undermining the traditional family and convincing women that professional accomplishments are the key to happiness."

RubberNun says:

Senator and canine enthusiast Rick Santorum has a new book. Here are some excerpts.

A sampling: "And for some parents, the purported need to provide things for their children simply provides a convenient rationalization for pursuing a gratifying career outside the home."

And by "some parents," of course, he means mothers. Fathers are allowed to pursue gratifying careers outside the home as much as they damn well please.

Do you think maybe someday people who blame feminism for "women working outside the home" will acknowledge that many women -- especially poor women -- have always worked outside the home, since the dawn of work, long before 1972?

Just pretend that Santorum has a point. Why does he insist that the mother has to stay home? I've known several families with working moms and stay-at-home dads. Isn't it sexist to suggest that men can't raise children as well as women? Just a thought.

(also at The Liberal Avenger)

Bird-Bird Blogging

2005-07-08T00:30:00.001-07:00

Marty tries to help with my blogger's block. In the background, Carlo pesters Ryan.

Carlo nesting in a canvas bag.

They Aren't All Bad

2005-07-06T21:09:00.000-07:00

United Church of Christ shows some compassion and common sense:

The United Church of Christ's rule-making body voted overwhelmingly Monday to approve a resolution endorsing same-sex marriage, making it the largest Christian denomination to do so.

...

The Rev. John H. Thomas, president of the United Church of Christ, said with the vote on Independence Day, the rule-making body ``acted courageously to declare freedom.''

A Nugget of Joy

2005-07-05T22:10:00.000-07:00

This is an excerpt from the comments section of an article about rising sexism in Australia. I read it and let forth a slight chuckle.

Paul Gilchrist writes:

...Personally, I blame the women. They haven't grasped their opportunities, but choose to run to the safety of the kitchen and wealthy males. Look at the endless parade of bimbos who chase sportsmen and successful businessmen. The thing which might save feminism is the war in Iraq. If it goes on long enough, and we have conscription, then surely half the conscripts will be women. That's something all the blokes will support.

The F Word

2005-07-05T12:14:00.000-07:00

Is it time to abandon the 'bad' label and invent one anew? Salon.com:

Gandy isn't suggesting that anyone rub the word "feminism" off their bumper stickers or refrigerator magnets. But she did acknowledge that she has had informal conversations -- both with people who work at NOW and with those she meets on the road -- about agitation from some within the movement who believe it's time to retire "feminism's" number.

...

But, she said, we cannot pretend that "feminism" has escaped the fate of "liberalism" before it. "This is what the right-wing has done to our language," she said. "'Liberal' is a proud term. But at a certain point, it became very difficult for people to call themselves liberal. If you asked them about issues they would say, 'I'm not liberal, I'm progressive.' Excuse me, you are a liberal! But the right made that a bad word. They've done the same thing with 'feminism.'"

...

But some people didn't think the notion of ditching the word was such a crazy idea at all. "I think it's very smart," said Erica Jong, whose use of explicit language in "Fear of Flying' changed the nature of American women's fiction in 1973. "The problem hasn't gone away. Women are still second-class citizens; the problem of choice is still with us -- in fact it's gotten worse. So if we need to change the name to get people involved, we should."

I have never had a problem with the term and I know many men who happily label themselves 'feminists', but many people do find the term repellant even though they endorse the ideas. I think that is more the result of social stigma and negative connotation than the suggestive gender denotation of the term itself. In this case, it doesn't matter what we call it because the anti-feminist, anti-humanist, anti-civil rights lobby will be determined to smear it.

Hate to Spoil the Party

2005-07-05T08:05:00.000-07:00

America, I know you didn't want to hear this on your special day. But there's something you need to know:

I'm sorry you had to find out this way.

War on Fatherhood?

2005-07-03T21:30:00.000-07:00

I don't get it. Someone please help me translate David Usher's latest incoherent babbling?

All men and women of moral stature must now step forward demanding restoration of the marriage contract, enactment of policies that encourage (and expect) spouses to responsibly work through the normal problems and processes of marriage and aging, and policies ensuring that divorce is no longer an institution that turns children into the chattel of politicians and feminists.

We now know that feminists are definitely not the best protectors of women and children, nor are they providers. Every day that we open the newspaper to read about mothers in poverty, illegitimacy, deadbeat dads, fatal child abuse, and crime in the streets, is another glaring reminder that husbands and fathers historically provide the best care and sustenance for their families.

(Emphasis added.) I just don't follow the 'logic.'

Beautiful Bane

2005-07-02T22:48:00.000-07:00

A self-proclaimed hairy-legged-man-hating-lesbian-feminist discusses how would-be liberation is oppression incognito:

"Shoes," Sheila Jeffreys says, "are almost becoming torture instruments. During a woman's daily make-up ritual, on average she will expose herself to more than 200 synthetic chemicals before she has morning coffee. Regular lipstick wearers will ingest up to four and a half kilos during their lifetime." We are talking about Jeffreys' latest book, Beauty And Misogyny: Harmful Cultural Practices In The West, and she is in full flow about the horrors of what she calls "the brutality of beauty".

...

Others oppose Jeffreys' position in a more general way. Natasha Walter, author of The New Feminism (1999), for example, argues that today's women do not want their behaviour "policed by feminism", but wish to enjoy sex with men, wear make-up, and dress in short skirts and high heels without feeling they are betraying feminism.

...After the US invasion of Afghanistan, for example, beauty clinics opened up all over the country, offering cosmetics as an antidote to the enforced wearing of the burka. "You'd have thought the women would have had other things to worry about," she sighs.

Now, I've disagreed with some Jeffreys' ideas in the past (for example, the idea that all feminists should be lesbians-- Sorry, I just don't dig les femmes.) Although her black-and-white arguments are extreme, I think she at least tries to address some of the problems of self-defeating behavior. Just how bad could it be? Can I interest anyone in some black market implants?

At pump parties, groups of patients typically receive silicone injections from an unlicensed, untrained person who is often using non-medical silicone. Costs tend to run between $200 and $1,000 per treatment, police said.

Industrial-grade silicone, floor products and sealers, and a host of contaminants including motor oil and paraffin have all turned up in post-party patients.

A Book Meme

2005-07-01T11:43:00.000-07:00

Courtesy of Jill.

Number of Books That You Own:

I don't think our current number system goes that high...do text books count?

Last Book Bought:

Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate (Lakoff et al.)

Last Book I Read:

What's the matter with Kansas? (Frank)

Five Books that mean a lot to me:

1) V. (Pynchon)
2) The Pigman (Zindel)
3) The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway
4) Behavioral Neurobiology of Birdsong (NAS 2005)
5) Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn about Sex from Animals (Zuk)

Tags: I wonder if these bloggers can count the number of books they own:

Aeonsomnia
Cecil the Ninja
Jimmy26YrVet
Matt

Is That a Bible in Your Pocket or Are You Just Happy About Jesus?

2005-07-01T09:11:00.000-07:00

A sex shop turned Bible store struggles to keep it up:

"We'd go three or four days and maybe make $4 or $5. You can't keep a store open like that."

Until the property sells, Braithwaite said, he will be at the store only on Thursdays in case a customer shows up.

Some of the Christian community that had condemned Braithwaite's porn shop will not support his Bible store even after they've embraced him as one of their own through baptism. Forgive and forget?

Funny thing is, the porn shop was highly successful in a county that is 'rife with churches'. Perhaps the moral elite are no less deviant than the rest of us.

(cross-posted at The Liberal Avenger.)

World Summit on Evolution

2005-07-01T07:06:00.000-07:00

The 'Woodstock of Evolution' shows that ID has failed to dissuade much of the Evolution community:

"Creationists and other outsiders contend that science is a cosy and insular club in which meetings are held to enforce agreement with the party line, to circle the wagons against any and all would-be challengers, and to achieve consensus on the most contentious issues.

"This conclusion is so wrong that it cannot have been made by anyone who has ever attended a scientific conference. The World Summit on Evolution, like most scientific conferences, revealed a science rich in history and tradition, data and theory, as well as controversy and debate. From this I conclude that the theory of evolution has never been stronger," writes Shermer.

I have never attended an Intelligent Design conference, but I would be surprised if they bicker, argue and debate the way scientists do. Yet, after all the controversy among those who study it, evolution is still widely accepted. Why? Because:

Knowledge not including what Darwin really said, and interpreted through the filters of ID and other pseudoscientists, is incomplete, superficial and vacuous.

Bird-Bombs Away!

2005-06-29T22:36:00.000-07:00

Birds prefer to empty their loads on white cars:

They found there was 60 per cent more white cars among those that were hit the most often than would have been expected.

What I want to know is how disgruntled does someone have to be to initiate a study like this?

Imperfect Design

2005-06-29T22:12:00.000-07:00

ID proponents claim that only a designer could have created such complex and perfect beings, but they fail to recognize an important loophole in their ideology: Humans are not perfect. Not even close. David P. Barash gives good analysis of our butchered body plan.

There's much more that the supposed designer botched: ill-constructed knee joints that wear out, a lower back that's prone to pain, an inverted exit of the optic nerve via the retina, resulting in a blind spot. And what about the theological implications? If God is the designer, and we are created in his image, does that mean he has back problems, too?

Humans aren't really meant to be bipedal. The transition to upright posture did not coincide with many necessary alterations in skeletal structure. Maybe that's why I am recovering from my second knee surgery and not yet old enough to escape the 'youth' car insurance rate...(due tomorrow...grrr).

The point is that these and other incongruities testify to the contingent, unplanned, entirely natural nature of natural selection. We are profoundly imperfect, cobbled together rather then designed. And in these imperfections reside some of the best arguments for our equally profound natural-ness.

Compassionate Eugenics

2005-06-29T21:40:00.000-07:00

This has to be one of the worst interpretations of evolution that I've ever read. Anti-science pioneers, hang your heads in shame. I started cringing around the second sentence:

There are 6,450,000,000 of us humans on earth right now. There have been at least that many who have already come and gone. Maybe a lot more. We are supposedly the most advanced species. Under theories of evolution, we should be seeing various kinds of mutations that would result in better humans, who would generally take over for the lesser humans. Ultimately, there would be some new species, identifiable as such, that would be a super human, I suppose.

For one thing, I think the current informed view is that there are more people alive now than the total number of people who have ever died. Exponential growth curves are funny that way. Least importantly, I prefer the term 'successful' because 'advanced' might suggest some movement towards perfection. Most importantly, is there even a strong case that suggests humans are evolving? Just for the sake of argument:

...For instance, we don’t have any 100 m dash folks beating the record by a full second, or milers taking the best mile down by 20 seconds. The new bests are always only fractions of seconds better than the last...

How do faster humans gain a reproductive advantage? I thought we were talking about evolution here.

...but surely there can be no ethical reason why we don’t try to develop super brains or super athletes...

Whoa, slow down there, Hoss. Whatever happened to compassionate conservatism?

I'm back...finally

2005-06-29T14:25:00.000-07:00

What'd I miss?

(It might take me a while to recover from 10 days of no internet. Talk about roughin' it.)

Prostitution & Iraq

2005-06-26T11:44:00.000-07:00

A couple days ago, Salon featured a story on the influx into Syria of young Iraqi women who must turn to prostition to support their families.

From "Unveiling Iraq's teenage prostitutes":

"It's a serious problem because there are young girls doing this -- 11, 12, 13 years old," says Abdelhamid El Ouali, the representative for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees who's based in Damascus. "It's amazing at first. But when you fight for your life, what are you going to do?"

The Syrian government and UNHCR put the number of Iraqi refugees in Syria at roughly 700,000. Syrian police either lack data or won't release any figures on prostitution, which isn't surprising considering the closed government. The U.S. State Department's 2005 "Trafficking in Persons Report" acknowledges the problem, but officials have no clear sense of its magnitude. According to the report, "There have been some reports that indicate Iraqi women may be subjected to sexual exploitation in prostitution in Syria at the hands of Iraqi criminal networks, but those reports have not been confirmed."

The dangers to Iraqi women are not localized among the refugees. With the rise in popularity of Shia political parties that are attempting to adopt the Iranian model of government, the female population is slowly being sidelined. As far as I know, the most vocal Iraqi feminist to reach our shores is the pseudonymous blogger Riverbend. Here is an excerpt of a very moving post from February:

Groceries and Election Results

I shook my head and sighed. “So do you still think the Americans want to turn Iraq into another America? You said last year that if we gave them a chance, Baghdad would look like New York.” I said in reference to a conversation we had last year. E. gave me a wary look and tried to draw my attention to some onions, “Oh hey- look at the onions- do we have onions?”

Abu Ammar shook his head and sighed, “Well if we’re New York or we’re Baghdad or we’re hell, it’s not going to make a difference to me. I’ll still sell my vegetables here.”

I nodded and handed over the bags to be weighed. “Well… they’re going to turn us into another Iran. You know list 169 means we might turn into Iran.” Abu Ammar pondered this a moment as he put the bags on the old brass scale and adjusted the weights.

“And is Iran so bad?” He finally asked. Well no, Abu Ammar, I wanted to answer, it’s not bad for *you* - you’re a man… if anything your right to several temporary marriages, a few permanent ones and the right to subdue females will increase. Why should it be so bad? Instead I was silent. It’s not a good thing to criticize Iran these days. I numbly reached for the bags he handed me, trying to rise out of that sinking feeling that overwhelmed me when the results were first made public.

I'll be posting portions of my email correspondence with Riverbend at The Liberal Avenger over the next few days. The most relavent topic to the post is the subject of muta'a, or pleasure marriages, which is simply a legal form of prostitution that is supported by some Shia clerics.

How Not To Write & Publish a Scientific Paper, Second Ed.

2005-06-25T18:44:00.000-07:00

In the 1^st ed., Heather of HWL pointed us to a Heritage Foundation paper on oral and anal sex among teenagers by Rector and Johnson (real names, by the way). The main battle here is whether or not teenagers who take virginity pledges are more likely to engage in risky sexual activities.

Before getting into the real point of this post, here's my favorite part of the "abstract":

Finally, this paper finds that although virginity pledgers are less likely to use contraception at first intercourse, any differences in contraceptive use between pledgers and non-pledgers disappear very quickly.

It's probably the most important conclusion out of the whole paper, and they spend the entire time complaining about biased media coverage. On top of this, Rector and Johnson can't even forge a scientific paper correctly. They should have read this book.

Here are my main "stylistic" critiques of the paper that don't overlap with Heather's:

Scientists will rarely use a degree or title in the author list, e.g. "Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D."

And it's generally accepted that an author will go by a single name througout her/his career. On my first paper, my middle initial was left off, but that was an oversight, and I always think of it as a big deal. The first author here, Rector, seems to have let his middle initial jump in an out arbitrarily throughout his tenure at the Heritage Foundation.

Abstracts are almost always a single paragraph without line breaks. Some fields are different than others, so this one may not count.

I've never seen an Executive Summary in a scientific publication. This is what happens when self-styled policy makers try to do science.

Whatever it is, it isn't a scientific paper. I'm not sure I want to go any further. I might be inspired to do a third edition; maybe not.

We Can't All Be Hemingway

2005-06-23T23:32:00.000-07:00

Washington Times :: For whom the wedding bell tolls

This op-ed is full of zingers, and the bastardization of the title of such a masterpiece is only the first. I'll single out the one that insults me the most:

In "close-relationship" law there's a moral equivalence between marriage and cohabitation — what society once derided as "living together." There's ample research to show that mere cohabitation to produce children creates a less stable environment for them than marriage. In close relationship law a "partner" is the equal of a "parent" and conjugal marriage morphs into the generic neutrality of "coupledom."

Here, Suzanne Fields is telling me, and millions of other Americans, that we are hurting civilization. If this society created me, and I'm destroying it, that's technically suicide. So, come again?

How Not To Write & Publish a Scientific Paper, First Ed.

2005-06-23T13:18:00.000-07:00

Ryan here. I'll be posting a bit while Becky is recovering and traveling back to Bloomington. On with the show....

One of my favorite political blogs is Here's What's Left. From the frothing bloggers at Power Line to the "nucular" option, Michael's writing is top notch. Every now and then, his partner in crime, Heather, offers up some great analysis as well. Her recent critique of the Heritage Foundation's study on the efficacy of so-called "virginity pledges" is worth a couple complete reads:

As Expected

Yuck. I just read through the Heritage Foundation "studies" on abstinence pledges that were being discussed a couple days ago, and I'm happy to say that they met my expectations and then some. I'll comment on their STD study now and post later with a thorough shredding of their analyses of oral and anal sex patterns because they are total monkeyshit, and also I hate to pass up an opportunity to talk about dirty sex. mmmm.

I'll have more thoughts in the Second Edition of this post when I can take my graduate student hat off.

Classic ID

2005-06-22T13:59:00.000-07:00

nonsense.

I may be wrong...

You're wrong. No need to go any further.

Light Blogging

2005-06-22T09:56:00.000-07:00

Apologies to eager readers for the lack of blogging going on here. A recent knee arthroscopy has interfered with my attempts. Also, the post-surgery medications inhibit my ability to compose a coherent post.

Thanks to Ryan for guest blogging over the next few days.

Click here to see the torn cartilage on my femoral condyle.

See What I Mean?

2005-06-20T20:01:00.000-07:00

Some people are feminists and don't even know it. They just blindly dismiss the 'label' because of its negative connotation.

What is Your Sexual Literacy?

2005-06-20T19:18:00.000-07:00

Sexuality isn't just about what happens between the sheets. To be a healthy, well-rounded person, think about your sexuality beyond the act...

Take the Sexual Literacy Quiz here.

I scored 100%! I am a healthy well rounded person.

Jackson Case Was 'Gender Lynching'?

2005-06-17T12:12:00.000-07:00

Did I miss something? I wasn't really paying attention to the Michael Jackson trial because there were more important things to be focusing on. David R. Usher of Sexists' News Daily had other priorities apparently:

"This is not law. It is the finest example of feminist sexism witnessed since the movie “First Wives Club” hit the screens in 1996. The Jackson case bears much more meaning than any movie could, because it demonstrates real living sexism. It is a national disgrace these minions of misandry are given prime time when the media would never air the equally-reprehensible views of the Ku Klux Klan."

I'm assuming that Mr Usher will be next in line to send his kids to sleepover at Neverland. I guess we can also assume that all feminists were hoping for a conviction and all men were hoping for an acquittal. Wait, what about the feminist men? They must have felt so torn...poor guys. It gets better:

Celebrity Justice Pat Lalama was apoplectic, shoving her fierce feminist face into the camera while literally scorching the inside of my picture tube with flaming rhetoric torching from her mouth.

The ultimate indicator of a fine journalist is the misuse of the word 'literally.' Any 'journalist' who messes that one up should resign his/her rights to describe things to people. I think Mr. Usher's literal hatred of women severely limits his ability to process information, let alone relate back a reliable, well-informed and justified interpretation of the events. I didn't see the Fox News interview he is referring to, but the figurative pile of feces that his article left of my monitor leads me to believe that his willful misunderstanding of feminism is just as rotten as his political views.

A surprising number of Americans still imagine that Jackson must have abused somebody. This is precisely how we have been programmed to think by feminists throughout the liberal media.

What liberal media?

The great civil rights advancements of this century will rise from the burgeoning mainstream pro-family marriage movement, which must rightly end feminist sexism to reach its goal. This movement will succeed because feminism is the true source of father-absence...

Ah, dammit! I've been fighting for the wrong things! I didn't realize I was supposed to be helping to abolish fatherhood.

We have substantially ended racism. However, vestiges remain which are actually driven by sexist attitudes towards males of all races.

Can anyone else figure out what the hell this guy is talking about?

Sauerkraut Custard Pie

2005-06-17T10:00:00.000-07:00

Sue Anne Zollinger, ex-Scissor Girl, no-wave guitar hero, doctoral candidate and collector of unusual pastries is featured in the Chicago Reader. The Art Institute of Chicago graduate tells of her adventure to spread international pie love.

Creepy...

2005-06-16T13:19:00.000-07:00

Despite the possible advances in fertility research, it's just creepy.

Too Sexy for My Dignity

2005-06-15T23:23:00.000-07:00

I don't usually post truly personal thoughts like these, but this is an issue that seems to haunt everyone. It's wonderful to see a young adult really developing an independent sense of self. Regardless of the pressures to conform or pressures to seek validation from peer groups, a high school student establishes her own style:

By the time spring rolls around, I feel as though my school is transformed into a strip club, and instead of arming myself with pencils and review books for finals, I think I’ll just start bringing dollar bills.

..I feel like the return of actual sunshine after months of grey turns the high school into Jay-Z’s newest music video-- underage nakedness and all.

... never again do I want to feel controlled by the approval of my peers...

We all feel the pressures to look and act in certain ways, men and women. I've given in to my share of shameless self-displays, but I have also conquered much of the cognitive dissonance. For example, I don't wear make-up because I don't like the way it feels on my skin, the way it looks on my face or the way it warps my conscience and no amount of commercial advertisement will change my mind. I know, easier said than done.

If you want to dress in the height of fashion, then do it and don't feel guilty. What I would discourage is conformity for the sake of acceptance. My first suggestion to anyone trying to breakaway: STOP WATCHING TELEVISION. The standards by which you judge yourself will change dramatically and they will be much more realistic. And remember, even all of the supposedly beautiful people we envy struggle just as much to reassure themselves.

The Truth Hurts

2005-06-15T13:07:00.000-07:00

The autopsy of Terri Schiavo was released today. I like the way Sufficient Scruples sums it up:

In short, the position of Michael Schiavo in this long sad mess, endorsed by every responsible commentator at the time, has been as fully vindicated as is scientifically possible - while the position of the Schindler family and Michael Schiavo’s many critics has found absolutely no support, as far as we can tell from the preliminary reports, and has in significant aspects been conclusively disproven.

Statistically stupid

2005-06-15T12:45:00.000-07:00

The Heritage Foundation "reanalyzed" data from a previous study that shows equal STD rates among virginity pledgers and non-pledgers. Ah, but be warned, los punditos say:

The Heritage studies have not been submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for evaluation and publication, but several independent experts who have seen the studies are reportedly concerned that the foundation's statistical methodology was "flawed" and the evidence "lacking" to back up their conclusions...

Astonishingly, the doctors who conducted the studies used an alpha-level of .10 to establish statistical significance. I was taught in graduate school that anything higher than .05 is unacceptable...

As was I.

Granny Was a Monkey

2005-06-14T21:57:00.000-07:00

In tonight's exciting episode of What's the Big IDea? we have a 'Fair and Balanced' follow up to a previous article.

Of course, stupid designs in nature far outnumber the miraculously intelligent ones, starting with the human appendix and tailbone, ranging across non-functional foot bones in whales, to joke animals like the dodo and the platypus, to molecular features like "junk DNA" and vitamin-C processing genes that are broken *in the very same way* in humans, apes and monkeys. If there was a creator, he/she/it sure was a bungler! - George

The Register features readers' letters both for and against evolution and cites a study that debunks the ridiculous 'eyeball is irreducibly complex' argument.

New template part II

2005-06-14T14:54:00.000-07:00

It seems that the swank new template doesn't agree with some versions of Internet Explorer...I'll work on it this evening.

In the meantime, you can use Firefox or Netscape to behold all of its magnanimous glory.

Wait a minute...

2005-06-13T20:35:00.000-07:00

What was all that about men and women equally likely to commit domestic violence?

News Flash:

Women are 84 percent of spouse abuse victims, and 86 percent of victims of abuse at the hands of a boyfriend or girlfriend.

Males are 83 percent of spouse murderers, and 75 percent of murderers who kill a boyfriend or girlfriend.

Nearly three in four family violence victims are female (73 percent).

Seventy-six percent of family violence perpetrators are male.

hmmmm....where are they getting their stats?

via feministing

Warning: product may contain 'Gayness'

2005-06-13T15:35:00.000-07:00

Equating homosexuality to a pack of smokes:

The leader of a conservative Christian lobby group appears to suggest that gays should be required to wear warning labels, although he denies that was his intention.

"We put warning labels on cigarette packs because we know that smoking takes one to two years off the average life span, yet we 'celebrate' a lifestyle that we know spreads every kind of sexually transmitted disease and takes at least 20 years off the average life span according to the 2005 issue of the revered scientific journal Psychological Reports," Rev. Bill Banuchi, executive director of the New York Christian Coalition told the Mid Hudson News.

Insult to injury

2005-06-13T15:24:00.000-07:00

Not only did they fly in from all across the country to blaspheme the good name of Evolution, but now they want to be reimbursed by the very people they are out to undermine. Shouldn't the Intelligent Design community be footing the bill?

Well said

2005-06-13T15:14:00.000-07:00

The Register:

Of course, writing off evolution as a 'mere theory' demonstrates a very clear misunderstanding of the meaning of the word "theory" in science. In everyday language, theory is synonymous with conjecture. Not so in science, where is has a very specific meaning: a theory is an explanation of a set of events, based on proven, or at least well-tested hypotheses. It will also have been verified many times by unconnected research groups.

God hates science

2005-06-12T22:32:00.000-07:00

Pioneer Press (reg. required):

"They've been taught that evolution is another way of saying atheism, and they just shut it out," said Wilcox, author of "God and Evolution: A Faith-Based Understanding." "They say, 'Why do I have to learn this stuff — don't you know that God hates science?' "

"God doesn't hate science — he invented it. We try to get them to see that evolution happened, and it's not so scary … that evolution is the way God did it."

Science is not atheism; science is non-theism. It is theistically neutral. We scientists are not advocating the teaching of evolution in congregational discourse every Sabbath. Will ID Creationists not pay the same courtesy and leave religion out of science classrooms? Many religious individuals have no trouble reconciling faith and science. Those who can't seem to accomplish this task should consider it a personal and private matter.

"I think there is a God, and he is the creator of the universe," said Miller, who is Catholic. "But the God of the intelligent-design movement is way too small. In their view, he designed everything in the world and yet he repeatedly intervenes and violates the laws of his own creation.

"Their God is like a kid who is not a very good mechanic and has to keep lifting the hood and tinkering with the engine."

New template

2005-06-11T21:04:00.000-07:00

Enormous thanks to Ryan and Liberal Avenger for their roles in bringing about the new template. Thanks for your patience while we mess around with it.

Apologies: previously posted comments were lost with the addition of Haloscan to the site. I would be happy to repost comments from the ongoing debates; just let me know your requests. Otherwise, feel free to repost your own sentiments.

How sex education works

2005-06-10T20:52:00.000-07:00

There is a right way:

Sex and birth control were things that were talked about in my house as openly as the basketball scores. And yet to my knowledge, none of my friends - nor myself, nor either of my two brothers - ever experienced an unwanted pregnancy, nor a brush with an STD. I am convinced this was thanks to my mother's drumming into our heads the fact that, while she'd prefer us not to have premarital sex at all, if we were going to do it, we were going to respect ourselves and our partners by being safe about it.

and a wrong way:

I watched the American TV news show 60 Minutes last week as Denny Pattyn, a Christian youth minister and founder of a multi-million-dollar government abstinence-only program called the Silver Ring Thing, now making inroads in the UK, bragged to the 60 Minutes reporter Ed Bradlee that, if his daughter ever told him she was planning on having premarital sex, he would advise her not to use a condom: "I don't think it'll protect her. It won't protect her heart. It won't protect her emotional life."
...
What kind of father would rather see his daughter dead than having safe sex? Perhaps the kind of father who considers the 88 per cent failure rate of his program (the percentage of students who, after taking "the pledge," go on to have vaginal sex, usually unprotected, within one year) good odds, and who turns a blind eye to the fact that sexually transmitted diseases are up 30 per cent, because they are being transmitted orally and anally by kids who have taken "the pledge" but continue to have sex - just not vaginally.

What Judeo-Christian principles?

2005-06-10T18:25:00.000-07:00

Treaty of Tripoli, article XI says that the:

"Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion...."

Can I get an Amen?

More at D.C.'s Political Report.

via Dadahead.

More goodies from Utah

2005-06-10T18:07:00.000-07:00

The Daily Herald:

"The divine design is a counter to the kids' belief that we all come from monkeys. Because we don't," said Buttars, who retired from running the Utah Boys Ranch, a school for troubled youth. "It shocks me that our schools are teaching evolution as fact."

Maybe we teach evolution as fact because it is fact. Just thought I'd throw that out there; it might help resolve some of the confusion Buttars has about a field he knows nothing about. Unlike Buttars, this article in The Daily Herald displays some genuine words of wisdom:

Intelligent design may be a subject best left to theologians. Evolution, on the other hand, belongs in the science classroom, where it can be presented with other scientific theories that are subject to human observation and measurement.

Anyway, it's not as though Utah school students are only hearing about evolution while they're in school. There's plenty of time in a day for parents, ecclesiastical leaders and teachers who take the Bible literally to debunk science. So Buttars's wish is already being granted without an additional act of the Legislature.

By hearing each theory proposed in the appropriate setting, students will be well-rounded and better equipped to sort out the issues for themselves.

Violence is Power

2005-06-09T17:10:00.000-07:00

Often in film and literature, female characters must be violent in order to be powerful. Because violence is typically viewed as a masculine characteristic, does this mean women must be masculinized before they are considered powerful characters? This essay redefines power through analyses of feminist science fiction.

"...These women, whom Yvonne Tasker calls "Rambolinas," may be tough, they may be powerful, but they may or may not "be women" for, as some people might think, if "woman"= feminine and the definition of feminine is the opposite of tough and powerful, how can tough women be women in our culture's limiting, dichotomous understanding? These tough women are often theorized as being symbolically male, especially if, as with Ripley, Sarah, and Charly, their bodies are also muscular and if other gender signifiers (such as how they dress, how they act, how they talk, how they wear their hair) suggest that they are masculine or, according to Tasker, "musculine"."

I'm sure we can all think of examples of powerful nonviolent female characters (for example, women may draw power through their sexuality) but I think this essay presents interesting arguments in light of a this recent feministe post
and this study which suggest female bloggers need to take on the male norm in order to be noticed.

A model universe

2005-06-09T10:45:00.000-07:00

I like to joke that all theorists do is play with computers and call it science. But here is one result of all their hard ~~play~~ work:

Scientists unveiled last week the most detailed model yet produced of the development of the universe.

The Millennium Run simulation shows how galaxies and quasars are thought to have evolved following the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago.

...

It is being hailed by cosmologists as the first accurate model of the universe because it has correctly predicted information that has since been observed, such as the fact that in the cubic region chosen there should be about 17.5 dwarf galaxies, two million normal galaxies similar in scale to our Milky Way, and half a million giant galaxies.

If scientists can design a model that accurately predicts the current state of our universe do you think the ID Creationists will finally give it rest?

Republican pornographers who are not Jeff Gannon

2005-06-08T22:33:00.000-07:00

World Net Daily:

Mary Carey, the buxom porn star slated to dine with President Bush at a GOP fund-raiser Tuesday, says despite her racy occupation, she's still a Christian, and has her own aspirations of winning the presidency in the future.

...

"Why wouldn't they use porn stars at a fund-raiser? Porn stars are about 10 steps above politicians. At least they are honest about what they do. The real question is why would the porn stars want to degrade themselves?" (Bob Bolton)

Blinged-out sex toys

2005-06-08T20:43:00.000-07:00

Maybe this is what the MRAs are thinking of when they say women are pampered:

via Boing Boing

Sunshine and Feminism

2005-06-08T01:59:00.000-07:00

I know this article is just more anti-feminist rhetoric, but I can't help but pick on Redstate.org. At least this time Carey Roberts tries to rant using references, unlike the last time we played together. Note that these are written text rather than links. How much you want to bet that redstate.org readers don't bother to copy and paste?

Whining about how the population is doomed because women control reproduction, Roberts claims:

The situation is especially acute in Germany, where the population is projected to decline from the current level of 82 million to 70.8 million persons by 2050. The fertility fall-off stems from a disintegration of family relationships - 83% of Germans say their main reason for not having children is their inability to find a partner or stable relationship. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/germanypopulationeconomy]

Ah, yes, but according to that same article, France's population might increase from 60.2 million to 75 million by 2050. Ladies and Gents, meet my good friend Carey "Pick and Choose" Roberts. The article also says that many women choose not to have children because they would rather focus on their careers. What's wrong with that? Women should be made to have children whether they like it or not?!

So blithely ignoring its impending demographic time-bomb, the German Ministry of Education and Research has announced a new gender mainstreaming program designed to entice even more women out of the home and into the workforce. [www.bmbf.de/en/474.php]

Entice? There is still a choice here. Women aren't being forced to forsake family life.

Advocates of gender mainstreaming claim they are merely trying to promote equal rights for the sexes. But in practice, this grand-sounding concept doesn't quite work out that way.

For example, men in Austria live 76 years, while women enjoy a full 82 years of life. But that six-year disparity in life expectancy didn't stop the government from establishing the Bundesministerium fur Gesundheit und Frauen - Ministry for Health and Women. [www.bmgf.gv.at]

Women are so pampered...living 6 years longer than men on average...selfish "little daddies' girls". I'm so glad Roberts gave a reference for the translated page because we all...no wait we don't all speak German. Sure Google will translate it, but how much you want to bet Redstate readers don't take the extra step? Besides, translating the page yields wonderfully informative statements like "Smoke Kallat main header in its speech the outstanding pregnancy support in Austria out and called the low infant mortality consequence of the nut/mother child passport as internationally exemplary." No kidding.

In Norway it was announced that women compose only 11% of members of corporate boards of directors, those bastions of male power and privilege. So minister Laila Daavoey recently decreed that henceforth all companies would be obliged to meet a 40% female board quota - or else face closure. [www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12770128%255E1702,0 0.html]

Once those companies shut down, I'm sure the E.U. will be more than happy to subsidize the checks for all those unemployed workers, male and female.

Because we all know that women can't run a business and inviting more women to a board is tantamount to a corporate death sentence. Isn't that what capitalism is all about anyway? The companies that can't cut it will fade and make way for companies that can?

For examples of why the our species is doomed:

One of the more colorful Swedish politicos is one Gudrun Schyman, an alcoholic who got caught not paying her taxes and was forced to resign as a leader of the Left Party, the former Communist Party of Sweden. Schyman apparently forgot that in socialist societies, paying taxes is more inevitable than death.
...
Early last month a group of Stockholm women put the Feminist Initiative message to the test. One night they showed up at a local strip club wielding baseball bats and umbrellas. Police ended up arresting 16 women after the melee. [www.thelocal.se/article.php?ID=1393&date=20050508]

Sure, Schyman may have problems and some women may be prone to violence. We aren't saying women are beyond flaw or somehow superhuman. (Insert snarky Redstate comment here.) But women comprise at least 50% of the population. Is it remotely possible to imagine that an economy and government can function with the same composition?

Tool use in dolphins

2005-06-07T14:32:00.000-07:00

The Australian:

The newfound toolmakers are a single lineage of female bottlenose dolphins in Western Australia's Shark Bay who stick sponges on their nose to help them forage for food in the muddy seabed. It is rare for marine mammals and it is also evidence of socially learned and transmitted "material culture" as the dolphins pass the trick on - mostly to their daughters - researchers claimed yesterday in the US journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The researchers who discovered the behavior have evidence to suggest that this is a recently derived trait. Add dolphins to the growing list of tool using animals. Perhaps humans aren't so very special after all?

Safe, legal, accessible and rare

2005-06-07T14:16:00.000-07:00

Why should abortions be legal? Because making them illegal or otherwise inaccessible does not preventing them from happening. Case in point:

Nineteen-year-old Gerardo Flores of Lufkin was sentenced to life in prison Monday in a landmark test case of a state fetal protection law. An Angelina County jury deliberated just under four hours, finding him guilty on two counts of capital murder for his part in killing his unborn twins.

From Ampersand:

None of the news stories I’ve read explains why they didn’t go to a doctor. Maybe they were just too stupid and scared and afraid of being found out; or maybe pro-lifers have succeeded in removing all practical access to abortion where these kids live.

Regardless of the reason, I would wager that these kids were determined to abort their twins. Legal or illegal, abortions are going to happen. We might as well provide safe facilities.

via Feministe.

I have multiple personality disorder

2005-06-07T12:48:00.000-07:00

Either that or someone is blogging at my site without my knowledge. This is according to Sexists News Daily which links to one of my previous posts saying:

Why Can't Feminists Play Nice?
The Girls At Archeaeopteryx Have Their Way With MND's Mike Spaniola

They might know that there is only one of me if they did some fact checking. Then again, as my original post suggested, MND doesn't regularly base their statements on sound information (a.k.a. FACTS). I also like how they used the term 'girls.'

Sex: God's wedding gift

2005-06-06T14:48:00.000-07:00

This was too good to pass up. From New Zealand's Wanganui Chronicle:

Wanganui father Gavin Ander says sex is simply God's wedding present.

He is one of 15 parents who contacted the Chronicle in response to the sex education in school debate. The relaunch of the "No rubba, no hubba hubba" safer sex campaign has sparked debate on whether sex education should be in schools or in the home.

This can't be real, can it? "No rubba, no hubba hubba?" The site looks pretty informative, but the title is hilarious. Do kids actually take it seriously? Wanganui Chronicle:

"We have had sex education in the school system for many decades with no fruits to show for it. It is simply not working. If the horse is dead, get off it.

Really? I know that abstinence-only is a highly flawed method, but now Sex-Ed in general is useless? So, New Zealanders should just push the Stork Fable all through high school? Or just leave it up to the parents? Parents that say things like this:

"There is a clear link between the increase of negative sexual health issues and the increase of education, because the main ingredient of morality has been removed from the formula.

"Sex without a sense of morality is like a car without brakes," he said.

That's not what I heard. I think a better analogy is "Abstinence-only without real knowledge is like a society full of willfully ignorant parents with an STI epidemic among youths." Here are some good myth busters about comprehensive sex education and ...what's this?...they provide references!?! Back to the article:

Mr Ander said young people must be taught the desire to abstain because everyone had the ability to abstain. "Saying no to natural desires and urges is not a far-right Christian thing; it is a common sense thing.

No, it isn't just far right thing, but it is a blatantly stupid thing. Kids are going to have sex whether Mr. Ander has the common sense to accept it or not. It's better that they know how to protect themselves.

I.D. lawsuit in Michigan

2005-06-06T08:07:00.000-07:00

Parents in Richland Michigan are threatening to sue their school board after two teachers slipped ID creationism into the school board curriculum.

They quietly taught intelligent design alongside evolution for two years until a parent complained last fall. Then the administration told them to stop teaching the theory while a committee, including the two teachers, studied whether it belonged in the curriculum.

ID proponents claim that the theory does not speculate about the identity of the designer, so it does not teach Creationism or religion. ID does, however, speculate about the origin of the universe without support of scientific evidence. No matter how they try to mask their agenda, this 'loophole' doesn't make it legitimate science.

Intelligent life found in SLC

2005-06-05T01:20:00.000-07:00

Salt Lake Tribune:

"The need to teach science from the firm basis of evolutionary theory is well established. The fact that we don't do it very well is also established. That failure explains why intelligent grown-ups such as [State Senator] Buttars condemn evolutionary theory for saying things it does not say and meaning things it does not mean.

...

Forcing religion to stand in for science does no favor to religion, to science, or to our children. How wonderful it would be if Utah understood that."

If this is coming out of SLC, there may be hope yet.

Update: No offense intended towards the good people of Utah, of course.

More unfounded propaganda

2005-06-04T16:19:00.000-07:00

When political correctness and radical feminism take over at an international human rights organization, it's not a pretty sight.

Or so Carey Roberts of Redstate.org would have you believe. That's right! Redstate has uncovered Amnesty International's true agenda: to promote feminist ideas and downplay the rights of men.

"So despite the fact that women are equally likely as men to commit domestic violence and even though men are twice as likely to die from violence-related causes [www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/en/, Amnesty International has opted to mortgage the credibility of its organization with the misleading message that women are more susceptible to violence."

Go ahead, try the link for yourself. It wouldn't work for me. You'd think if someone has the balls to make such a claim, they'd want readers to confirm the facts for themselves...no, wait...I forgot that this is Redstate.org. I think the page the are referencing is here, and it says exactly the opposite of Roberts' claim: "...the overwhelming health burden of partner violence is borne by women at the hands of men." Back to the redstate article:

"Here's an eye-witness story from its 1995 report, Women in Afghanistan: A Human Rights Catastrophe: "Fierce fighting broke out and we were all running away in the streets of Kabul...Suddenly, I noticed that my husband was not with us. I was crying hard calling out his name. A guard from one of the checkpoints came to me and told me to keep quiet. I told him that I had lost my husband."

The full account leaves the reader with the impression that the woman's grief deserves more sympathy than her husband's death. That's an abuse of the traditional notion that the taking of life is the greatest human rights violation of all."

I'm glad Roberts gave a reference for the story so that we can read the whole thing for ourselves...oh, no wait...there is no reference. But Roberts is so trustworthy--don't question authority. Here is where you can find the whole account, folks. Roberts completely misrepresents the story and ends the passage right before the climax:

"Then he looked at his commander who was standing in the nearby house behind a window. I heard the commander ordering the guard to kill us."

That's how republicans are-- always undermining our climaxes. I think this part of the account certainly puts it in a particular light that I like to call sympathetic. The whole thesis of the article is ridiculous. Doesn't the call to end torture in Guantánamo Bay qualify as pro-men? But then again, we're dealing with someone who writes:

"But one day someone noticed that women were "underrepresented" in the body counts. That's not good for feminist theory, which holds that women are always the victim in patriarchal societies."

Roberts, what the fuck would you know about feminist theory?

Update: Reader Monjo has kindly pointed out that this may be the reference Roberts uses to support the idea that women and men are equally violent. To which I have these major criticisms:

1) If this is the pdf that Roberts was linking to, it is even more indicative of the attempt to mislead. The statement that Roberts seems to be referring to, "university studies have also indicated similar rates of physical assault by men and women" is directly followed by except for sexual assault when women are overwhemingly the victims.

2) This study does not include sexual assault in it's definition of violence

3) This study does not differentiate between violence and self defense, it just gives rates of violence against a partner in general.

4)This study only addresses violence in university students which may not be representative of the mass population (considering that many studies cited in this report say there is an extremely high rate of violence among dating university students.)

5) Roberts is clearly trying to link to a World Health Organization article in the original post, yet I cannot find the pdf you suggest anywhere on the WHO site. I'd appreciate it if anyone can provide some insight here.

These are just some of my major criticisms; I have left several more in the comments section.

Why can't feminists just play nice?

2005-06-03T12:13:00.000-07:00

We all know that presumptuous little girls taking advantage of our free education are taking away from little boys' opportunities to learn. This is an outrage!! Women shouldn't be allowed to go to school because it is men who build the schools. If you don't help build it, you can't go.

Mike Spaniola (MND):

"Although innovative and honest, the majority of men are nonetheless insulted by a political climate that holds men responsible for inferiorities contrived as impossibly unique to anyone else. Boys in school learn at the expense of the girls, we are told. But it is boys who have worked in the garages of America in their spare time to develop better cars and engines and, most recently, computers and software. How is society served then, when feminist teachers tell boys not to "monopolize" school computers so that girls can sit at the screen and gossip electronically? How will promising "boys of tech" hone developing computer skills? For having been industrious, men are now portrayed as shiftless; for having been innovative, men are shown as domineering; for having been sensitive and honest, men are now manipulated and degraded."

So,...because women were socially and legally prevented from taking part in much of the innovation, they should now be restricted from enjoying the luxuries that resulted from them. Okay, I get it. Women were not allowed to help draft the Constitution, so they are not covered by the laws therein. Men went through all the pain and suffering of building the schools, so only boys should be allowed to attend. I see.

Criticism of men comes easily when viewed by what you want rather than by what you must provide. For example, would women clamor for gold and diamonds if they had to dig and operate mines themselves? If men were to go on strike, infrastructure would suffer within a week, and imagine teen-age girls despairing as malls no longer received shipments of clothing, shoes and baubles. When Madonna sang the virtues of being a Material Girl, she forgot which gender accommodates that lifestyle most.

Oh, Jesus. Does this even deserve commentary?

UPDATE: Some comments that I left in response to this article have apparently hit a hot spot with some fans of the Sexist News Daily. Pretty annoying.

Crucial Update: The change to the new template erased the well over 70 comments for this post. Feel free to repost your own sentiments. Many apologies.

Feminist chides Walmart

2005-06-03T11:08:00.000-07:00

Associated Press

"A feminist leader drew rounds of applause from Wal-Mart shareholders Friday as she chided company managers for having only two women on its 14-member board. In the end, Wal-Mart asked shareholders to reject initiatives she backed.

Martha Burk, chairwoman of the National Council of Women's Organizations, said Wal-Mart should give a breakdown, by race and gender, on how stock options are distributed.

...

At the start of her three-minute address, she told company Chairman Rob Walton that Wal-Mart needed to increase the number of women on its board.

"Two women on the board of Wal-Mart is not enough of 14. We can do better," Burk said, drawing applause."

Birdy-style

2005-06-03T03:51:00.000-07:00

I'll jump on the weekly pet showboat and shamelessly exhibit the fauna that hang around my house.

Marty (front): 15 yrs, cinnamon cockatiel, fluffing up for a nap,
Carlo: 2yrs, gray cockatiel, eagerly mimicking his role model.

Carlo revealing his vanity.

Marty trying to build his nest in my silverware drawer.

(D)evolution heard 'round the world

2005-06-03T00:51:00.000-07:00

Jason Miller from Left Hook has written an excellent analysis of the Kansas School board non-controversy ("Scopes II").

"Ironically, not one of the "performers" in Kansas’s version of the Cirque Plume holds a PhD in evolutionary biology. Their credentials qualifying them as “experts” qualified to objectively challenge the theory of Evolution are highly questionable."
...
"Intelligent Design is a cleverly packaged form of Creationism which the Religious Right is attempting to sneak into public classrooms through a variety of means, including this farcical "hearing" in Kansas."

Kansas may see a close shave yet. Meanwhile, the non-controversy may be spreading. Today in Science magazine (308.5727.1394), Martin Enserink reports from Amsterdam:

"When science and education minister Maria van der Hoeven recently announced plans to stimulate an academic debate about "intelligent design"--the movement that believes only the existence of a creator can explain the astonishing complexity of the living world--she triggered an uproar not unlike that raging in Kansas."

Although Van der Hoeven defends this as a way to unite multiple religions through their common belief in a creator (yeah, right), the community is responding appropriately with hostile questions like, "Does she want to go back to the Dark Ages?". Agitated by the controversy in Kansas, dutch men and women on both sides of the issue are 'a bit more sensitive' about the roles of religion and the state in education.

Update: Utah state senator Chris Buttars plans to lead his state on the IDiot bandwagon. Maintaining that "Devine Design" is different from Creationism, He thinks the new inclusive school curriculum would not violate current church-state separation laws. It's the same old story- the IDCists think that nature is 'too complex' to be an accident, but this is worth quoting:

"We get different types of dogs and different types of cats, but you have never seen a 'dat,' '' he said.

Friday good news blogging

2005-06-02T22:34:00.000-07:00

In the midst of corporate fraud, political turmoil, and a nonstop barrage of IDiocy and ignorance from the right, it's nice to stop and reflect on something pleasant that makes me proud to be human. (Or maybe I just want to plug something really cool.) Pie fanatics, art connoisseurs, one and all, there is hope. The Pie of the Month Club has opened membership to the general public!!!

What better way to celebrate humanity than with pie and pie-related art, like this great antique-botanical-style illustration of a pecan pie

or this awesome mini pie sculpture?

Got a pie question? Just ask The Pie Expert! Members receive one cool postcard every month, which features a recipe for a pie and cool original artwork by the Pie Expert extraordinaire! Such as:

Okay, I'll stop before this sounds anymore like an infomercial. But be warned, you can't wear the P.O.T.M.C shirts to church functions because they have the word POT on them...yes, seriously.

Speaking of Dinosaurs

2005-06-02T13:59:00.000-07:00

Behold my new car emblem:

I'm also a big fan of the Procreation design:

These and more blasphemous decorations brought to you by Ring of Fire.