Oh, save me. I'm trying to escape Australia, but apparently a nation of convicts knows how to keep a fella locked up. I'm sitting in an airport in Melbourne, waiting and waiting and waiting for my flight, so that I can sit trapped in a can for hours and hours, with the prospect of a 6 hour layover in the most wretched airport in America, LAX.
I may not emerge from this sane.
Anyway, here's a terrifying video of me, speaking to a bunch of students at the Freethought University Alliance earlier this week. It may be my last words, since after this trip I may just be reduced to speaking in tongues from the safety of my straitjacket.
Now continue as you were, talk as if I weren't there.
Oh, right. I'm not.
More like this
So here I am, stuck at the airport with no internet connection. Don't ask me why. I am showing a signal, but this has been the Trip from Hell, so I'm not surprised. It should have been easy. One hour flight time, nice hotel on the waterfront, all day meeting with interesting people discussing…
The official kick-off of the Melbourne Global Atheist convention is tonight, but we're starting without the the officials.
I met Bride of Shrek (who is not green) and Rorschach (who wasn't wearing the cool shifting pattern mask) for dinner last night. I can't say I was exactly lively company — I…
When the time came to schedule this European odyssey that we're currently on, I discovered two things. First, that it was going to be a hell of a lot cheaper to fly on the 18th of December than on the 22nd, and second that it really is cheaper to book a regular round trip ticket than a multi-city…
The trip to California went well. Suspiciously well, in fact, to the point where, even though I am now back home, I am still waiting for something to go wrong.
I first became suspicious during the two-hour drive over to Dulles Airport. There was no traffic. How odd. My rule of thumb when flying…
Well, my bracketology post got smashed by the portcullis. Short version: Not only Georgetown, but the whole Big East has let me down, and my bracket is in flames... but I note that despite being in last place in the Pharyngula group, I'm second only to Sven in possible points remaining, so there's hope.
Alas, my hope rests on Syracuse... from the Big Frakkin' East!
A 6 hour layover? Aarrgghh. My sympathies, PZ.
Still that jumper ??
;)
Rorschach, I finally bought a bottle of the Coopers Stout today. Looking forward to trying it tonight.
I posted this in the last open thread, but in the offchance that someone missed it: http://www.kobrascorner.com/assholery/mindfucks04.png
Crap, I was supposed to link to the page not the image itself. Oh well.
ambulocetacean,
I can't speak for Australia or the UK, but in the US our more conservative party, Republican, has moved to the right, triggering the Democratic Party to move to the center and center-right. The USA, from my understanding, has always been somewhat more conservative than other Western countries. We were the last ones to outlaw slavery. We're the only ones to not guarantee health care to all citizens. We have a very precarious safety net with much larger holes. The political spectrum here is very narrow because the opinions of the populace are more constrained. The Dems moved to the right because they couldn't get elected from the left.
I, too, find the Tea Party movement scary. There's tremendous rage in the USA right now, but it's directed at the wrong targets. We should be demonstrating to close tax loop-holes for the rich and corporations, public financing for campaigns, curtailing lobbyists, better labor laws and more protection for consumers, but the populace blames the government and wants even less intervention. It's hard to understand, but Ronald Reagan is still seen as one of our best presidents.
Part of the problem, as I see it, is a complete ignorance of the true range of views. Too many people really believe Obama is a socialist or communist or fascist, and they hate and fear him because of it. These people don't know what any of those labels mean, and they certainly don't really know why they don't want a socialist president. We're told by media outlets like Fox News that Europe is a socialist nightmare like the old USSR. Many people remember the images of food lines from the Eastern Bloc before the collapse of communism. They think that there's a slippery slope from regulating banks and other corporations to centralized economic planning by incompetent government bureaucracies. They're the same people who believed and applauded when Reagan said such monumentally ignorant things like "Government isn't the solution to our problem; government is the problem." and "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
These are the same people who say the government never does anything right, but get their Social Security or SSI checks on-time every month. They're the same people who don't object when the National Guard comes to town to sandbag as the rivers rise to catastrophic levels. They're the same people who drive on publicly built and maintained roads every single day. They're the same people who receive Medicare treatment. They're the people who don't know about the tax abatements a corporation like Wal-mart receive when it deigns to build a super store in their town. They're the same people who think fetuses are people and women should be forced to carry pregnancies to term, but then turn around and support welfare "reform," slashing the budgets for Medicaid and Food Stamps and WIC. These people are terrifying and they're not an insignificant portion of the USA population.
Recently I was talking to one of my conservative friends who said anyone who supported cap and trade was a liberal. When I tried to explain that cap and trade is a market-based, politically center approach to the problem of carbon dioxide emissions and that there are far more liberal positions, he simply wouldn't listen.
That's long and rambling. Sorry about that. It's really frustrating to see this stuff happening and terrifying that politicians may be forced to listen to the ignorant. Following the less government intervention, less regulation fervor will certainly lead us into a Depression. If that happens, I will be living off the family land in an undisclosed location. Someone, Jadehawk?, mentioned up-thread that learning to grow your own food is important if society collapses. It's something I'm actively trying to learn to do, particularly to grow food from the seeds of last year's crop. Things are already bad here and likely to get worse. :(
Let me know what it's like ! I wonder if Coles online have it, since I'm still having booze groceries delivered via online shopping due to angry back...:-)
Kel, OM,
Were you the one talking about buying textbooks for info, but the cost was a problem?
If so, you can always see if the textbook you want is used by your local college. You may be able to get it cheap by buying from a student at the end of the semester. I've seen people simply throw books the bookstore would buy back in the trash. Usually the bookstore won't buy it back because a new edition came out, but the new edition is only a little bit different. I guess my advice is to either put up an advertisement saying you want to buy the book toward the end of the school year or skulk around the buy-back tables and offer kids more cash for the book. :)
4 8 15 16 23 42
I was, though the cost issue is more down to being married as opposed to poverty.
It's a good idea, I'll have to look into it.
@10:
The differences between those numbers: 4, 7, 1, 7, 19. 4 + 7 + 1 + 7 = 19?
Not sure what you're getting at there.
the problem is that the language for expressing the things that are wrong, and that people feel are wrong, doesn't exist. If you listen to people one-on-one when they vent their frustrations, they sometimes slip into "marxist/socialist rhetoric" without noticing, because they don't know that it IS socialist: I've heard many people say that bosses and managers just waste time and space, and they could run the business themselves better than those clueless dudes from the corporate office; I've heard people who have lost their houses say that people really should just stand up to these "thieves" who are taking people's homes and fight. This is straight out of the marxist class-warfare playbook, but you say that to anyone, and they just might shoot you on the spot.
since the language they need for expressing their grievances has become taboo, they are left with libertarian rhetoric, which sounds superficially similar enough and isn't tainted with the specter of socialism.
it's a fucking farce, really.
Kevin, best of luck to you with your family.
At least they are doing some talking with you. Some folks wouldn't do that much.
And a hug for you, Kevin.
See, Christains? Tearing families apart is one instance of the harm that your religion does. And before you deny that it does, remember that your Jesus said that it was supposed to destroy families. (You and your dimwit "The family that prays together, stays together" plaques.)
Jadehawk,
I see what you're saying here. That's an excellent point, and it's something that has changed significantly since the Great Depression. Even though communism wasn't the most popular ideology in the 30s, there were tons of people calling for what we now call "class-warfare." The wealthy class had real reason to fear an actual shift to communism in the USA because people were so desperate, and blaming the right people for their desperation. Too many Americans have forgotten how bad it was then, how close we came to anarchy and/or communism. Part of the goal of the New Deal was to placate the populace enough to keep the government in power.
I guess two big "Red Scares" have beaten the idea that socialism or communism have any merit or good points at all out of the American consciousness.
Ironically, one of the things I blame for the lack of support for structural changes to our economy and safety net is the safety net. If we didn't have unemployment insurance, food stamps, etc. far more people would be hungry and the situation might have already become unstable. People are still comfortable enough, or believe they will return to comfortable soon enough to reject changes that will protect them from the severe consequences we saw during the Great Depression.
Jadehawk, Pygmy Loris above,
Alas, the problem with democracy is that people are generally easily led - I seem to remember somewhere in the last thread one of you saying you had been reading dystopian novels, but the one missing from the list was Huxley's 'Brave New World' which is perhaps most apt in terms of a society conditioned to accept the status quo.
I rather think there are no political solutions - I used to think we could educate ourselves out of the morass, but I doubt that now. I spent most of the 80's in the UK being lectured by an anarcho-syndicalist colleague who was certain the workers would rise up - they never did, and much to his puzzlement selected the Iron Lady again and again.
It looks to an outsider like US politics has been gradually engineered to a state of near permanent paralysis - short term interests and opinion poll led government stopping all but the most populist policies. Lengthening political terms might help (although I doubt it).
Pygmy Loris,
Yeah, ignorance is clearly the problem, but how will people learn if they don't read or watch or listen to anything other than Fox and Rush Limbaugh? How can you educate millions of people who don't want to be educated? (I'm not talking about indoctrinating people into any particular ideology, just getting them to see what's what so they can make informed decisions).
When people wear the label "dittohead" like it's a badge of honour, well...
But surely it's not that bad that you have to become an apocalyptic survival gardener, is it? I thought that was more for the Glenn Beck fans and the Oathkeepers.
Rorschach
I take back what I said, I just checked and technology has caught up in Ipswich and we get Coles online. *swooooon*. The bastards however do have this coda
Utter pricks.
However since I live in an area that is not even serviced by nary a delivery Chinese,Thai or even pizza place I really can't complain.
Feck, I would really have been in trouble if this had happened to me in Brisvegas !!
*btw, despite me winning 4.5 grand once in their sad excuse for a Casino, I think the term Brisvegas is quite undeserving*
.. not if it's said with contemptous irony it usually is!
..I gotta get me out of this state. Sadly I'm essentially lazy and if I went anywhere other than Tas or WA I'd have to retrain a little in criminal law if I wanted to stay working in the NGO disability crim area ..or go back to being a commercial lawyer which, now I'm getting all old, cynical and money hungry is a possibility.
I always thought that "Brisvegas" came from Rockhampton calling itself "Rock Vegas", which was the name of the casino town in The Flintstones. I think.
ambulocetacean:
Let's just say it doesn't hurt to sharpen up the gardening skills. It's still way too early to go the garden thing here in ND, but it will be time to prepare soon. I grow as much as I can in the non-winter months. Helps the pocketbook at any rate, and it's satisfying too.
When I lived in Innisfail we used to call it "arsevegas". This was not ironic.
read the archives of this blog, and read this article, and then maybe you'll get a whiff of where my "the world is DOOOMED!!!" feeling is coming from [/half-kidding]
Opinion poll led government would actually be an improvement in many areas. A majority of Americans wanted to impeach Cheney, and now I think a majority favors no-brainers like ending DADT and making some kind of public health insurance plan available to all. But somehow the politicians don't jump to enact this kind of populism. (And how populist was the Wall Street bailout?)
I don't recall getting any ass in Brisbane sadly.That is all.
Your geology fix for the night/day:
El'gygytgyn, a 3.6 my old impact crater lake in Chukotka (Russian Far East).
Hi Jadehawk,
Thanks for that. I read Dmitry Orlov's essay and some of the posts on Casaubonsbook. All quite depressing, really.
But then again ... maybe the eco-catastrophist science blog readers and the paranoid libertarian militias will find themselves digging veggie patches shoulder to shoulder. With familiarity comes understanding, and with understanding comes love. Shovels Across America, if you will.
Actually, it could all turn out quite nicely.
Rorschach
When I lived in Innisfail we used to call it "arsevegas". This was not ironic.
.. this was not because we were getting any arse (though if you're into 43 y.o, living-at-home-still,desperate for a bit of external genetic material through 3 generations of breeding in a town of 5000 people, sons of Sicilian cane farmers then this is your market).
It was because it was a total arsehole of a town.
Ah, that.
Yeah, good point.
The sons of sicilian cane farmers, I might pass on that, although their daughters I might have a look at.....
http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/The_numbers
Feynmaniac, and for those of us who have never seen that show, the significance of it is what? Or is this just a tv show thing?
If ever there was an ironclad proof of the nonexistence of a benevolent god, it is LAX. I don't think the place can even be described by the laws of physics without further advances in quantum theory. I went to the 1984 Rose Bowl with the U of Illinois marching band and they lost my luggage going both ways.
So good luck on the flight, and I hope your luggage enjoys its visit to Paris.
I'm not sure why lijdare posted them. I was just explaining where they were coming from.
Those numbers feature prominently in the show to the point of schizophrenic obsession, literally in the case of one fictional character and semi-literally in case of many real life hard-core fans. Maybe that's why it was posted....
They didn't actually play an excerpt from Handel's "Messiah" in the introduction for PZ, did they?
@Kel, OM: another place to look for textbooks is one I have used for my kids. If you are in the USA (and maybe outside, will depend on the mailer) you can try paperbackswap.com
"Brisevugus": I have to ask -- who was the mohel and what part did he snip?
The Overture at the start, and the Hallelujah chorus when we get to PZ consuming Jebus’ body.
Thanks, everyone. I think my sister will be okay. She's upset, but I know she'll get better for it later.
She told me she was worried because she doesn't want me to go to Hell (score 1 for 'why I think religion is evil.' Making my sister cry because of a ridiculous concept.) I basically laid down that I think if there was a just and benevolent god, it wouldn't be the god of the Bible, and that I won't go to Hell because this just and fair god would see that I've lived my life caring for others, engaging the world with utmost curiosity, and showing love to everyone I meet.
Kevin,
My sympathies.
For me, my love of science and rational thought forced me in my teens to give up the idea of a God that created the Earth 6,000 years ago. For a few months I tried be a Catholic since they weren't as anti-science as the fundamentalists, but I soon saw the same irrationality existed there too and eventually gave up the whole God thing. Note, I reached this conclusion more or less independently and several years before I heard of Dawkins, Myers or the "New Atheists".
Everyone I told in my family about my atheism reacted negatively to some degree. I expected this, except in the case of my father. He isn't particularly religious (a self described 'non-practicing Catholic') and goes to church as often as I do now (i.e, just for wedding, graduations, etc.).
Of my two sisters, well, both weren't thrilled about it. I argued with both of them, not trying to "convert" them (though they were trying to convert me), but merely giving them my honest thoughts on the matter. With the youngest one this (along with several other reasons) lead to us having a bad relationship. The older one however thanked me not too long ago. While she still believes in some sort of "higher force" she said that without me she might have ended up a fundamentalist and had religion dictate every aspect of her life.
I hope things go well for you.
I'd agree. However JFK in New York is a close second.
Kevin
Just to add my support to everyone else. It seems to me you're approaching things about right, neither confrontational nor dishonest with your family. I hope it all sorts itself out for the best.
I'd agree. However JFK in New York is a close second.
My vote would be Chicago O'Hare. Don't get me wrong -- I like the F4F Hellcat on display, and there is a place that serves a passable Chicago dog in the same area as the fighter plane, but everytime I fly through, going to or coming from a fire, I land at one end and have to race to the other. I fly in on a CRJ (which means the small plane terminal) and out on a big jet (which means the big jet terminal) or vice versa. And I either have 25 minutes to make my next plane or four hours. Never something nice and comfortable.
Atlanta sucks, too. As does San Francisco (the bus ride from terminal to terminal is a thrill ride in and of itself.
I like Salt Lake City, Denver and Portland, Oregon, though.
Blockquote fail. Both first lines should be blockquoted.
Kevin - is your denomination a "once saved always saved" flavor? That would ease your sister's fears somewhat. Otherwise, I think it's just something she'll have to get used to. It's the shock right now more than anything else.
the most wretched airport in America, LAX.
To quote, or at least paraphrase Douglas Adams, it can hardly be a coincidence that no language on earth has an idiom "as pretty as an airport." Nonetheless, I'm doubting LAX or even JFK as worst airports on the continent. Atlanta, maybe? Though JFK's international terminal is downright Orwellian.
Just found out my Democratic representative is going to vote against the health care bill. So pissed off I can't see straight.
Surely Newark gives LAX a run for its money in the "wretched" department.
Nerd using deadwood,
Please take a moment to medline “placebo effect” and Cochrane or to read the Novella thread where I posted the fact that the “sugar pill” placebo has been disproven to have any effect at all in modern patients. You are now as likely to get a “nocebo” effect from inactive pills.
Oh good, bride of Shrek has been doing some reading. The reason Naturopathic Medicine is or is not legal has more to do with the turf battle between the eclectics and the quacksalvers (the AMA) than with any cases. There have been cases of damage done by individuals without training calling themselves Naturopaths, and with M.D.s assuming either the title or alternative medicines.
Yes, the average medical patient for Naturopathic Doctors is a college educated, older female. These are not naïve fools. They come with extensive reading and documentation of what they want and we discuss their options and support them through things like menopause and arthritis. These are chronic diseases that take time to alter favorably. We have no hospitals in the U.S. , so we don’t treat acutely unless we have hospital privileges. A number of Naturopathic Doctors now specialize in different areas, cardiology, oncology, etc., but the average patient is a highly educated woman.
In terms of my study of Naturopathic Medicine, those patients improved in contrast to regular medical care. They did not spend their time on vacation, but were seen for follow up extensively. When you attack the study, you need to provide a counter study that shows an alternate, scientific point of view. The peer review process is the best one we have found for finding what is scientific vs. what is merely opinion.
Caine has placed me on his kilfile and yet feels qualified to comment on my latest posting. Typical “scientific” analysis.
A. Noyd seems unable to grasp the concept of studies versus attacking people. Terminating a conversation because you are unable to respond with science is not the act of a scientist. I question A.Noyd’s ability to logically reason.
Josh, thank you for fulfilling the amazing role of hatemonger. I suspect you haven’t read a single thing I’ve posted. What harm have quacks ever done to you personally that you are so bitter?
And again, Caine chimes in with a comment. Maybe he doesn’t understand that when you block one side of a conversation and continue to shout from the other side, that would be the definition of someone who is incapable of open minded scientific discussion.
ambulocetacean chimes in that I got my butt kicked by Novella. Have a look at the full comments on that thread, and then go over to homeopaths on the run. Dr. Novella and I did have multiple exchanges, but if you take the time to read through the material, it is not at all clear that Novella did anything more than take a second look at what he’s been spending his time doing. If there is in fact any scientist out there reading, have a look at Novella’s output as a neurologist. As a tenured Yale neurologist he should be generating one to two papers a year. He’s managed two small studies in fourteen years? I think my questions about his scientific priorities are well founded.
Caine chimes in again, showing a remarkable ability to not ignore me. What is the point of a kilfile if you keep commenting? I think he’s a closet fan.
Rorschach, who either has serious emotional issues or has never read or watched Watchmen, has skipped over what I do to find what works? Really? Do you pray with your patients when they are dying or do you tell them it doesn’t work?
Caine chimes in again. This time he says he has degenerative disks. How sad that he kilfiled me, so he won’t know that I’ve had multiple doctors and nurses come to me for pain relief. It isn’t the disks, it’s the muscle spasms that cause much of the pain. Could someone tell him to check out www.maloneymedical.com under back pain?
Boy genius, do you have access to unicorn farts and faerie kisses? I’m sure there’s a market on Ebay.
I’ve had several patients that I’ve been able to wean off eight oxi a day down to the occasional narcotic. These are patients so gorked out that they were unable to function. In one case the family was considering a nursing home for this 48 year old woman. Her back is now functional, although now she’s managed to damage her acromioclavicular joint and I haven’t been able to help.
Ok, so then Bastion Of Sass comes up with a question for me, and we have a historian weighing in with his medical opinion. Right. IamBilly is right that if she did indeed have systemic fungal infection she’d need to be in the hospital.
Caine comes in with a diagnosis of candidiasis. I was right, he is definitely a closet fan, and can’t keep away from my stuff. I wonder how many of you are actually storing something like a multivitamin on your shelves, taking it in secret, totally in the closet. I know Josh is. He may be outspoken about his sexuality, but he’s a closet quack wannabe. Somebody check his cupboards.
Bastion Of Sass, here’s the helpful analysis you can tell your friend. It comes from an N.D., and will be much more acceptable to her. The diagnosis of candidiasis was a popular catchphrase used by those in alternative medicine in the mid 1980’s. It isn’t a blood infection, but an overgrowth of yeast in the colon. This can be checked using stool analysis, available at standard labs. The classic example is candida, but a range of other bacteria, including MRSA and C. difficile are possibilities. If her homeopath (which is a distinctly different field from my own and should be limited to highly dilute substances) did not do any testing, then he or she is making a more general, and ultimately inaccurate, statement about her ability to absorb nutrients, etc.
Personally, I find the anti-candida diet to be wretched and unappealing. You need to avoid all sugars, all yeasts of any kind, and fruits. Even if it treated a lab documented issue, it is not something I have seen patients be able to maintain.
I don’t think they need to follow it, because of the documented research in the AIDS population. AIDS patients do experience candidiasis topically and systemically, and researchers have created sacchromyces boulardii for them. A member of the beer yeast family, it populates the gut and competes head-to-head with candida. There are individual reports of lung infections in AIDS patients using nasogastric tubes, but for the outpatient population S. boulardii has a very safe profile. So if your friend is determined to continue her forced diet, it makes sense to either get tested or to consider the more palatable solution of S. boulardii (and eating normally again).
In your own case with breast cancer, you are aware that Taxol was extracted from Yew trees? At this point the standard of care should have moved on to the aromatase inhibitors, which give a better five year outcome than Taxol for prevention of recurrence. In my searching, I found that mushrooms, including the standard white button mushrooms, are very high in aromatase inhibitors. So you could talk with your doctor about adding mushrooms to your diet and tell your friend that you are considering alternatives. Notice you don't even need to eat the mushrooms, just to consider eating them.
All right, I know the rest of you have family and friends who are "addicted" to what I do. Rather than waste your time swearing at me, which evidently does not work (definition of insanity, Josh)why not use your resident Quack to slowly help them back on the road to scientific inquiry?
How about the Myers himself, battling as he does with the evil S. mutans in his mouth? (That's the bacteria most commonly responsible for plaques). Have you researched the best toothbrushes for periodontal disease? I have.
I have airport-phobia--least favorite place on earth. Did some time in LAlaland and except for the traffic (which is region-endemic, not specifically an airport problem) and, sometimes, the parking, LAX is not so bad. Now I live a 20-minute straight shot to either JFK or La Guardia and I'll take JFK every time, thanks.
O'Hare has the trippy light-tunnel that saved my freaking brain one time so gets a pass.
No, your really shitty airports include Newark, Chicago Midland, and Philly.
Hullo, Thread.
Rather amazingly woke up before nine today. Just got back from a three hour walk. Brought home victuals.
I have some turnips - I believe I saw them mentioned at some point. A wee orange pumpkin that I'd like to make into soup (had some at friends once), but I'm open to suggestions. And finally some avocados, kalamata, hummus and a nice cheese. Oh, and ethnic bread!
Recipes, please!
I see our patron saint a placebo, Qwack the woomeister is back. tl;dr But based upon his previous posts, till nothing cogent. The only cogent statement would be he is renouncing Quack medicine. A loser who victimizes his alleged patients. Get a real life Qvack, and upgrade your morality by finding a better job. Enforcer for the mob would be step up for you.
FYI, this phrase is meaningless to 'mericans.
oh, hi, Maloney.
Say, keep up the good work, what? But, like, maybe elsewhere?
Thanks, Doc!
I live timewise about equidistance from Milwaukee and OHare. We tend to use Milwaukee since the airport and parking situation there is much more user friendly. The last time I flew out for training, it was cheaper to fly from OHare, but the parking costs differential made Milwaukee a tad cheaper.
Sili: I don't remember the name of this dish, but I think it hails from Argentina (so of course it has beef):
2 lb Beef stew meat, cut in 1 1/2-in. cubes
1 large Onion; chopped
8 garlic cloves; minced
3 Tbsp Oil (I use olive, but whatever)
1 can chopped Tomatoes (10 or 12 ounce)
1 large Green bell pepper (or, if you can find it, a nice ripe red one) chopped
Salt, pepper (to taste (and to heart for the salt))
1 teaspoon Sugar
1 cup Dried apricots roughly chopped
3 potatoes (if you can find purple ones, it adds colour) diced
3 Sweet potatoes, peeled and diced
2 cups Beef broth (or wine and water, or wine and broth)
1 medium Pumpkin (yours may be too small -- bake it as directed and scoop the innards into the stew at the last minute)
melted butter
1/4 c good red wine (Burgundy may be too strong)
1 can whole kernel corn (1 lb), drained, or substitute 3 ears of fresh corn cut in one inch rounds
Trim any excess fat from beef and cook with onion and garlic in oil until meat is browned. Add tomatoes, green pepper, salt and pepper to taste, sugar, apricots, potoes (both kind) and broth. Cover and simmer 1 hour. Meanwhile, cut top off pumpkin and discard. Scoop out seeds and stringy membrane. Brush inside of pumpkin with butter and sprinkle lightly with salt and pepper. Stir sherry and corn into stew and spoon into pumpkin shell. Place shell in shallow pan and bake at 325F 1 hour, or until pumpkin meat is tender. Place pumpkin in large bowl and ladle out stew, scooping out some of pumpkin with each stew serving.
Does that help?
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=29…
Knockgoats@548 of previous incarnation
You asked about the math being used by our over-reaching economists. It is somewhat specialized and not something I've used. However, the "order" refers to how many times one must subtract off a trend to get a stationary series--e.g. neither increasing or decreasing. In effect, it is the same argument many have used before--CO2 forcing is super-linear, while temperature is rising linearly, so CO2 can't be the driver.
The problem is that for such so-called "polynomial co-integration" to work you have to have a very long dataset, and we don't here. Moreover, there are many drivers of temperature that operate on timescales of decades. Tamino over at Open Mind did a pretty nice takedown of the whole approach, and several others have pointed out that it is nonsense. The denialosphere thrives on nonsense though, especially when it is shrouded in complicated math.
Yesterday we had corned beef for dinner so today I made corned beef hash for breakfast. Doubtless you've looked at corned beef hash and wondered "how do they hash a corned beef?" I know you've cried yourself to sleep not knowing how to make corned beef hash. Well fret no more, corned beef hash devotees, for your Uncle 'Tis will explain how to make it.
Take equal amounts (by volume) of cold, boiled corned beef and cold, boiled potatoes. Chop them fine (¼ inch/.5 cm). Season with salt and pepper, put into a hot, buttered frying pan, and moisten with milk or cream. Stir until well mixed then put on a medium flame to brown the bottom. Turn onto a hot platter and serve.
same tune better quality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRrR89MyOfw
Teh ECO forgot to include a link back to the previous subThread. Fortunately he also forgot to update the sidebar permalink.
For your navigational info.
Outstanding work, Dr Maloney. Oh wait - that's right! You're not a doctor at all, are you?
Does Maine have a law against practising medicine without a licence? How do you get around that when you're calling your scam "Maloney Medical" and posing in a stethoscope?
I don't know how you sleep at night when you spend your days pushing lethally dangerous anti-vaccine bullshit on to people who don't know any better.
Children are dying in Australia (whooping cough) and Britain (measles) and no doubt in the US because of callously irresponsible quacks like you frightening their parents away from vaccines.
And you're less keen on chelation now than you were when you were in quack school? That's something, I suppose. But - as you should know - chelation is still bad, bad juju for anyone who doesn't have heavy-metal poisoning. Do the words kidney failure, brain damage and death mean anything to you? Why do you want to pump people full of chemicals that they don't need? And you do realise that you don't get mercury poisoning from vaccines and tooth fillings, don't you?
And you still believe in homeopathy? You really are immune to reality, aren't you?
Don't kid yourself. Steve Novella handed you your sorry ass. Go and get a medical degree if you want to argue with people who know what they're talking about.
Steak and Kidney Pudding.
I am having this tonight, so I thought I was pass on the recipe.
Filling:
1lb Stewing Beef
1/2lb Kidney
1 Onion - Sliced
3 tbsp Water
Suet Pastry:
6oz Self-Raising Flour
3oz Suet
1 tsp Salt
Water
1. Dice beef into 1/2" pieces.
2. Remove core from kidneys and slice into 1/2" pieces.
3. Combine beef, kidneys and onion in a bowl. Season with salt and plenty of black pepper. Add 2-3 tablespoons of water and mix well.
4. In another bowl combine dry ingredients and add suffcient water to bring to a dough.
5. Set aside 1/3 of the quantity of dough, and role out rest.
6. Butter a 2pt pudding basin, and line sides and bottom with dough.
7. Add the meat and onion mix to the pudding basin.
8. Roll out remaining dough add place on top of basin to form a lid. Push down at sides to seal.
9. Place a sheet of foil or greaseproof paper over the basin, putting in a pleat to allow for the dough to expand. Tie foil or paper in place with string.
10. Slow Cooker: Place in slow cooker, and fill bowl of slow cooker half way with boiling water. Cook for about 7 hours.
Stove-Top: Place basin in a large pan, and fill half-way with boiling water. Allow to simmer for around 6 hours. Make sure pan does not boil dry.
Serve with carrots and cabbage.
At this point the standard of care should have moved on to the aromatase inhibitors, which give a better five year outcome than Taxol for prevention of recurrence
Wow. This statement is wrong in so many ways it's hard to know where to start, but I think I'll start with the obvious.
What effect will aromatase inhibitors have on recurrence in a woman with ER/PR negative breast cancer? If you answered "virtually none" you are correct. Even assuming quack's statement about mushrooms is correct, they won't do anything for ER/PR negative cancers.
And where does quack get the idea that it's a choice between taxol and AIs? For women with appropriate levels of risk and tumor type, both are indicated. They do entirely different things and have different, but overlapping indications. Thus, the standard of care is not and will not "move on" from one to the other while both are useful tools.
Finally, saying that one treatment or another gives a better outcome in breast cancer betrays a lack of knowledge about the disease and its varied biology and manifestations.
"...the prospect of a 6 hour layover in the most wretched airport in America, LAX."
Only spent four hours there (had a good book as an aid). Try a 5-hour layover at Pittsburgh then forward your report.
Oops, forgot to mention the mushrooms. Mushrooms are yummy and I recommend eating them, especially with garlic. However, counting on them to cure your cancer is probably overoptimistic. At best, it's complicated.
BTW, the quick link still goes to the last episode. At least on my computer.
#60
Thinking about Sally:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eirKYIoAjwU
(and other versions in the list)
Quack,
While I'm willing to admit that is YOUR client base, the results on that study (the one that is the apparent standard of your own Alt Med Journal ) did not, in ay any way adjudicate on the client's educational qualifications.
Could you please then explain how you are bringing the terminology "college educated" into this study? There was no standard of education as a parameter in this study so I'm truly interested as to why you feel the need to try and use this a support to you reasoning?
Quack
.. and if there is one thing that compounds my thoughts that "college educated" women do not universally want to attend you practice of woo is the knowledge that, MENOPAUSE IS NOT A FUCKING DISEASE.
A real Doctor of course would know that.
Is it me, or does PZ look a tad...slimmer?
I once spent 4 hours at LAX.
I was flying from the UK to New Zealand, and the aircraft need some maintenance so we all had to get of and wait in a transit lounge.
We have a scintillating view of baggage reclaim. There was a cafe, but they only took US dollars. Kind of odd, since no one waiting seemed to have any, seeing as how we had boarded the plane at either Frankfurt or Gatwick, and we bound for Auckland. Transit passengers were the only people who had access to this cafe and few transit passengers will have currency for a country they are only stopping in to refuel.
PZ Myers:
Wheeee! This is fun!
No, the most loathsome airport in America is Chicago O'Hare.
In #63 Matt Penfold gave us a recipe for some traditional British fare, Steak & Kidney Pudding. Here's another item of British cooking:
Deep Fried Mars Bar®
1 Mars Bar®
1 cup plain flour
1/2 cup cornstarch (cornflour)
1 pinch baking soda
milk or beer
oil for deep frying
Chill the Mars Bar® in a refrigerator, but don't freeze it.
Mix the flour, cornstarch and baking soda together. Add milk (traditional) or beer (which gives a lighter result) until you get a batter with the consistency of milk.
Heat the oil until a small piece of bread will brown in a few seconds, but don't allow to smoke.
Remove wrapper from chilled Mars Bar®. Coat Mars Bar® completely with batter.
Carefully lower into hot oil and fry until batter is golden brown. Serve.
Notes: This dish is an excellent source of fat, sugar and calories.
This batter is also used for another traditional British staple, fish and chips.
I am quite happy to let the Scots take full credit for the deep fried Mars bar.
Not that I have ever had one. Never managed to pluck up the courage.
Usagichan,
I'm the one who said I was reading dystopian novels. Brave New World is next on my list. Your UK colleague shouldn't have been surprised that people didn't rise up in the 80s. Things weren't bad enough. As long as they've got something going in their mouths most people aren't going to rock the boat. That's why the 30s in the USA were such a time of upheaval. Millions didn't have anything to eat. To get real change, you have to have really bad conditions first.
ambulocetacean,
There's a sizeable portion of the US population that view being educated as a bad thing. They're not interested in thinking too hard about anything.
Well, I'm not really sure. We have very high unemployment and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. If the political winds bring a right-wing nut like Sarah Palin to office in 2012, we can expect none of our serious problems to be addressed. Runaway global warming and a reliance on oil are very bad and I just want to be prepared. Ultimately, I pretty much live my life like the really bad things won't happen or we'll do something to mitigate the effects, but I like to have a back-up plan.
I have no interest in sharing valuable soil with the people who voted us into the kind of position where I'm gardening because my life depends on it. If they're nice I may let them be my manual labor, though.
Hypothetical scenario:
(Family shows up looking for some food and work. I meet them flanked by gun-toting bodyguards)
ME: Did you support the conservatives, watch Fox News or listen to right-wing talk radio?
FAMILY: Yes. We don't believe in big government. If only Reagan had been around this wouldn't have happened.
ME: (looking at the faces of hungry children) Well, I guess I could use some help. Y'all can go ahead and chop cotton. Then the stables need to be cleaned.
Finalemente! My RSS feed is empty!
Of course, lots of posts have expired while I've been trying to catch up. Perhaps some day I'll have look for them ...
My avocados turned out to be riper even than I feared. I made a nice big incision in my thump when I was about to remove the stone from one.
O'Hare most definitely trumps LAX for the worst airport in the US.
Pygmy Loris,
Ha ha! I'm sure you won't forget to remind the poor, starving libertarians that sharing is socialism.
Then you'll have trouble playing Thumper.
That'll make sitting down a litte more difficult.
And remember, when life gives you overripe avocados, add salt, tomatoes, olive oil, fresh chile peppers, onions, cilantro, and lime juice, mash it together, and enjoy the avacado concoction -- in Nahuatl, guaca mole.
it's been "Euphemism Week" for 7 d, 13 h +.
just fuckin' sayin'
#75 'Tis Himself, OM
No. This is how to make it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGOaaYeMyS8&feature=related
And here is the Great Michellin Chef, Raymond Blanc, getting advice on how to prepare it and giving his considered opinion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yG0zN-LQTs&feature=related
BUT, for the ultimate experience you MUST do it the Scottish way:
http://fxcuisine.com/default.asp?language=2&Display=103&resolution=high
(Note that it is recommended to eat it with a glass of Scotch)
Wait, somebody posted "the numbers"?
Much more appropriate to PZ's plight would be
http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/LA_X,_Parts_1_%26_2
Be afraid, PZ.
35458
#75 'Tis Himself, OM
Now you are talking about something quite different! British fish and chips (at its best)deserves to be put high on the pedestal of international cuisine!! At its worst, it can be unutterably dreadful.
The fish MUST be fresh and of the highest quality - cod is great, haddock is also good but not frozen. The 2 best places for fish and chips in the country are both within a stone's toss of the sea and use locally-landed fish. One of them has a permanent queue winding down the road any time it's open. Because of the throughput, the fish and chips comes straight from the frier, drained and onto the paper in which it is wrapped.
When I was a student first time round I was at Hull University, on the NE coast of England and, at that time, a great fishing port. Probably that was the fourth best fish and chips - served in a sit-down restaurant which was a great warehouse. Fish, chips, peas, slice of bread and butter and a cup of tea for 20p (it was a while ago).
The third best is where I live now. I am in the middle of England, almost as far from the coast as you can get. The owner of the local chippies buys all his fish at the Birmingham fish market, competing with all-comers to get the very best. I have occasionally bought potatoes by the sack - 25 kg or 56 lb (half a hundredweight). He buys 100 sacks at a time and that lasts less than a week.
Hints:
Look for a queue but where the staff are working flat out inside.
If you can, find out the best day for the freshest fish. Ask the owner - locally it's Tuesday and Thursday.
Go where the staff have a passion for what they are doing.
Ask for your fish to be fried specially for you - it means waiting a few minutes but it means you'll get it fresh.
Unless you want to eat it immediately, don't let them put vinegar or salt on it - I have salt in the car or I whisk it home ASAP.
Finally, it's true - monks do make the best fish and chips! Why else do you think they are called friars?
[Ed. Oh dear. Oh dear.]
Alan B #84
Who are you going to believe? Some Limey who lives so close to Wales he could see Offa's Dyke from his chimney piece* or someone who not only spent four hours in Prestwick Airport waiting for a connecting flight but also spent a rainy Sunday afternoon in Glasgow**?
*Assuming he would climb onto his roof and further assuming some hill wasn't in the way.
**Many if not most Sunday afternoons in Glasgow are rainy.
You mean tied to the stake and burnt. Greasy flour stuck to overcooked fish is dreadful, no matter how fresh the fish was or how long the queue of people with no taste buds. It's not quite as bad as peas, but it certainly isn't MUSHROOMS.
Ah, I see.
Long story short: the main plot of Lost is about a plane going from Australia to LAX that crashes in the Pacific on a mysterious island. A LOT of weird shit then happens to the survivors. As mentioned, "the numbers" feature prominently.
____
P.S. Had to post comment again. Get rid of Euphemism Week banned words already!!!!
blf:
I dunno, could be worse. It could be wrapped in scrapple and fried.
Not that I'm putting down scrapple (I love the stuff), but wrapped around fish would be bad. Very bad.
There used to be a place up the north shore of Boston that had excellent fried fish -- so fresh out of the fryer that you had to wait for it to cool a bit. I think its under a Walmart parking lot now.
Carlie:
<Mr.Rogers>Can you say "primary"? I knew y'could!</Mr.Rogers>
Don't just be pissed; get involved. It's easier than most people think to be active in party politics: Look up the chair of the most local unit of the party (here in CT it's at the town level), and ask how you can help. It's the first step to getting your voice truly heard. It's not hard to get to a position where you know your local, state, and federal representatives on a first-name basis... and it's not about giving money at all; it's about giving attention and time.
Carlie, you probably already knew all this, so forgive me for using your post to say it. But I was in my 40s before I realized I really could do more than just vote and yell at the TV.
Speaking of TV, the debate is live now on C-SPAN, and you can also get live updates and video here.
I know where Hull is. I've even been there. My mother's family come from Beverley which is a mere 10 km (6.21371192 miles) from the outskirts of Hull.
Teabaggers makes racist and anti-gay slurs.
Yes, LAX is a miserable pesthole, but there is at least one exemplary human there. Last summer the driver of one of the inter-terminal shuttles found out that I was about to miss a connecting flight. He drove me right to the gate, took me up the stairs to the access door next to the jetway, and then used his security card to get me inside just as they were closing out my flight. I considered writing a letter of appreciation to his employer, until it occurred to me that what he did was likely to get him fired.
#88 'Tis Himself, OM
Clee Hill is in the way. Mind you, there was a purpose in Offa building his dyke ...
#89 blf
That's rather the point. I can range from un-utterably dreadful to sublime. Tragically, you are more likely to find the latter than the former. Great British food is available if you know where to look.
#91 iambilly
I rest my case!
I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
Gyeong Hwa:
Yah, and I saw a story this morning (on HuffPo¹) about a GOP Rep who gave a statement saying it was the Dems' fault... that the rhetoric was an expression of (apparently justifiable, in this bozo's estimation) rage at the majority due to their "totalitarian tactics." <shudder>
We're going to win this vote, and health care reform will become law. And I actually believe it will be a decent foundation for future reforms. But I worry a whole lot about the debris and structural damage this hurricane of manufactured rage will leave behind. It's going to take a lot of good people not giving up for us to heal.
¹ Can't find it now to link to; I guess the pace of today's news has pushed it off the front page.
Bill - it's a good message to get out. I didn't start being active at all in politics until the last presidential primaries, and I'm still not as involved as I should be. It doesn't show through in my persona here, but my meatspace personality is quite reticent to speak out on things and is the type to call my rep's office and then hang up in a bundle of nerves when they answer. Having sent a bunch of emails over the last few weeks was a pretty big step for me. I should start finding actual people to bother.
I love NHK's news priority: High school students play baseball.
Bach hat ein toll Museum.
sperm
The very best fish and chips I ever had was at a restaurant/pub in, of all places, Venice California.
The fish was battered and so hot that when, brought to the table, you had to break it open and wait a good five minutes for it to cool enough to be able to eat it. And the fish inside was light and perfectly steamed, not the least bit oily.
Deep frying, when done correctly, is the closest thing to magic in our modern world. *drool*
I think one of the tricks to deep frying is to use something moist enought that the water is turning to steam and escaping which keeps the oil from coming in. Makes sense to me, anyway.
Abebooks.com is a good source for used books at a really low price. I recently got this book on Abe for $4, including shipping. They are usually older editions, though.
Not a bad soup in the end. Should used a bit less apple. And possible only one chili ... at least I still had some crème fraiche left over to take the edge off it.
Care to be more specific?
I stomped those grounds for many years.
Just as a comment, I've never had a deep fried Mars bar. I'll probably never have one considering the fuss my cardiologist and my dentist would make if they heard I'd eaten one.
Back to my friend's "yeasty blood" diagnosis by a homeopath:
I'd like to blog a little bit about the "yeasty blood" diagnosis, but don't have the background to really discuss the element of the diagnosis and treatment that made me most suspicious about it: the very idea of having yeast in the blood and its somehow being improved by not eating foods made with yeast.
Has anyone ever heard of a blood infection of any kind caused by yeast?
Can any kind of yeast get in the bloodstream? And, if so, how?
And, if so, would avoiding food and beverages made with yeast make any difference in the amount of "yeast" in one's blood?
It is even possible for the kind of yeast used in baking or brewing to cause an infection of some kind?
I don't have a background that would allow me to begin to research or answer these questions, but I'd like to be able to say something sensible in any blog post about "yeasty blood" I might write.
Neither have I. But now, someday I will. And it'll be all your fault.
My job here is complete.
/ Sunday language rumination/
I love the term ‘ass-clam’ and have enjoyed using it when the opportunity arose. However, after visiting the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium in California I realized that applying the term to Kw*k, M00ney and the like was simply unfair to clams. Who’d have ever guessed that clams can dig through solid rock or concrete, like these .
However, I did have a flash of inspiration: Kw*k & his ilk are not assclams but ass remoras, or, as I would propose they be named, Remora gluteus. It’s a perfect description: they attach themselves to others, do little harm to the one they are attached to but do right well for themselves. In fact, some species even feed on the feces of the host. Can’t you just visualize Kw*k going through life as a remora, sucked up to his ‘mentor’ McC, feeding on droppings (literally) and scraps, then detaching from McC and sucking onto someone at the world-famous university he attended?
Feel free to use the term without attribution.
/end rumination, return to espresso/
And my representative in Congress, allegedly a member of the Democratic party, is voting ‘No’ today. Coincidentally, 13.5% of her campaign contributions to date, $394,574 have come from the health care industry. What a coincidence. . .
You can check out your representative's payoff from that industry here :
Representative Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin, Dem SD, I name thee Ass-Remora of the Day.
Althought it would serve as evidence that the Flaying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) exists.
Sven, I tried looking it up before I posted, but I couldn't find it. A couple years back I was working at Digital Domain on Main and Rose. We walked to this place for lunch a few times.
It's several blocks north of Rose on Main st. and had a very nice (though small) outdoor patio. Does that ring any bells?
Wait! I found it!
http://www.libraryalehouse.com/
What's so great about a republican health plan?
Speaking of yeast again.
For those who are interested in my pet yeast, or rather the saga of my bread making adventure I have posted in way too much detail about it
Short story: It worked! I made bread and it tastes good :D:D:D:D
Don't get me wrong, windy, I hate an awful lot about the plan. But I'm positive that if they don't get the votes to pass it, the entire Congress will be crippled from this point on and will not be able to do anything else. If they can't even stick together enough to pass something halfway decent, then it will be obvious that they have no power to do anything. There won't be another version of the healthcare bill. There won't be another version of anything. It will be a total sham of a legislative body.
Uh... close tags fail.
here...
Cheers and lifts libation is salute!!!
Quackalicious needs 3 years of undergraduate chem courses IV STAT.
One of my professors worked on Taxol. Took 'em a while to figure out how to make it soluble. You could drink a million yew tree shakes, and the (nominal amount of) paclitaxel in them wouldn't be absorbed by your body; without some tweaking, it's insoluble.
Talking about Clee Hill (well, I was ... )
It is a most interesting place. It is featured in the medieval Mappa Mundi*: indeed, it is the only high land shown in the British Isles. Near the top of the hill is a pub called "The KREMLIN Inn" with the "R" written backwards to make it look like Cyrillic lettering. It is believed that it is nothing higher going due East until the Ural Mountains. It is NOT true that the Kremlin is visible from the pub although there have been many strange sitings after throwing-out time on a Saturday night! From my limited experience neither the beer nor the food is particularly good. The view, however is magnificent, being the highest pub in Shropshire.
The Kremlin Inn did have one strange feature. During the Cold War period it had a temperamental juke box which, every now and then, stopped playing the Top 10 Hits and connected the listeners to Radio Moscow instead! Reds under the Bed - but better than a Giant under the Hill.
You didn't know Giants lived under hills? All giants need a hill to live under in the cold winter and lay upon on warm summer nights. And if they haven't got a hill, they come equipped with a giant spade so they can make their own.
In the bad old days (yes I know some people call them the good old days, but they've obviously forgotten about the giants and the trouble they caused). Well, in the bad old days there were so many giants that there was hardly room left for all us little folk. And what room they did allow us was mighty uncomfortable - a life making sure you weren't in giants' footsteps was no fun at all, still less waiting to become part of a giant's lunchbox.
But luckily enough giants are a quarrelsome bunch who seem to spend most of their time arguing and fighting amongst themselves. The giant of Titterstone Clee was a big, boastful fellow with a red hot temper and a mean, nasty streak. He'd sit in his chair (it's still there to this day up on top of the hill) he'd shout and crow at the giants over on Brown Clee and Abdon Burf nearby:
"Not big enough for a hill of your own, you have to share one, what sort of giants are you, eh!"
Now sticks and stones may break your bones and names can never hurt you, but they can get you mighty mad. And enough of the wrong sort of words can lead to slings and stones in next to no time, and that's just what they did. You don't have to be a student of history to know that one stone thrown leads to another flying back and before long you've got a full scale war.
Well, a war nowadays can be a dangerous and noisy affair, but we're only small fry, can you imagine a battle of giants? The Clee Hills turned from the best to the worst place in all the world. Stones led to rocks and rocks to boulders; and boulders to mighty weapons.
Now, I can tell that you think this story is just hokum and never happened at all! That's the trouble with being skeptics. You can come over here and you can prove it for yourself. Up at the top of Titterstone Clee there's that chair I told you about before and scattered around are boulders galore - the giants' missiles for all to see. And up on Abdon Burf you'll find a mighty 8-foot long slab. It's called 'the Giant's Shaft' and it's all that remains of a massive arrow shot from the Titterstone giant's bow. If you don't believe me now, you'll never believe your own eyes.
That battle went on all summer long and the sky was black above the hills. In the end the giants fought themselves to a standstill and dropped in a heap, unable to move a muscle. And that's when the good people of the Clee Hills saw their chance. They upped with their spades and picks and buried those giants right there where they lay.
The victors climbed into the Giant's Chair to celebrate their conquest. And so loud were their cheers and so noisy the din of pick hitting spade that they frightened all the giants' children away. And nevermore has a giant been seen on the Clees to this day. I have never seen one so that proves it's true!
Now the Clee's were back as the best place to live the people didn't want to leave anything to chance. So every last Sunday in August, to commemorate the battles, they held a Wake on the hill. They'd sit in the Chair and intone magic words to keep the giants away.
Are we safe today, with no Titterstone Wake and those magic words lost? I think not. So next time you come to Titterstone Clee, sit in the Giant's Chair and say a little prayer that we might sleep easy in our beds.
(Or not, as the case might be.)
* The Mappa Mundi is unique in Britain's heritage - an outstanding treasure of the medieval age which reveals how 13th century scholars interpreted the world in spiritual and geographical terms. It probably dates from around 1290. There are many giants and other monsters shown on the map. In modern terms it would be considered "unreliable".
http://www.herefordwebpages.co.uk/mapmundi.shtml
Those formulation chemists earned their money. Unlike Quack's fraudulent homeophathic friends...
There is a reason Aussies tend to take multi-month vacations every few years... ;)
Usagichan (#453 [last thread])
I was wondering about this, actually, since it's always on display at my local Kinokuniya. How much knowledge of Buddhism and Christianity would you say it takes to really get into this title?
(#460)
To add to that, for two kanji compounds, there is also the juubako-yomi （重箱読み） [first kanji is the Chinese reading, second the Japanese] and the yutou-yomi （湯桶読み） [first kanji is the Japanese reading, second the Chinese].
(#467)
I pick up a lot just from reading. It helps, I think, that I started teaching myself to read kanji by writing them out, so I have a good understanding of their structure and can pick out any phonetic elements very quickly. I have a fairly terrible memory for the meaning of words, though.
(#523)
Get yourself an electronic dictionary with handwriting input. You should be able to find an older model for cheap in the back alleys of Akihabara. I'm partial to the Zaurus, but they're more of a PDA and they're not inexpensive. My current one even has a kanji dictionary with a multi-radical lookup option for extra-obscure characters.
Sili, here's one:
Roasted Pumpkin Tagliatelle w/ Stilton Sauce
1 pumpkin or butternut squash, peeled, de-seeded and cut into 1 inch chunks
2 sprigs fresh thyme
1 tbsp brown sugar
2 tbsp olive oil
1/2 pint double cream
8 oz blue Stilton cheese
grated rind and juice of 1 lemon
salt and black pepper
Method
1. Preheat the oven to 400F
2. Place the pumpkin and thyme on a roasting tray and sprinkle with the brown sugar and olive oil. Roast for 30 minutes turning frequently.
3. Ten minutes before the pumpkin is cooked, cook the tagliatelle in a pan of boiling water as directed on the packet.
4. Pour the cream into a saucepan. Add the grated lemon rind and season with salt and pepper. Bring to the boil over a low heat and simmer gently for 5-6 minutes. Remove from the heat and stir in the Stilton and lemon juice. The Stilton will begin to melt.
5. To serve, drain the pasta, return to the pan it was cooked in and toss with the roasted pumpkin. Pour over the Stilton sauce, toss but only very gently and serve.
My dog...not the ballerina-clown building???
I used to drink an occasional pint at the Library Alehouse up there, but for fish and chips I'd guess O'Brien's?
I'm amused that this begins with the introduction to the Messiah. I wonder if these students are trying to send a not-so-subtle message... ?
Menopause is not a disease, you criminal dipshit of an assclam. It's a natural process. Sweet Zombie Jesus, get over yourself - you're incapable of "schooling" us and you're certainly incapable of helping people in any way, shape or form.
Just found out on Friendly Atheist that James Randi has come out as gay. I'm glad that he's comfortable with himself, but sad that it took so long for him to be able to.
But Caine, it only happens to women, which makes it abnormal in the first place, and it keeps them from having more magic sperm babeyz, which means it's obviously a defective bad diseas-y thing.
Carlie, oh yes, of course! What was I thinking? *eyeroll*
So they should pass something even if it's bad policy? What if it just gives them a "mission accomplished" so they have even less incentive to try anything meaningful later?
It's ok, Caine, the girl-hormones keep your brain from working properly.
where do you get the silly idea that they will try again later? or that what comes next will be better? after all, the last Democratic plan was better than this one, and I'm not as optimistic as David that the republican party is on its dying breath here.
the U.S. is thoroughly dysfunctional; this really is the best that can be expected from it at the moment.
Carlie:
That was *not* nice! I don't like tea up my nose!
Kel, strictly speaking it is not stout, but "Extra Stout".
And it is my favourite tipple, but watch out, it will knock your socks off!
(Michael in Adelaide where it is made.)
Thank you, Alan B, for telling us the story of the war of the giants. I'll forgive you now for being a Sassenach who doesn't know how to deep fry a Mars bar.
I agree, although many proponents of the bill argue it can be "fixed later". But I interpreted Carlie as saying that a win on health care will enable the congress to make meaningful reforms in other fields, I don't see much evidence of that happening either.
you've got it backwards. it's not that passing this will make other things easier; it's that not passing it will make other things impossible.
That's just a different way of stating the same thing I said.
you can't tell the difference between making things better and not making things worse?
Oh I see Quack is here. Menopause as a disease. Yes. I see. Is menstruation a disease as well? I mean, it has symptoms. It has a time of onset. It certainly shouldn't be happening in a five year old or a 75 year old although I suspect there could be cases where it does.
You know that has me thinking though. We really do treat aging as if it is a disease. It's as if once we pass the age of 25 we should do everything in our power to keep the process that got us there from continuing. Why... as I am so shall ye be?
A majority of individuals who are empowered in such a way that their opinions count more than anyone else's and are presumed to be the general opinion of all agree enough that they like it enough to support an industry that promotes it. The rest of us live with its consequences.
Quack, you seem to be on the awful side of everything.
Anyone interested in watching the crazies run wild can check out the comments at Fox News. Maybe this is par for the course over there, I don't know, but there are a lot of folks claiming this will be the end of America, calling for armed rebellion (yes, real live treason!), and so on. I find it morbidly fascinating.
Jadehawk, I don't know why you're trying to nitpick the hell out of my comments. It seems we mostly agree. I was asking if I interpreted Carlie right.
"If they can't even stick together enough to pass something halfway decent, then it will be obvious that they have no power to do anything. There won't be another version of the healthcare bill. There won't be another version of anything. It will be a total sham of a legislative body."
This seems to be saying that it's important to pass healthcare reform, not so much on the merits of the bill, but for congress to be able to do anything later. But if these "other things" are not going to lead to meaningful reform in any field (as evidence would seem to indicate), why is it so important that the congress is not exposed as a sham?
what purpose would it serve? this isn't like in real democracies where ineffective government can be replaced with something better once it's declared ineffective; this is what america is stuck with until the next elections, and then the choice will be between this and worse; as always.
as for why the bill should pass, it's a combination of things; the bill is literally the best thing American can possibly expect right now; and it's a step forward for a change, even if a really fucking tiny one.
and it's one of the biggest challenges the current administration is facing; there's other things that are likely to be addressed afterwards, which will be also tough to get thru and of low quality. but the alternative is nothing at all for the next 2 years, and then Sarah Palin as president, which is much much worse.
though, in my more morbid moments, i want this collapse to just be done and over with right now, rather than dragging on forever as it is doing. I want the teabaggers to take over the whole government, civil war to break out, and the U.S.A finally to collapse under the weight of its own stupidity, just so we can get to the part where we can rebuild it.
And then I remember that I actually live here.
Ol'Greg:
Heh. Well, menarche doesn't conform to any schedule. Mine started just after my 9th birthday. I was not impressed. On the upside, I started menopause at 36, sailed right through it, no problems whatsoever.
If you've really got yeast in your blood, you're dead and decaying as far as I can see. IANAMD...
Too much like earthworms? I could imagine that. (I don't react that way myself; mice are nice, and rats aren't any worse.)
I think you mean hearty.
Google for Phoberomys if you dare. It even lived in a swamp.
~:-|
That tooth"paste", frankly, I want to see. :-)
Not rats. They're South American rodents, so more closely related to guinea pigs, chinchillas, and maras (look them up) than to rats; the closest relatives of the SA rodents as a group are the Old World porcupines. (The New World ones are SA rodents.)
I think it was 19 % believing they're in the top 1 %.
Heh. This reminds me of the discussions in linguistics whether certain chain shifts in sound systems were pull shifts or push shifts. For the High German consonant shift, we know it was a pull shift because it's documented in early medieval texts; for the Germanic consonant shift, it's a celebrity deathmatch (...well, I probably exaggerate how heated the controversy is, but there is one).
I haven't read most of Casaubon's Book, because (apart from time issues!) I find it... a bit weird. However, in general, I get the impression the danger of economic collapse is (at least till Peak Oil) a lot greater in the USA and elsewhere. The current financial crisis is a noticeable crisis in the USA, and has bankrupted the Republic of Iceland, but it didn't even put a dent in the price of housing in or around Paris till right about now (and that's still a small decrease), because here it's not a bubble – the demand is real, and (unfortunately) so is the limited supply. If the US$ turns into wastepaper, things like oil will simply suddenly be priced in €, and most of the world will pretty much carry on as if nothing had happened...
Also, the USA has a lot more armed crazies than most other places.
Now, Peak Oil is another matter, and it may well strike soon. But some say it's going to be such a slow process that it has in fact already begun.
...Maybe it's just me, though. I've found I'm oddly calm in general about threatening catastrophes that I can't do anything about.
Absolutely.
LOL! That's pretty much the only scenario I can't imagine to be realistic. :-)
What the fuck makes you think Josh, OSG, only cares about himself?!? Do you think he's a complete asshole?
Now please don't tell me you were just extrapolating from yourself...
BTW, you might be interested to learn that Caine, la Fleur du Mal, has admitted to femininity in this very Thread. Even posted a link to a photo that really leaves no doubt. :-)
Isn't everyone who knows about taxol? :-)
(BTW, the yews are called Taxus in Scientific, so every armchair botanist who has encountered the word "taxol" knows where it comes from. :-) )
<headdesk>
The effect of CO2 on temperature isn't linear. The temperature rises by 2 to 3 °C per doubling of CO2 concentration (...yeah, "partial pressure" I should say) for obvious reasons like molecules lying behind each other.
ROTFL!
We won't let you get away with not explicitly mentioning that a museum is an "it". :^)
<slightly open, broad grin>
The circumflex is etymological; it's what's left of the s in fresh.
Heh. No. DD is kitty corner to that....interesting architectural specimen. It's behind/around the Rose cafe. But parking was in the ballerina clown.
And seeing that place before my morning coffee was....hallucinatory.
Haven't been to O'Brien's, but if I go back, I'll check it out.
David:
I did. :D I finally killfiled Quackass, I take it I turned male in his latest screed? I'm going to have to start keeping track of all the times I've been presumed to be male.
Many economists believe peak oil started around 1995.
blf #89
Just for you
Re the health care colloquy between Carlie, windy, and Jadehawk (@various), two points:
1. At this point, failure to pass this bill would not merely be an instance of doing nothing; it would amount to, for all practical purposes, an existence proof of the impossibility of doing anything... ever.
2. While I would never urge Congress to pass bad law merely for the sake of doing something, "bad" is always a relative term: There is no sense in which this legislation is bad compared to the status quo. Ideally, I would want us to move entirely away from a for-profit, fee-for-service model to publicly funded single-payer, and this is obviously not that. But... compared to the status quo, this legislation will save lives (including potentially that of my own daughter), reduce the deficit, and perhaps most fundamentally importantly, drastically improve the social equity of access to health care services. This is not bad law, howevermuch it is undeniably weaker than the ideal reforms would be.
Failure to pass this bill, with the concomitant abandonment of any plausible hope of further attempts at reform in our lifetimes, would be a disaster of epic proportions. Jadehawk talked about the temptation I'm sure we all feel from time to time to just let it all fall down, and hope something better will rise from the rubble, but then noted...
It's all well and good to dream of a "fruitful" collapse from which we could rebuild a more humane nation... until you think about how many good, innocent people would end up buried in the rubble.
definitely, for many reasons. but european agriculture is also dependent on oil (Green Revolution and all that); we have an increasingly less stable climate which is bad for agriculture which needs stable and predictable patterns; and since the US is a hub of global commerce, it's not going to fall quietly but drag the rest of the world with it (again).
I'd prefer to face that drama in some civilized country, but that's not precisely an option right now
Am I the only one who got the rodents of unusual size reference, or is everyone being facetious?
Carlie:
No, somebody (who, exactly, slips my mind) posted a link to an imdb quotes page. But it was amusing to watch people take the line at face value, wasn't it?
:-)
My uncle started baking his own bread very soon after going to the USA.
Radio Moscow has a beautiful theme tune. :-)
<drool>
We have a winner.
Note that this holds worldwide. It was, for instance, a major point that tens of millions of people overlooked when they voted against the proposed EU constitution because it wasn't good enough (as indeed it wasn't).
(Perhaps interestingly, the Federal Speaker* of Austria's Greens was the one who pointed this out on TV.)
* That's the closest term to "boss" they allow :-þ
Wow. windy is wrong on something ;-þ
The point being, I think, that the USA lacks the separation between president and government and has a separation between parliament (Congress) and government (administration) instead: even if the government is totally paralyzed because the parliament doesn't let it do anything, it can carry on for FOUR! MORE! YEARS! as if nothing had happened; and nothing more will happen for the rest of the four years. (Two years, in the unlikely event that the voters' sympathies are with the administration rather than with Congress.)
Where I come from, as soon as the government loses its majority in the parliament, the government is fired. This automatically triggers new elections for parliament, leading (in turn) to a new government being formed. The two-/four-/whatever-year cycles are not sacred; they can be cut short, and sometimes they must be, lest nothing get done anymore.
Yes, coalition governments (which we get a lot) can sometimes look similar, like when the coalition partners are very different ideologically and can hardly agree on anything. But what they agree on still gets done.
This.
My sister didn't have hers that early, but, as I've already mentioned, she literally cried the entire day through without interruption, breaking her previous record of 3 hours.
Had drinks, dinner, drinks with Knockgroats and Ring Tailed Lemurian tonight, now on train back to Birmingham. I want to put on the record that they were both alive when I left. Really. I have witnesses. Several witnesses.
Walton, missed you and wished you could have come. At least we were free to plot the final overthrow of the monarchy.
Night all
I'm not worried about socioeconomic collapse in the UK, but we have shifted a lot of our grocery buying to a local farm, and this year's tomatoes and beans are germinating in the conservatory ready to be potted and planted out in our tiny back garden. There doesn't seem to be any downside to growing your own. Nasturtiums and beans are really pretty and give you a tangled bank of greenery which you can reach into and obtain lunch. IOW, let's not assume that getting into cultivation == crazy survivalism.
I'm also very interested in the process by which the USA might, one day, get a health care system.
Arrgh! Pittsburgh! Once again, the Big East conference stabs the still-warm corpse of my bracket!
Speaking of menarche and menopause, I encountered my first real uterus last week (that I was looking at as opposed to experiencing my own). I couldn't get over how tiny the damned thing was - for some reason I always pictured it as about the size of a fist, not less than half of that. Sure there's yadda yadda baby fitting in there yadda yadda, but what I kept thinking was "how the hell can such a tiny thing cause SO MUCH PAIN?" Freaky.
If (((Girl))) ever finds out I put this on line, she'll most likely disembowel me with a 13a jazz mouthpiece, but I'm not known for my common sense. (((Girl))) hit menarche at around 13, but the monthly mood swings began when she was six. That was a shock. Every three weeks, she became a little witch. The mood swings actually lessened when she actually started. So, by my math, she's now been hormonally insane for 132 weeks of her life.
Kwok you. How is "Passing HCR will enable congress to do X" so different from "Passing HCR will make it possible for congress to do X"?
At each of the several mentions. :-)
Wow. Details, please!
:-o I don't feel that tired yet! Nooooo...
(But I'll go to bed soon anyway, for a change.)
Yes, and this is majorly scary (on the few occasions that I actually think about it). There's natural selection for us finding a replacement before we run out of affordable oil.
It's not going to hit right now (there's still some accessible oil left), so... once you've finished studying, can't you just take your boyfriend and leave? I get the impression your artist job doesn't really require you to be anywhere particular in meatspace?
I mean, I expect this to be about as simplistic as it sounds, but did I at least get the general principle right?
There was an episode of The Simpsons where they showed campaigns by both parties; the Republican banners were: 'We're Just Plain Evil' and 'We Want What's Worst for Everyone' while the Democratic Party's were 'We Can't Govern' and 'We Hate Life and Ourselves'.
Scary.
David:
Wow. That's um, impressive. It never occurred to me to cry; I was annoyed that I had to go and explain the situation to a nun (naturally, I was in school) and note I did not have the stuff to deal with it. I did get to go home and take care of business, but the nun only gave me an hour. I thought I should have been given the day.
If passed, that MAY give them enough authority to pass other legislation. Not guaranteed, but possible.
If not, they definitely WON'T be able to because they will have shown their incompetence and will get no support for anything they might try, and in fact will be actively fought against even harder than now.
To take a bad joke as an example, let's say I break my arm and get it operated on. I ask my doctor "Will I be able to play the violin?" She says yes. I really can't, because I've never taken a lesson, but I theoretically could in the future.
However, if during the surgery my arm gets amputated, then no, I definitely can't.
Well as far as menstruation I think I was right on the target at 13 or something. Actually I remember that pretty much every girl my age had already started and I was a little concerned. Being young and a bit naive I worried that my lack of interest in boys coupled with lack of menstrual blood might mean I was different in yet one more way :(
Of course I had a 13 year old Texan's limited understanding of that.
As it turned out it showed up for about 6 months but then went away for a long time due to low body weight.
Actually I don't mind them. I'm lucky in that they aren't horribly painful, heavy, or coupled with periods of depression. I don't really get the dire way some people view normal menstrual periods.
I'm among those who believe that passage of the health care reform bill is a step forward, though a small step. However, I'll be interested to see how passage affects the dynamics in DC. Up 'til now we've had two Parties of No in Washington: the R's opposed everything and the D's were unable to pass anything. Now that it appears that HCR will indeed pass I'm interested in seeing how the R's will react to their loss. The blame game has already begun. The R's have bet everything on obstructionism and lost, and they followed the nutcase fringe of the party off the cliff. As noted above, the bill that passed was, in the greater scheme of things, a thoroughly Republican bill, at least in the historical sense of what the Republicans stood for when they stood for anything, rather than just against everything. If we are lucky the backlash against the extremism will split off some of the few, rational R's left, and maybe a little more progress can be achieved.
For the record, I'm not optimistic enough to think that reform of the financial system is in the realm of possibility, at least right now.
theoretically i can work from anywhere; practically, the USA levies a 30% tax on foreign business on its soil, so all money I make from American customers will shrink by 1/3. Add to this conversion from $ (especially if it crashes), and i won't actually be making any money anymore.
Add to this the fact that over here, both he and I are employable, while anywhere else neither of us have employable skills, and he wouldn't even be allowed to work for an extended period of time.
"Make easier" isn't the same as "make possible" = "enable", even though the latter includes the former.
Apart from time & effort, indeed not.
Wow. I'd really like to know how that worked (hormonally).
This subthread urgently needs a few TV tropes.
WOW!
Wow again!
I was in a darkroom in a community college. I was working on something in there when I thought... eh... that's interesting.
I was wearing boxer shorts, a giant black t-shirt, and combat boots. HELLO 90's! I remember this only because a kid had snapped a pic of me in the hall and later developed it. It was a pretty good picture, but when I saw it I was like... "Hey that's a picture of me the day I started my period!"
I think I went to the toilet and stuck some toilet paper in my undies so I could get back to work.
Ah... memories.
I fucking hated them. Being incapacitated due to pain, bloatiness, crappy mood and/or being drugged out of my mind for 1/4th of every month fucking sucked.
the last three years have been pure, menstruation-free bliss, and if the zombie apocalypse ever comes, I'm kidnapping an OB/Gyn (or at least a registered nurse) and locking them in my basement with a lifetime supply of Mirena coils :-p
Indeed, and I didn't say anything about making anything easier. My @138 referred to the latter part of Jadehawk's statement.
Ol'Greg:
I used to be that way. My periods were always on the light side, never longer than 4 days. They got even lighter for the years I was on swim team and dive team.
It wasn't until I was in my early 30s that I truly understood what some women go through. I developed an ovarian cyst, the overwhelming pain of which is hard to describe. If I tried to sit, it felt like I was being impaled on a red hot poker. Standing and walking weren't any better. Along with the pain, I got a period which was heavy and lasted 3 effing months. It was unbelievable. I'm quite happy all that is long behind me.
I'm staying at your house.
*Mirena fist-bump*
Oh believe me. I understand it is not so easy for many women! Glad to hear you're not still having to deal with that, btw.
Idjit sighting: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/02/canada_is_sharing_in_christi…
What exactly do you mean by "reform of the financial system"?
LOL! It's interesting who gets blamed first: the craziest ones. Even the word stupid is uttered. Is there... like... hope? :^)
No, I really did expect my "argument" to be as simplistic as it sounded. I did get the general principle right, but I also did lack some necessary knowledge of unfortunate facts. (I suppose building up a customer base from scratch isn't easy...?)
Well, since we're sharing menarche stories...
February 6, 1985. I was 11. I remember the day because the news was making a big deal about it being President Reagan's birthday. My mother decided that, in celebration, we would go out for dinner (unprecedented on a week night, since we were fairly poor). I remember being mortified to realize that my mother must have told my father what we were celebrating.
Jessa:
???? Your family went out for a fancy dinner it couldn't really afford to celebrate the birthday of a sitting right-wing president? I mean, not some historical icon, but the guy sitting in the Oval on that day? The mind just utterly, effin' boggles. I've known a lot of Reagan-worshippers in my time, but that takes the cake!
Jessa:
Hmmm... on re-reading #177, I see I may have misread. Did you mean that the celebration was for your "special day" all along, and the Reagan thing was just a coincidence? If so, I retract my incrdulity!
I don't have a customer base; the companies which host my images have a customer base. this allows me to avoid dealing with customers, which is good for my mental health :-p
"how the hell can such a tiny thing cause SO MUCH PAIN?"
you've obviously never had gallstones.
:P
Okay, maybe I was not as clear as I could have been. Happens a lot. I remember the day I got my period because the news was going on about it being the president's birthday. It's one of those background tidbits that sticks with you when something momentous happens in your life. We were having dinner to celebrate me getting my period. We weren't celebrating Reagan (who my parents both hated), we were celebrating me "becoming a woman", as my mother would say.
<google>
Ah. Learned something.
I suppose too little copper is given off for this? Must have been tested, right?
I'll check that out tomorrow.
LMAO! I think this is what she meant to say. But your response was priceless :D
Heard on the floor of the House: "Being a woman is a preexisting condition!"
David M.
I'm talking about regulatory and legislative changes in the US which would significantly reduce the chances of another meltdown in the world's financial markets. Reform would include an independent agency responsible for protecting consumers and increased regulation of banking and financial activities. Paul Krugman had an excellent column about it here and Frank Rich wrote about reform today.
Eh, that makes everything easier.
Good night at last. :-)
wrong coil. the mirena coil is plastic and gives off hormones, the paragard is the copper one, and that one actually makes periods worse :-/
Jessa (@182):
Yah, I sorta' figured that out after I posted my original reply.
David - the copper ones are a different brand; there was one that was taken off of the market in the 1970s (Dalkon) due to copper problems, but they appear to be solved. Mirena uses progestin.
Ichthyic-
Oh man, don't remind me. I had GB removal surgery at 17, after a year of gallstone episodes. That was the most debilitating, bone-deep pain I've ever experienced. My doctor commented that, in his opinion, "the only thing worse is cancer".
David:
Yes on both counts. I got an IUD waaay back in '75. Or maybe '76. It was a Copper 7.
Bill @ 189:
Yeah, I had already hit "Submit" when I saw your reply. You know those times when something you're saying makes total sense in your head, but is a touch (or more) confusing when it comes out your mouth (or fingers, in this case). Yeah, that was one of those times for me.
Good point. Or kidney stones, for that matter.
Apropos of randomness, here's some Tito Puente. I really like this one because not only is he kicking the ass out of it, but he's obviously loving every second of it.
Oh most people I know just love Mirena. But a friend of mine had a weird problem with it where it caused her to experience symptoms of pregnancy constantly, including positive urine tests (but negative blood tests) and that seemed so odd to me.
I use the patch although I've been told it can be dangerous by the doctor when I ask for it :/
It's just that I hated Ocella, and anyway I can almost never manage to take a pill on a regimen. Hopefully my life won't ever depend on it!
Once a week I can handle.
BTW, for those of you watching C-SPAN, Joe Courtney, who spoke ~20 minutes ago, is my congressman, and I'm proud to say that he speaks for me.
Not for nothin', but do any of you have a good recipe for Tortilla Soup? Gluten-free if possible? Thanks in advance...
Ａ．Ｎｏｙｄ ＠ 123 re Saint Young Men,
Not much at all - I would say it is more important to have a grasp of Tokyo pop culture rather than either religion (although some knowledge of Buddhism will help get some of the jokes).
Bill - I used to have a good recipe, but lost it a few years ago. :(
To my recollection it had corn, petite diced tomatoes, some diced potatoes, a can of green chiles, a little diced red pepper, some chicken broth, and a dollop of sour cream, with cilantro, scallions, and baked tortilla strips on top. I'm probably leaving out whatever made it actually taste good, and that's probably just the generic recipe for every slightly tex-mex flavored soup ever.
Bracketology: Unlike the Big East, the Ivy League did me proud @Cornell!
Recipeology: So now both Carlie and I need help w/Tortilla Soup recipes. The best I ever had was at Alamo Cafe in San Antonio; anyone know if they've published a cookbook?
Hey Bill, do you prefer tortilla soup that is red or pale? My mom makes a pretty good one but hers is the light kind.
Ol' Greg:
Most of the versions I've had were pale... but I'll look at any recipe anyone thinks tastes good. This does seem to be one of those dishes that varies a lot from cook to cook.
I'm limited to accessing the site on my iPhone right now, so I can't do much editing. First thing I'll do when I get home is fix links to The Thread. Second thing I'll do is end the little experiment called Euphemism Week. You'll know I'm back when those little patches appear.
Unfortunately...6 hour layover in LAX, 5 hour flight to MSP, 4 hour shuttle ride to Morris. I've still got a long, long way to go on my epic journey home.
PZ - don't forget the sleep! Do that first. No, wait, have time with the Trophy Wife first, then sleep, then get around to blog cleanup.
Not that you need anyone to tell you that, of course, just trying to express that we won't mind if we're neglected for a couple of days. :)
OK Pharygulistas, time for some fun...
Remember I mentioned a conversation I was having a while on a "Lost" discussion forum with someone who claimed "science was a religion"? Well, he/she just left this pile-
"I don't know if we're talking about the difference between a world with religion and a world without religion anymore. Debating the accuracies of various statements within any one particular religion doesn't indicate why religion exists as a whole or what impact it has on the world. If we forget about the finer points of individual religions and forget about arguing with scientific 'facts', does religion still have a place of importance in the world? By dissecting what you perceive to be the failings of any individual aspect of a particular religion do you refute the validity of all religion? Do you even address it's function and purpose?
The question was posed, "what if religion were abolished in favor of science?"
Well, what if it was? How do you express the difference between right and wrong scientifically? Are these simple concepts? Are they facts? What equations do you teach to establish one's ability to make decisions and interact with the rest of humanity?
How do people as a whole come to an agreement about what good and bad, right and wrong are? Can they? By what process or mechanism? If these things can be defined then how do you maintain, or sustain, or modify, that agreement? How do you pass it on to future generations? How do you even discuss these principles without allegory and parable and in what forum? Through what institution?
How do you do all of this through the simple application of science?"
What say you?
PZ:
Urgh. Just get home safe, spend time with the Trophy Wife and rest up.
Sili @ 51:
1. Discard turnip.
2. Eat bread.
At least PZ is back in the USA. Not going to show up on a Lost episode. Get your rest and properly greet the TW. Then worry about us.
The Trophy Wife™ will be at work when I get home, so no, there will be no distractions and I'll just be tired and lonely.
FFS, I smell a serious defender of religion in all that. These are such basic questions, which have been addressed numerous times by numerous people. I will admit to being a bit gobsmacked by the "How do you pass it on to future generations?"
Is this person actually questioning how values could possibly be 'passed on' without a religious institution? Oy. I'd point out that a whole bunch of people who were provided with religious values/morals have hardly lived a life embracing those values, although they do seem to embrace religion when imprisoned. ;)
hmpf, to insult German and its gendered grammar, I will write the sentance in Dutch.
Eyjafjallajökull er í eldi.
PZ:
Oh no. Aaaaw, poor PZ. Well, pay attention to yourself first, we'll be fine for a day or three.
Well, from memory here... which means no real measurements! I'm terrible at this but if you want an authentic family recipe this is one. Some things are probably common sense but you never know...
You can maybe use it as ingredient guidelines if some one else comes up with exact measures :P
You make some broth of your choice by boiling a chicken and some onion in a few cups of water. Get the meat off the chicken. You can skip this if you use prepared broth but still include some dark meat or bone in the soup unless you just really hate it.
Alternatively you can make a veggie broth too (onion, lots of onion if you do this) My mom likes to make this because it makes a more complex (but less authentic) soup.
Strain any bone out of the broth and set aside to get the veggies ready.
Back in the pot you just emptied of bones you throw in some oil and chopped onion. Prickly pear (canned is ok), some potato, hatch or other big green chilies like poblano. Fresh chillies is ideal but canned is also ok. You can add hotter peppers if you like.
You can also add a bit of espazote (taste it before you add it because some people HATE it. It is nasty if you add too much so don't add more than a half teaspoon to a whole pot of soup. A little bit is pleasant (I'm fond of it), but a lot is like adding a lot of bay leaf. It will ruin the flavor.
Saute any other spices you like in with the vegetables... a little cumin and garlic is a good idea. Some people don't like much cumin. I like lots so I'd put in a big heaping tablespoon at least :P A clove of garlic at least or a tablespoon if you use that bottled crushed kind.
We don't put tomato in usually, but lots of people like to chop up a tomato. In general if I were putting a tomato in I'd put it in with the meat or even with the avacado and cilantro which is later. Heavy things that need frying go in first with the spices. Then meats, then broth, some boiling and then the delicate things or things you want to have really distinct taste.
So lets see. You've fried your veggies and spices a little (just a little until they're coated with oil and smell good or until the potatoes have a little brown on them.)
Now you throw your meat pieces back in and pour all the broth back over it. Bring it to a boil and then turn it down a bit. Add water if it looks too thick. Boil it harder a bit if it is too thin to get rid of some water. Make sure to stir it a lot if you do this!
We let the pot guide us so lets see if you have a big metal pot it's probably three or four cups of broth and maybe another cup or two of water.
Depends on how much chicken you are making. Dilute with water until the meat to broth ratio seems appropriate.
Once it looks pretty nice and smells appealing, chop up some cilantro (my mom hates cilantro though so if you happen to hate it then leave it out by all means) personally I love the stuff and think the soup is ruined without it. I also like my onions in big pretty rings, but some people prefer them almost pulverized.
Avocado... slice this up at the last minute if you like it in there. Then pour the soup on top of it.
Nooowww for the tortilla strips.... you just know I'm going to tell you to slice up some corn tortillas and fry them in oil, don't you? I know this sounds gross but if you have stale ones they fry better.
It doesn't take very long and gives you something to do while the soup simmers in that middle phase that can go on forever (it needs a good hour I think of slow simmering before you add the cilantro).
HAhahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
Oh, thanks, Bill, that was a good laff.
Yeah, and fuckin' Pitt...I like my Final Four a lot, though.
RickR, I would say that all right and wrong, even that which is encoded in holy books, were attempts to make the tribe work properly, maintain order, and maintain tribal identity. These rules predate imaginary deities like Yahweh, invented 2,500 or so years ago. They developed from the evolution of hominids. Groups that cooperated did better than those that don't. Cooperation meant sharing, taking care of the sick, doing your part. Gods were the johnny-come-lately to the right/wrong business, but they did write the wisdom down. Without deities, society will decide right/wrong the same way they did before deities. Discuss things and reach an consensus, but with much better data than before.
Ol' Greg (@214):
Thanks. I've saved that, and will let you know how it comes out when I've had a chance to try it.
Sven (@215):
Yah, your prospects look good... unless my flyer on Syracuse comes through, in which case none o' y'all can beat me!
James Randi comes out.
Hmm. Perhaps, but the authority figures would have had a harder time justifying their ideals of right and wrong and maintaining group cohesion. The inventions of deities would have been advantageous to earlier societies. Inevitably though, it changes with some society growing more skeptical of the perceived authority and others changing the deities all together.
Look on the upside PZ, by the time you get home Health Care Reform will of passed.
First vote on #hcr passes 219-212; two more votes to follow.
Did pass, 219 - 212. Too bad Obama had to bargain with Stupak + Friends to get it through ;(
Randi, Part I
Okay Pharyngulites, fair warning: this is a long one. I’ll try to break it up so it’s not too tl;dr.
So, Carlie pointed out upstream that James “The Amazing” Randi has come out as gay, at the ripe old age of 81. Good for him, and hell, we should all be so lucky to live as long as he (and I hope he has many more). I’m not posting this at Randi’s own site, because everyone is being kind and giving him kudos, and I have no wish to seem rude to him or any of his well-wishers.
First, please, please understand I don’t think I can dictate for James Randi or anyone else what they ought to think or feel, and I do know I haven’t lived his life. What I’m about to write may strike some of you as provocative at first, but please bear me with me and hear me out even if I indavertently push your buttons. I’m troubled, and I’m trying to think through this. On a personal level, I’m happy for Randi that he finally felt free enough to come out. I’m quite sad that it took him until the twilight years of his life to feel comfortable enough to do so.
However, I’m left a little non-plussed by the hundreds of commenters at his site commending what they are calling his bravery. I know coming out (as gay, or atheist) is a very personal, individual decision. I get that. But the world Randi grew up in (he speaks of the culture of homophobia when he was a young man) has changed signficantly, and it didn’t suddenly become less controversial to be gay in the year 2010. It gets better every year. It’s better than it was in 2000. It’s better than it was in the late 80s (when I came out, at age 12). And it was easier for me to do so by a long shot than it was 20 years earlier when the people braver than I were doing things like the Stonewall Riots. I’m so curious why Randi didn’t sense - or didn’t feel comfortable enough to take advantage of - the much more open attitude about homosexuality that has been around for decades. Yes, I know it’s not uniform; it depends on your social circle and geography.
But that raises another puzzle: The friends and colleagues Randi has enjoyed are among the most reasonable, rational people in the world. It’s near-certain the homophobia quotient would be about as low in his professional (and I assume, friendship) circles as one could hope for. Randi was not young Constance McMillen, a lesbian who is out in extremely conservative Mississippi, and who demanded equality in a hostile environment. That’s bravery. And Constance McMillen, people like me in 1988, we had it easier, more or less, than the fags, dykes, queens and queers who paved the way for us in 1969. Those people were brave.
I’ll cut this one off and start on the next post. I promise I’ll tell you why I’m asking about this, and please don’t assume I’m a heartless ogre for bringing it up. . there is a reason. If you must thrash me, please wait just a few minutes:)
Randi, Part II -
Why am I talking about this? Because I think deeply about the moral and ethical obligations we humans have to each other, especially minority groups. I feel a personal obligation to be “out” to make it just a little bit easier for those who are scared and intimidated. I’ve felt this since I came out in high school, and it’s a reason I’ve never made my sexuality a secret, personally or professionally. This “SpokesGay” persona I have here? It’s schtick that I find amusing (and I’m grateful some of you do, too). It lets me indulge my naughty sense of humor. But in real life, I don’t go around flouncing (OK, sometimes at parties).
I treat my gayness as neither more nor less remarkable than my colleagues’ heterosexuality. I mention it only in the natural conversational ways any straight person does with his or hers; by reference to romantic partners, social groups I belong to, etc. There’s something even more powerful about treating it as unremarkable as compared to being “on” all the time with balls-to-the-wall activism.
I had few rolemodels like that as a kid, and it hurt. When I was in high school, I was constantly taunted, bullied, and beat up for being a fag. That was bad enough, but I had a special resentment for my English teacher, Ms. G. It was perfectly obvious that she was a lesbian (years later, when I was friends with some of her own colleagues, they confirmed to me they were baffled that she thought she was in the closet). She and her partner used to come through my line when I was a grocery checkout boy. But she turned a blind eye to the abuse I suffered, and she never offered even a veiled hint that I wasn’t all alone in the world.
She wasn’t the only one, of course, and sure, she had professional pressures of her own that I probably don’t know about. But not that many. I resolved never to become that kind of person, and to remember to extend a helping hand to people who weren’t as lucky, and didn’t feel as secure, as I did. As a high school kid out in an era where that was highly unusual, I needed some comfort, and some solidarity, and adults who should have known better almost universally failed me in their obsession to protect their own standing. It still makes me angry, and it motivates me to remember to speak up - and speak loudly - whenever I see homophobia that might otherwise pass. Some vulnerable person, young or not, needs to know other people care.
On to Part III. . ..
Randi, Part III
So, back to Randi. His job is to be a professional skeptic (and he’s a national treasure for it, too). He’s not a political campaigner that I know of, and I don’t get to tell him what he should and shouldn’t do for my pet causes. I know that. But I do think people of good will, especially members of oppressed minorities, have an ethical obligation to help others. I do think people who are lucky enough (as I am) to be materially comfortable, and to move in social circles where they’re free to be who they are, should remember those who aren’t so lucky, and to take a few personal risks to help them. After all, someone came before us, historically, in a much more hostile environment, and took the heat in order that we enjoy the comfort level we have today. I think we're obligated to "pay it forward."
Every time a celebrity comes out as gay, or atheist, the social fabric changes. And, some scared atheist trapped in a fundie household, or some frightened queer kid, gets a ray of hope. I know this because I clung to those moments, and they helped me bear up. Read some of the comments from gay/bi/queer skeptics on Randi’s blog - they’re almost enough to make you choke up when you see how grateful these folks are that Randi planted his flag publicly. It buyoed them.
So why didn’t he do it before? I don’t know, but it bothers me. I don’t know him, I don’t know his life, I haven’t been on his journey. But I’m less inclined to characterize his coming out in 2010, at 81, as the act of bravery so many others think it is. That doesn’t mean I wish him ill, and it doesn’t mean I think I have the right to dictate that my ethical priorities should be shared by everyone else. I suspect some of you are going to find this offensive or provocative; maybe you’ll think I’m a right proper jerk for even mentioning it. I surely don’t mean to be. I’m hoping some of you who’ve been active in gay/queer/race/secular politics will understand why these questions occur to me, and I hope I’m not the only one to think they’re legitimate questions to ask.
/logorrhea
#hcr: Final attempt to add Stupak Amendment fails (221 nays and counting). Stupak himself spoke against the motion, which was really just another attempt to kill the underlying bill, since the Stupak language can't be incorporated through reconciliation.
From my experience, even if a person may accept that you are gay, they may change their perception or treatment of you when you come out to them. It's a fear of changing the status quo of the moment: Even if they are glad for you, you may not want them to change their ideals of you.
I like :-)
When I came out, I wasn't going around like some fairy queen. I acted the same way I always have. In a way, it goes back to the status-quo-thing. Being gay doesn't mean I now must start acting like a stereotypical gay guy. I am the same person I was before, just now I'm not trying to convince myself that I'm straight.
Sorry to hear that Josh.
PZ wrote:
Don't be silly, PZ - you know deep down that God is always with you...
Josh:
Josh, I don't think you're being a jerk, nor are you being rude or offensive. I've spent way too much time with friends who have finally had the courage to come out to their families, and faced complete rejection. I've watched as friends who were diagnosed HIV positive were turned away by family and so-called friends. I've opened my arms, heart and house too many times because loved ones could not do or were not willing to do those things.
I would not berate someone for staying in the closet, sometimes, there are extremely good reasons to do so. However, I have always encouraged embracing one's self and overcoming the fear of rejection. Doing what's easy is all too often unsatisfactory and leads to regret down the road. For every person who makes the step to come out of the closet, there is someone, somewhere, who can find comfort and strength from that action.
I've been lucky, for the most part, in that I have not lost many people over my being bisexual; I have shocked a few people over the years, but that's kind of fun. ;p As for those who refused to accept it, it's their loss.
#hcr: Senate reconciliation package passes (217 ayes and counting). It's really done! Obama expected to speak soon.
Bang, bang, Nancy's wooden hammer came down upon the desk!
Nancy Pelosi just gaveled the #hcr debate to a successful conclusion.
Funny thing is that I've got a screenshot of The Tennessean's twitter feed saying 4872 didn't pass ;) I took it because I'm also watching CNN's live HR feed.
@Josh: I'd consider nothing you said about Randi as being rude, nor was it presented rudely. With Randi it seems like he has never been particularly open about his personal life, so I'm not so sure it's that big a deal that he hasn't come out until just now. Had he been straight like Ted Haggard was, I'd think much differently.
No I don't.
They are legitimate question, but the answers are complex. I really did wish people would stop amusing themselves whenever celebrity so-and-so comes out or "might" be gay. It should make no difference if they are (unless there were homophobic bigots before they come out.)
@Caine -
Thanks for saying what you did. Also:
This reminds me how "invisible" bi people have been in the larger gay/queer movement. I'm ashamed to say I used to be one of those snarky fags who went around saying, "Bi? Whatever. That's just an excuse." Some of that was a reaction to the vexing phenomenon of social fence-sitters (always men) who couldn't screw up enough courage to admit to actually being gay; they wanted to take advantage of straight social privilege, and shield themselves from the more complete stigma of being seen as an out-and-out cocksucker by falsely claiming to be "bi".
But that too often translated into a denial of the very existence of bisexual people by activists (like me) who should have known better, and who ought to have been a lot more human and empathetic. Glad to say I got over that obnoxious attitude - I hope it's better these days for bi people?
Here's a recipe for quick and easy coconut pie that my mother used to make when I was young.(long,long ago.) 1) Four eggs well beaten. 2) 1/2 cup self rising flour. 3) 1 1/3 cup sugar. 4) 1/2 stick melted butter. 5) 1 tsp. vanilla extract. 6) 1 1/3 cup shredded coconut. Combine all ingredients and mix well.Pour into a 9 inch,deep pie plate and bake 50-60 minutes in a 300 degree (f) oven until golden brown. It's delicious with a custard texture.Enjoy!
PIE!
That sounds great! I don't cook anything more complicated than steak or pasta, though.
@Gyeong:
Thanks for the feedback; I appreciate it.
You also wrote:
Sure, if a prominent person is actually a bigot, especially politicians who vote against equal rights, I'm all for outing them. Immediately. Full stop.
But what I'm proposing (or questioning) is a little more radical. Say the celebrity in question is not a homophobe. Say he or she has never done anything to actively oppress other queer people. But say he/she has coasted along on social/celebrity privilege, doing absolutely nothing to speak out against homophobia, because to do so would hurt his/her career. I think that kind of person bears some ethical responsibility, too. I do think their reticence is profoundly morally questionable.
Jodi Foster is a perfect example. I couldn't bring myself to cheer her on when she came out (coyly) so recently - I wanted to ask her why she spent so long in the closet when most people knew the truth anyway. Why did she spend so long demurring, and thereby actively perpetuating the (baffling, since Hollywood is supposed to be so "liberal") stultifying prejudice against mainstream actors?
Totally unimpressed.
Thank you - recipe snagged!
Josh,
I'm a straight white guy, so I don't know what it's like to be part of a minority, persecuted or otherwise. But perhaps that can help me see things more dispassionately.
First up, though, I don't think it's for you to be telling other people what they should have done with their public lives/personas. If Randi hasn't been the towering gay role model/spokesperson he could have been, so what? There's no shortage of other gay role models and spokespeople. In the meantime he's been a powerful force for good and reason in the world, and he's contributed hell of a lot more to humanity than I ever will.
Perhaps there is one important way in which he could have filled a need (if that need is there; I don't know): as a role model for older closeted gays and lesbians. Which brings me to my next point.
Randi is of a much older generation. Sure, it's much easier to come out now than it was in the '70s or '80s, but even those weren't Randi's formative years. People are often (to some extent at least) a product of the time and place in which they grew up.
To take a different but not entirely irrelevant example, in Australia, people have long been ashamed of "The Stain" of having been descended from British convicts shipped out here in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Old folks will happily talk about their family tree until the cows come home, but there is usually one ancestor that they refuse to discuss. Often that's because they were a convict or because had Aboriginal or Chinese gold-digger blood in them.
Most (or at least many) young white Australians these days would be thrilled to learn that they had a few drops of convict or Aboriginal blood in them. The old folks not so. Cultural conditioning and all that. Australian society has moved on but older Australians haven't.
Randi's reticence to come out might be the result of conditioning or trauma that goes back to the '30s or '40s for Chrissakes. Can't you just be happy that he's come out now? What if Randi's coming out inspires other octogenarians to come out too? Will you be pissed off at them as well?
FWIW, I think you did the right thing by not posting at Randi's place.
Josh, I look at this way- it can be hard for us, who grew up after the sexual revolution and gay liberation, to understand what life was like for gay people in the 30's and 40's (when Randi grew up).
And even though the culture has changed tremendously, his emotional reaction to the culture he grew up in (one I think it would be hard for us to conceptualize) would be very hard to overcome. I think of it like PTSD. No matter how much your head tells you your situation has changed, your gut still radiates that old fear about exposure.
Hiding was a survival tactic, but it's no longer adaptive. I'm just glad he had the opportunity to experience life outside the closet. That's one hell that really does exist.
OlGreg
Mirena is not my friend. I conceived my last child while having a Mirena. Of course with the bugger in there it was touch and go for the early stages of the pregnancy until the placenta formed and ultrasounds showed it was wedged in it, far enough away from the feotus to not have to risk removing it.
The thing was still there when she was born which kind of shocked me but as the Ob said "where the hell else did you think it would be?"..and then proceeded to take photos which I'm presuming he whips out to impress other Ob types when they get together.
Josh:
I've gotta say, I have heard that too many times in my life. I have been told repeatedly that I'm simply too cowardly to come out as gay. I know that bisexual has been (and still is) used as an excuse. If I could so something about that, I would. It really does a lot of damage to those who are bi. I've been told I cannot count or consider myself bisexual because I married a man (my relationships with women notwithstanding). I've been subjected to the "if you're not with us, you're against us" rhetoric. Yada, yada, yada.
I do think things are better now, but not by a large margin. I think too many people simply consider being bi as fence-sitting or that bisexuality is not an actual position (no pun intended there, couldn't think of a better word.) Bisexuals tend get the problems and hassles from both sides, there's disbelief on one end and resentment on the other. And inbetween, there's a lot of disrespect. I do my best to clarify things when I get into a discussion, in the end though, I think it comes down a lot of people feeling that issues are best when bisexuals are negligible.
I know that coconut pie recipe quite well. Always good.
*sighs* *nods*
What do say? I mean really... as in what, exactly do you say?
@ ambulocetacean:
ambulocetacean:
I think you're misunderstanding Josh's feelings on this matter. I understand where he's coming from, and I understand, to a point, where Randi has been all his life. I've already yakked quite a bit about what Josh posted, so I'll just say that I do think the questions Josh posed are important ones, and deserve thought and consideration.
I want to say it's partly our culture fault for that. We have so many loud mouth hate groups terrorizing people (one of my teach at school was like this and I'm so glad he didn't get his promotion), that even a decent person may be afraid to denounce homophobia. I think it's in the hands of the loud and outspoken gays and allies to change the clime and encourage people to support equality.
OTOH, I there are the apathetic people who, while not homophobic, are not willing to do anything to change situation just because "it didn't concern them" (I was given that exact phrase by a person when we voted for prop 8. I loath that phrase so much. I really steam my broccoli.)
Speaking of which,
Steamed broccoli:
3 tablespoon butter
2 cloves garlic, finely minced
3 tablespoons fresh lemon juice
salt, to taste
pepper, to taste, optional
Preparation:
Steam broccoli until tender but firm, about 5 to 7 minutes. Heat the butter in a heavy nonstick skillet over medium heat; add the garlic and sauté for 1 minute. Add the cooked broccoli, lemon juice and salt and pepper to taste, cooking briefly to combine.
Usagichan (#198)
Hmm, not that I'm up on pop culture, either, but maybe I'll check it out. I just finished Hoshi Mamoru Inu. The slip of paper around the cover said it's the "number one book that makes people cry," among other endorsements, so I had to see if it could live up to that. While it's totally over-sentimental, it did make me cry. Twice.
~*~*~*~*~*~
Josh (#222)
Well, I'm with you in that I don't see coming out so late as being an outstandingly brave move on his part. I wonder, though, if he kept quiet so long because he didn't want all the "psychics," charlatans, and believers in woo to use his sexuality as another excuse to dismiss him. I don't know that this is the case, of course, but it's not unreasonable to suppose, given how he's made a life's work of antagonizing people by calling them out and exposing their deceptions. While things have steadily improved, the world at large does still stigmatizes same-sex love, so it would have become ammunition in the hands of at least some of his enemies. Maybe he just didn't feel he could be effective fighting both fights.
~*~*~*~*~*~
ambulocetacean (#238)
It's not a dispassionate issue. That's the point.
Gee, Josh only said a couple times he wasn't doing that: "I don’t think I can dictate for James Randi or anyone else what they ought to think or feel..." "That doesn’t mean I wish him ill, and it doesn’t mean I think I have the right to dictate that my ethical priorities should be shared by everyone else."
@RickR:
Rick, you're so right, of course. That's what makes these issues so difficult to discuss. I vacillate between real empathy for Randi (yes, I do feel for him as a human, and a gay man), and frustration with his having felt trapped in a pre-Stonewall mentality.
I know several elderly gentlemen very much like Randi. They're in their 70s or 80s, and they're still living their lives as if the world was the same repressive place they knew from the 50s. One refuses to say "He's gay." Instead, he resorts to circumlocutions: "He's a member of the committee". It's alternately endearing and embarrassing.
Another one gloms on to me whenever we meet at professional conferences. He's desperate for some sympathetic company; he talks about all the years he missed when he could have made a home with a man he loved, and how he has to negotiate his last years on this earth keeping together a sham of a hetero marriage for the sake of "appearances" in his church community.
Sure, I feel for these men. I want to comfort them, hold their hands, and let them cry on my shoulder. And I often do. But don't blame me for getting fed up and wanting to smack the shite out of them, too. For goodness' sake, it isn't 1955 anymore, and it hasn't been 1955 for a long time.
I haven't, but why should gay people not be able to be condescending too?Maybe it's a response to being a repressed minority, I dont know, but it seems quite intolerant and maybe even a bit elitist.
I don't see any attitude displayed, he was disagreeing with you.
Oh, but I most definetely think it should be off the table, for you or me or anyone else.
Next we're going to tell the closet atheist in the bible belt who didn't tell his/her family all their life that they don't believe in god that they wasted a lifetime of opportunity to be a role model for atheism.
You're making it very easy for yourself there.
@ambulocetacean
That's one of the valuable things Pharyngula offers: we're not all the same, and people from widly different backgrounds join the conversation. I want that, and I'm glad straight/bi/queer/white/black people are going to jump in. I'm well past my Baby Activist (TM) days when I thought only My Tribe had anything useful to say. That's just silly, and it doesn't help move understanding along.
That said, I resent the sh*t out of you characterizing yourself as "dispassionate" because you're not a member of the oppressed minority we're discussing. Go back and read what you just wrote. Seriously.
So, you, as a straight white guy, can "dispassionately" join this conversation? This conversation about the experiences and ethical obligations of queer people, as they develop in the context of a society that puts people like you (straights) in a privileged position? Because you occupy the socially default (i.e., privileged) position, you can opine on this dispassionately?
Are you fecking serious? If this were a conversation about racial inequalities, it wouldn't even have occurred to you to say, "as a white guy, I think I can comment on this dispassionately."
I've read your comments here, and I don't think you're a brute, an ogre, or an idiot. I'm not trying to shut you down, and I'm not saying I don't want to listen to you. I do.
But you need to seriously re-examine some of your glib assumptions. If you're half the grown-up I think you are, you'll be embarrassed.
Ol'Greg:
That really depends on the direction of the conversation. When it comes to the "but you married a man!" accusation, I point out that none of us can really help who we fall in love with. If my husband had been female, I would have still fallen in love with the person. I also explain that on a purely sexual basis, I tilt more towards women than men, but that consideration alone wasn't enough to make me walk away from such a deep love.
When I first moved to ND, I made friends with a woman, and we were getting to know each other quite well. When I told her I was bi, she was taken aback. I asked her why, and she said "well, you just came out and said it! I wasn't expecting that!" That left me a bit nonplussed. Well after we became very good friends, and after a night of healthy beer drinking, she told me I was making her uncomfortable. I enquired, and she said "well, now, when you're wearing shorts and a tank, I look at you. That is making me uncomfortable. I wouldn't look if you hadn't told me you were bisexual."
I found myself nonplussed again. Finally I asked her if she had sexual feelings toward me, she said no. I asked her what she was worried about then. What it came down to, is that she was unaccustomed to thinking about sex unless it was hetero and she was unsure if I had sexual feelings towards her. I laughed and said "no, I don't. You're not my type." :D We had a long talk in which I basically said, it's simple - I'm attracted to both women and men, I married my husband because that's who I fell in love with, and no, I won't jump on any woman who I happen to see wearing shorts and a tank. ;p
I have said to people that I knew with absolute certainty I was bi at 10 years old; that being bisexual is neither a whim nor a choice. Along with many other things, but I'll stop here. For now.
Josh:
Homer:
hehehe
@Rorschach:
No, he was chastising me for something I repeated (and quite humbly) said I wasn't trying to do. Go back and read my original posts.
Fail. The question about sexuality or minority oppression status, is most certainly not off the table. Especially when one makes it public, as Randi has. Just why do you think it should be off the table?
Hmmm. I just had a comment disappear into moderation hell for no explicable reason whatsoever. Does Pharyngula do this often?
Rorschach:
No, you haven't, and I was not talking about anyone on Pharyngula. I've often been told I was cowardly in meatspace. I think it's a tad more complex than people being intolerant and elitist. There are elements of that, but as I said, there are a lot of people who simply find bisexuality to be untenable. A lot of attitudes have been shaped over the years by the fight for basic human rights for gay people.
The issues are far from black and white, and a lot of people prefer things black and white.
@Rorschach:
Not a role model "for atheism," a lifeline/rolemodel for other intimidated fundie kids. Are you seriously suggesting there's no legitimate ground to plow in interrogating what our ethical obligations might (or might not) be when it comes to hiding our true feelings in order to get along?
I've staked my position. I tend to lean toward the idea that, if you can, you ought to publicly pronounce your position. I think if you're a member of a societally despised minority, you do have an ethical obligation to refuse to buckle under to that, not just for yourself, but to help other people who are more vulnerable than you are. So as to encourage them.
There are reasonable disagreements as to where that obligation begins or ends. I don't feel competent (and I'd find it an act of hubris) to pronounce where those lines are drawn. But it is a real issue, and I don't think it's "off the table."
Don't misread me Rorschach, and accuse me of having some unreflective attitude about this. It's unfair, and I resent it.
I don't know but in a world where you can have a therapist confide that they think bi people are really just "mentally ill" and confused as compared to straight or gay people it's just another kind of suck for some people whether it's morally right or wrong...
Josh, you do realise that your emotional reaction to a topic does not have any relevance to the truth or falsity of a conclusion.
Being able to debate or analyse a topic dispassionately and without emotion or bias should be a good thing, which I'm sure is how ambu meant it.
Because questioning or criticising another person's private choices and decisions during their lifetime is none of your fricking business IMO.
A noble thing to do, if your personal circumstances are such that you can do it, and of course something any member of an oppressed minority should want to aspire to, if you put it that way.
But not something you should criticise anyone for who does not manage to do it, due to their very own personal life choices or circumstances.
Ol'Greg:
There's all manner of fuckity-upped for you. I've gotten the "you're confused" line before; thankfully, I've not had the "mentally ill" line tossed at me, at least not to my face. And people think we're the screwed up ones.
@Rorschach:
Your condescending attitude is noted. This isn't merely an emotional reaction, it's a substantive disagreement. I'm questioning amb's claim to be seen as automatically "dispassionate" because he's a straight guy. That's a rather bold and contentious empirical claim, and it deserves scrutiny. It uses an unsupportable rhetorical move, and I called him on it.
.
They are no longer strictly private choices when one announces them publicly, on his blog, as James Randi did. Were I delving into his personal life invasively, that would be different. But I'm not.
Josh:
While I agree with your position for myself, I do not at all consider it an ethical obligation for anyone else. I know of too many instances where showing your differences is simply dangerous - and that it is not always apparent until it is too late.
It is up to each individual how brave they choose to be.
@Rorschach:
Disagree. It's perfectly ordinary (to the point of tedium) for philosophers to debate the ethical obligations we do or don't have to our fellow humans. To debate the lines between public and private lives, and what that means, and what that might entail, for our actions.
I am not a philosopher, but I'm entitled to ask these questions, too, as a member of the human race. Don't forget that James Randi made this public. Very public. This will naturally engender conversation of this sort.
Why does this upset you so? Why do you insist on characterizing my questions so tendentiously? Why do you characterize what I'm asking as context-free criticism, or as some sort of prescriptive pronouncement on what James Randi ought to have done? It's not. I'm probing the issue, and to be sure, I have an opinion about it.
But I'm not settled on the answers; that's why I brought it up. You, on the other hand, are characterizing the very fact that I'm posing the question as illegitmate per se. You're also soft-pedaling the fact that Randi made it a public discussion, which then makes my questions seem (unfairly) like they're delving into something "personal." Why are you doing that?
Josh, OSG:
Oh, damn: Here I'd been keeping my (virtual) mouth shut because I thought, as a straight monogamous white male I had no "standing" to say much.
Ahh, but while I actually do have some thoughts, a whole day of watching #hcr on C-SPAN has left me too befuddled to be confident I can get them out clearly. Maybe if y'all are still talking about this tomorrow....
It doesn't. I just think you're wrong.
So did Tiger Woods.It still remains his private matter.Discuss it all you want, by all means, but I just feel you should refrain from armchair judgments on his personal life decisions.
Rorschach, to expand on that a little, many people feel that bisexuals have it easy, in the sense they can make the choice to go for a hetero relationship, thereby being able to sidestep all the obstacles which face gay people. Also, many people feel that bisexuals being able to make a choice actively hurts gay rights in that it reinforces the notion that one can actually choose to be gay. That's not true, of course, and being bisexual was not a choice for me. It can be difficult for people to believe that though.
Hi Josh,
I wasn't coming at you with any sort of "f*cking attitude". I could have phrased that better by saying "I agree with you that it's not your place to tell people what they should have done with their public lives".
Yes, I do see that my tentative claim to be able to look at things "dispassionately" was naive at best, probably arrogant and patronising and obviously offensive. I sincerely apologise for that. It was clumsy and ill-considered.
I am here to learn much more than I am to pontificate. Clearly, I just learned a little bit more.
Like I said, I'm a straight guy, so I don't know what it's like to be gay. I know next to nothing about the history of gay rights movement and even less about your own work in it. I like to think that I'm conscious of my own ignorance and would rarely butt into conversations about gay issues to say anything more than "Homophobes are dicks, LOL!"
But this was about an individual, James Randi. And I think you're being too harsh on him.
How does the simple fact that someone is gay oblige them to become a role model or activist? And is it not possible that his coming out even at this late stage, might still do some good?
You are no doubt a courageous, committed and hard-working person whose work in the gay-rights movement is to be admired. But is it realistic or even fair to expect that other GLBT people do the same? People who are less courageous and less motivated will always benefit from the people who put themselves on the line for good causes. That doesn't necessarily make them bad people. It just highlights how admirable the activists are.
Randi is from a much older generation. We will probably never know the reasons he stayed in the closet so long, but you can bet that he had them.
It's been an odd situation for a long time. Many of us have known for YEARS that Randi is gay--he's never denied it, but has always just quietly been gay. It's a tough one -- on the one hand, you can wish he'd been a more prominent role model, but on the other, wouldn't the ideal world be one where the sex life of people with whom you will never interact sexually be totally irrelevant?
Does that mean we should start calling Randi "The Fabulous Randi"? ... Yeah that was really bad.
@Rorschach:
You're selling me short.
That's not an apt analogy, and your comparison of his media-exposed marital infidelity to James Randi's voluntary coming out as a gay man is offensive. Tiger Woods, as a huge celebrity, is pretty much forced to make some ridiculous public statement of regret. I don't think he should have to. I think whatever goes on within his family is something no one should feel they have a right to comment on, and I condemn the prying culture that believes it has a right to actively invade celebrities' private lives and extract confessions from them.
Oh, you say, then why do I think James Randi's situation is any different? For two reasons:
1. He affirmatively, personally, decided to come out. He made this public, not the paparazzi.
2. Marital infidelity is (for better or worse) a scandal. One's sexual orientation is not (or it should not be).
Are you seriously suggesting a parallel between the public excoriation of Woods breaking his marital vows (whether it's our business or not, and I think it's not), and the fact of a celebrity's sexual orientation (hint: whether you're gay or straight is not a "scandal")?
Do you really want to compare my interrogation of the ethical responsibilities of gay celebrities (note again: questions, not prescriptions) with the paparazzi's prying into their marital indiscretions?
If you do, you need to recalibrate your compass.
ambulocetacean:
These could help you out a bit in that regard:
Before Stonewall and After Stonewall.
PZ:
Absolutely. That's the reason that living openly in a matter of fact way is important. There's still a long way to go.
Josh,
point of the analogy being of course that both are private matters laid open in a public statement, that's as far as the analogy is meant to go.
And both are deeply private matters that armchair moralists should refrain from judging.
I'm sure the man had his reasons, and they should not be for you or me to judge or criticise.Are we're going to go over your or my life decisions next with a fine comb and pick where we thought you or I could have done better?
Nonsense.No media, no scandal.It's something between 2 (or 19) people.
@ ambulocetacean:
I'm here to have conversations and to learn more, too. We don't learn all we need to by listening to people just like us, so I appreciate what you have to say, even when I object to it:)
Am I being too harsh on him? Yeah, I know I'm posing some harsh-sounding questions. But I think they're questions that need to be asked. They're questions that are important to how we, as a society, treat our least-valued members.
No, James Randi is not obligated, nor can he be expected to be, The One Great Savior For Gay Rights. But he did come out publicly and enter the conversational fray. I do want to problematize (sorry for sounding pomo, y'all know I hate that) the uncritical cries of "bravery" thrown his way. Not because I wish him ill (I don't, I wish him well - believe it or not, I adore him for the immeasurable contribution he's made to rational thinking), but because I'm not convinced he deserves them. No, that's not "nice". Sorry. I've seen real bravery in civil rights struggles.
Oh, I know the reasons quite well. I'm just not sure how valid I think they are are (yep, that's judgmental). I'm not ignorant of history, and I'm not exactly inexperienced in how this works. I also know there are a lot of people in far more dangerous (physically and emotionally) situations who came out anyway.
Sigh. I didn't mean this to become a "pick on James Randi" rant, but I guess it was inevitable that it would be taken that way. But I'm not going to apologize for posing questions about how many accolades comfortable celebrities deserve when the topic is "coming out." We have to grapple with them, even if that means some will see it as "mean." Whatever.
Josh, I know you're busy disagreeing with Rorschach, but did anything I wrote about bi people answer your question?
Josh and Rorschach, it's an interesting discussion, but it's getting a bit personal. You are both good people with good points, but as you say, some things are personal, and motives are hard to guess. You two are attempting to communicate via text, and it is a difficult medium for nuances. In person, I am sure that you would hug, kiss and make up. Relax, please. Thank you.
As for Randi, I think it is traditional to say something about bravery to anyone who comes out, kinda like saying "best wishes" to a bride and "congratulations" to a groom. It isn't any of my business what his sexual preferences are, nor do I know exactly why he announced what he did the way he did. There's some info available as linked above, but I don't feel any need to investigate.
It is a shame that he didn't come out sooner, but it is a good thing that he didn't have to. Yay to his friends for being friends.
By the way, just so you all know my perspective, my girlfriend has long, red hair that I love to run my fingers through. And I rub her feet every evening. I can no longer keep that a secret. Thank you for accepting me the way that I am.
Yes, but you and I both know that there is a long road before that happens. For that reason, I can understand why some people choose to wait a long time before they come out publicly.
Josh, I understand what you have been saying. But I can also understand why many people do not want to want to stand out, not want to be a spokesperson of any kind.
For example, I hold no animus for Jodi Foster. As far as I know, she has not said anything against LGBT issues. Also, she did not have a beard, she did not go out of her way to appear straight. It would seem that she is a very private person who works in a field that is populated by extroverts. If she was straight, I think most of us would know as much about that theoretical family as we do about the family she has now, not much.
Also, it is amazing how much of a difference a decade can make. I was not out to myself, let alone anyone else until I was out of college. In the late seventies, there was not one public example for me that I can remember. Gay/Straight alliance student clubs were very rare. The first lesbian couple I that I see was in 1984, my freshman years in college. I did not meet them but I remember their courage. There was an LGBT support group but it was anonymous. It was not until my senior year when a handful of queer freshmen came in and really shook things up.
I can now see young people come out as gay, as lesbian and as transgendered while still in school, something that I never heard about when I was that age. I knew that I was not "normal" but I had no idea what it could be. Plus just about any mass media portrayal of lesbian tended to be sleazy.
I am grateful, for all of the brave people who fought so hard and in many ways, sacrificed so much just to get us to the incomplete goal of equality. This is why I have spent time with the trouble makers and rabble rousers. But I also have great sympathy for people who just want to live a quiet life. From them, all that is needed is that they are honest. In a lot of ways, I think that having households with gay couples, lesbian couples and couples where one or both are transgendered can say as much to the neighbor children as having public figures. That couple I mentioned earlier, even though they do not know it, had a profound influence upon me.
Maybe this has already been mocked here but I had missed it:
Glenn Beck sings "Born in the USA" (set to music, Shatner-style)
ROTFL!
---
Many threads ago people were singing the praises of collard greens, so I finally tried them. I didn't simmer them for as long as recommended, so there was some bitterness left but I liked them that way. Any comments on this recipe? Has anyone tried making a pie with them?
You must be new here.If we need a referee I let you know, I think Josh and I can handle it, and I am trying to unpack my suitcases and boxes here anyway....:-)
Ichthyic: "Obviously you've never had gallstones."
Ain't that the damn truth. And that reminds me: I've starting having the itching thing on my hands at night. Researched a bit and ran across primary biliary cirrhosis. Wondered if that was something your medical detectives have considered.
@Rorschach:
You are consistently missing the point by conflating:
a). forced, vicious media "outing" of infidelity, and the attendant expected spectacle of "I'm sorry" from the philanderers
with
b). voluntary coming out as a gay man
I agree that no one has the right to rake someone's private life over the coals for public consumption. But there's a huge difference between the appalling (and base, money-grubbing) media interest in infidelity, and the freely chosen "coming out" of a gay person.
Whether you agree with the prevailing mores or not, marital infidelity is seen as a moral failing. It's ugly and outrageous that anyone in the media thinks they have anything to say about it - the only people the unfaithful have to answer to are their loved ones.
Coming out as gay, especially voluntarily, is not the same thing. You're not "admitting" something shameful, which you then "apologize to the American public" for.
Expecting closeted celebrities to at least think about whether they have an obligation to be out as a role model for others who aren't as luck as they are is categorically not the same thing as guarding the privacy of marriages and their infidelities.
One is a normal human condition, the variety of sexual orientation that should never be shameful.
The other is a question of breaking promises in an intimate relationship.
To equate them is insulting and offensive, Rorschach.
Which is why I now feel it my ethical duty to say: Randi's gay? So what?* I propose that we start making it irrelevant by acting as though it were already irrelevant. Kind of the whole "fake it until you make it" idea.
*Actually, being a Randi well-wisher, I'd more likely say "good for him". But that response wouldn't be any different than if he'd 'come out' to say he had a girlfriend whose feet he rubs every evening.
I will not commend Randi for his bravery. Having said that, I will not saying anything against him for going many decades without publicly announcing his sexuality. If he was open to the people around him, that is all I can ask for.
@Caine:
Girl, I am indeed busy disagreeing with him! Yes, what you said made perfect sense, and I'm glad you said it. As I wrote before, I'm embarrassed to say I was one of those dumbasses that wrote off bisexual people. I was wrong, and I was unforgiveably glib about it. You need to keep speaking up, because people need to hear it. Especially those of us in the queer/gay activist community who have treated bisexual folk so unfairly.
Wondered if that was something your medical detectives have considered.
that's a chronic condition; we're still looking at things that are acute.
and JUST the back of your hands itch?
that's odd.
seriously, every single square inch of anything covered with skin itches on me.
*sigh*
all the latest blood tests are negative (or insignificantly positive) for any underlying pathology, and the LFT's are looking *somewhat* better.
still, jaundice and itching and general weakness continue.
now waiting till friday and one more blood test to decide whether to go to then next step and get a liver biopsy.
current thinking is that the micro-ducts that carry bile into the common bile duct might be partially clogged.
requires a specialized surgeon to fix that, though.
:P
...so the nightmare continues...
Thank you, Josh, I appreciate that. It's a difficult situation, both being invisible and having people on both sides wanting bisexuals to remain invisible. Me and mouth will continue to our part. :D
Caine
My best girlfriend is bi and she says the hardest thing is the feeling of never really "fitting" in. Not gay enough to be in with gay folk, not straight enough to be in with straight folk. Her long term partner is female and I actually met her after they had got together so I've only ever seen her with a female. I'm now examining my thoughts and if I'm honest I really see her as gay, probably because of that reason. Also my sister is a lesbian so maybe that influences my perceptions.
Gonna go and ring the BFF and have a heart to heart with her, it'll be interesting to see what she thinks my perceptions are and whether she's ever found them awkward or hurtful. mmmm, food for thought..
PZ said:
This. And many of us who've never met him suspected it strongly, too. No, not because we're incessantly prying little old Aunties, but because it's often extremely obvious (and non-controversial) to grown-ups who have any cosmopolitan experience. Believe me, very few people gasped when he announced it.
Yes, the ideal world would be just the one you described. It should be totally irrelevant. It's been a joy to watch that hope get closer and closer to reality.
Perhaps the reason why people are critical of Randi is that he has the resources to come out earlier in that he has a more tolerant community around him. Even so, I still think there are many other personal reason to wait, even amongst a comfortable crowd.
and JUST the back of your hands itch?
sorry, read that wrong. still, with just the hands itching, I would suspect something else.
Caine (#251)
My sister sometimes talks about her frustration over the moronic paradox of having to "prove" she's bi by being more into women, when the whole point is that she doesn't have a polarized preference. I'd happily stand up for her and help stomp such silliness should anyone be so foolish in my presence.
I did no such thing, you are running away with my Tiger analogy although it has been pointed out to you exactly how I meant it in the context.
And to think and say I did is misrepresenting what I said, and I'm not impressed, Josh.
Couldn't agree more.I do so not care what anyone's sexual orientation is(although hot sensible lovely intelligent single lesbians make me facepalm occasionally...), but I realise that for a lot of GLBT folks it is very different then for the straight hetero people who are supposed to be the "norm".
Josh OSG:
I call a foul. The only equation I saw Rorschach make between them was that they're equally none of your business. If you want to argue whether that's valid or not that's just fine, but it's pretty obvious that Rorschach wasn't calling Randi's actions a breach of trust, nor was he calling Tiger Woods' situation a sexual orientation. You're just looking to take offense now.
Actually, it's the palms of my hands, but for obvious reasons I avoided saying it! Apparently it's not unusual for that to be the first site for the itching; it may well not be the last. Last night I had some problems with the soles of my feet.
And man, I understand about the overall itching. That's what I had when pregnant with the twins. It's sheer torture.
I'm just going to see how it goes. I'm missing a gallbladder since just after the twins were born, or I'd suspect cholestasis.
Anyway, I ran across that last night and immediately thought of your situation. You're being thought of with deep sympathy here in Austin . . .
Caine, I realized the possibility of me being bi about a decade ago. There was a married couple that I became friends with. Neither were what I would consider to be especially physically attractive. But they were so supportive of each others artistic interests and also of their friends. One day, I finally realized that I was attracted to both of them and for that reason.
I never acted on that impulse, I respected their commitment to each other. But I was very surprised by that realization about myself. While physical attraction plays a huge part in what we desire, I do think that many people are also looking for personality traits. And that can trump the desired gender one is looking for.
@Rorschach:
I'm equally unimpressed with your argumentation in this thread. I think it's flaccid and full of inapt analogies and avoidance tactics. But I also suspect that our personal feelings are getting in the way of a straightforward conversation. You're a smart guy, and a great contributor here, as anyone would attest.
Oh, for an objective super computer to adjudicate all Pharyngula disputes. Maybe Multivac?
Bride:
Word. We not only don't fit, but honestly, no one "wants" us. I've always been more comfortable in the gay community, and thankfully, I have been welcomed by most.
That's it - bisexuals in a relationship are considered to be one thing or the other. Even though I'm married, I did have a long term relationship with a girlfriend (all above board, no cheating involved) and then people told me I was poly, not bi. Really, there's no easy way to identify as bi.
A. Noyd:
Oh, been there, done that. It can get very frustrating, feeling as if you have to prove yourself. Stomp away!
Sili:
kålroe eller majroe?
here's a recipe for the former. It tells you how to cook your Swede.
@pcarini:
No, I'm not. "Just looking to take offense" is obnoxious, and I really don't want to do that. I was objecting to what seemed to me to be the blanket equation of James Randi's public coming out (for something no one would consider shameful) with the media's prurient, inappropriate interest in Tiger Woods' marital infidelities (which, regardless of what we individually think, are considered shameful and wrong by society).
I don't think they're the same. Rorschach's post did seem to me to be drawing an equivalence. Perhaps I was wrong. But please don't accuse me of "looking to take offense." I don't think that's fair.
Janine:
Absolutely! I agree completely. If I had gone with my gender preference, my husband would never have been in the picture. Love is love, and it often takes you someplace you didn't plan on going.
I don't know you and don't have any feelings for or against you, I just respond to what you write here and judge you based on that.
As I said above, being able to argue dispassionately and without personal bias and burden should be a good thing.
@ Caine:
Well, come on over to my house. I want ya, and your wife, or husband, or whoever the frak you decide to make your life with. Plus, I'm a great cook, and I have a very comfortable guest bedroom in a modest, small, but charming Cape Cod-style house. Just don't mind kittehs. They will dominate you. While you sleep, and when you wake. Their is no escaping the kittehs.
If anyone is interested, JW nut KTL is at the "Priest who don't believe" thread.
Now, back to Rorschach and Josh.
Josh at #274,
Yeah, I see your point about the uncritical adulation of Randi's "bravery" devaluing the real bravery of others who have gone before. Apologies again for the clumsy way I blundered into this conversation. You were right, I am embarrassed by what I wrote, even though I wrote it with good intentions. Live and learn, I suppose :)
PZ,
Yes it would be lovely if GLBTness one day ceased to be any sort of issue. I suspect we'll be waiting (and some of us working) for quite a while.
Caine,
Thanks for the links to the Stonewall docos. I'll have to see if I can find them on Amazon.
David M, way upthread.
Yes, that does sound more like it, the 19 per cent/1 per cent thing. I'll have to try to google that survey.
Blerk. I should really go and do some work now.
When it comes to bi people, it seems that how a person ends up living their life ends up coloring how other people see them. Take a hypothetical bi woman. The person she ends up with is a man. They are honestly in love with each other, get married, have children and raise the stereotypical family. Most people will call her straight.
Take that same hypothetical bi woman and change some of her circumstances. She never meets that man. Instead, she gets into a relationship with a woman. They move in together, go into a state that allows LGBT marriage and raise the stereotypical family. Most people will call her a lesbian.
The only difference is who the woman happened to fall in love with yet that will color how people will perceive her. Very few are going to take the time to wonder what her sexuality is. They will only judge her by the circumstances that she ends up living in.
Josh, you are a darling. Thank you. That same invitation stands for you, if you ever find yourself stuck in the prairie. :) As for the kitteh power, it rules here too.
@ Rorschach:
Likewise. But don't pretend your own intellectual/emotional disposition has no bearing on how you approach these conversations. Conversing without emotional biases is a good thing.
I've criticized your position in specific terms in several posts. I have substantial, quantifiable problems with your point of view. Don't continue to characterize my position as coming from unreflective emotion (and don't imply it, either). You may be right, and I may be right, but don't keep up this narrative that you're completely rational, while every objection is emotionally based.
'Tis Himself (previous thread), my former boss described a budget as "a list of goals with price tags attached," which is nicely succinct.
That brings up an idea: a person at our school LGBT center told me that she wasn't bisexual but rather pansexual. It was a new term to me, but she explained it as attraction to someone regardless of physical charactersitic or gender but rather intellect.
@ Josh OSG #300:
I'm glad you weren't intentionally looking for offense (which I agree is obnoxious.) I apologize for making that accusation.
How, though, do you explain the way you parsed Rorschach's #265 and subsequent clarifications as a "blanket equation" between the two, when he said the following:
He stated the intended point(s) of equation between the two, and they're hardly enough to be a blanket. This seemed clear enough to me that I felt justified when I said you were looking for offense. Again my apologies.
Janine:
Yes, that's true. While I understand why people do that, it's still frustrating. I've always been openly bisexual, and throughout my life, I've dealt with the "omg panic" from women (as in having a good time with them and literally seeing it dawn on them, omg, she's bi!) despite my being married to a man. That "dawning" is an interesting struggle to watch, especially as they try to wrangle me back into the hetero box.
Gyeong Hwa Pak, I have two friends who identify as pansexual. It's not all that different from bisexuality in terms of being put into one box or the other, depending on who you happen to be in a relationship with at the time.
See, I don't get how or why hetero or GL people want to marry in the first place, but bisexual folks?? So for the next 50 years in the supermarket I won't just be looking at the chicks but also the guys !! Double torment !
;)
pcarini:
The point is that Rorschach's analogy was inapt It doesn't matter how you tart it up, there is no comparison between a media-blackmailed confession of adultery, and a freely offered coming-out as a gay person.
Seriously, what the hell is the mystery here?
In one instance, we have a prying press that puts celebrities on the spot, and forces them to make dishonest mea culpas to satisfy a cultural narrative.
On the other hand, we have well-situated, comfortable, respected men like James Randi, who voluntarily come out as gay. And the minute I pose some questions about what that means ethically, I'm equivalent to the prying paparrazi?
If you can't see what's wrong with that formulation, the problem is yours, not mine .
Why would I wonder about the sexuality of somebody who is happily (and presumably monogamously, though I don't mean to say other permutations can't be happy) in a long-term relationship? Not that I'd doubt her if she told me she was bi, but it would seem impertinent.
Agreed.
There are a number of factors that brings two people together as a married couple. I know that the notion of love is one of the biggest factor in the US society, but other sees it as a economic, social, or political move. And these are exculsive, it's mixed.
But you don't have to look. ;-)
(less competition for me. lol)
No you are not, and I can't see how anyone suggested that you were.
The mystery is how you can miss such a straightforward point and misconstrue it so obvious for everyone to see without realising it.
Fixed.
pcarini:
It may not seem pertinent to you, however, it is pertinent to me. Perhaps if you haven't spent decades dealing with gay rights issues and haven't had to deal with decades of bias it really doesn't seem to matter. It would be nice if it actually didn't matter, but there's a long road to get to that point.
@Rorschach:
I've been thinking the same thing of you. So where does that leave us?
It's been happening for a while, but perhaps more recently during fucking euphemism week.
Sastra actually had trouble wrestling with a post that kept getting tossed in the queue, which was a real WTF.
You could try posting the first half/second half of the comment, and see if that goes through. Or put spaces in potentially problematic words. Or something like that.
fu ck th at ce ns or sh ip sh it.
Why would I wonder about the sexuality of somebody who is happily (and presumably monogamously, though I don't mean to say other permutations can't be happy) in a long-term relationship?
That is part of the reason that bi people end up being marginalized.
Rorschach, just because you have no desire to get married nor be in a long term relationship with one person does not mean that other cannot find something fulfilling in it. And I am speaking as someone who never really wanted to be married in the first place. Also, that joke really does not work too well. It is based on your stereotypical vision on what it means ti be bi. Work on it, maybe you might come up with something better.
PZ has said he'll end Euphemism week when he's properly back. The man might end up speaking in tongues, for fuck's sake, we can give him a break. ;D
The mystery is that you were offended and insulted by an inept analogy.
I agree he could've chosen a better one, but he took pains in the initial post, and then later clarified what he was talking about. Still you insist taking an entirely different aspect of the two stories, equating them, and then getting angry that they've been compared thus.
I'm more than happy to drop it, since I really shouldn't have intruded into the argument you two were having. For my part, I think that the two points of comparison Rorschach made were valid and completely inoffensive: 1) That both matters were revealed publicly, and 2) That both aren't really anybody's business.
At the risk of Commenting Too Late At Night(TM), let me bitch about something else I really despise -
Being told that one's opinions are coming from an "emotional place." Being told that justified disagreement doesn't make sense. . .no, no, it can only be seen as an "overly emotional" reaction to what all other reasonable people (read: straight men) would be able to discuss without all those bothersome, "hysterical" reactions.
It took me a while, but I finally figured it out: homophobia and sexism are of a piece. Homophobia is just a baroque ornament glued on top of the fundamentally rotten core of sexism. It's all about devaluing, spitting on, and characterizing-as-humiliating anything feminine.
Janine:
Yep. I didn't want to marry, I did it for a quilt. That doesn't mean I wouldn't have been a livin' in sin with my husband though. Marriage definitely does have its advantages though, and I'm happy I have those nowadays.
And with that, I triumphantly dismount from my High Horse(TM), before anyone kills me for being insufferable:) !
Janine @ 323,
been married, done that, got the DVD, not looking at it too often tho...:-)
In the interest of TMI and all that I shall refrain from refuting that point, suffice to say that I don't think my vision is so stereotypical at all....;)
No argument here. The whole "I'm dispassionate" biz tends to amuse me; sometimes it angers me. But then, I'm a passionate type and I'm female. And bisexual. Uh oh, three strikes. ;D
Haha! Best book title evah:
I Did It For a Quilt: The Sordid, Secret Life of Caine, Fleur de Mal
Josh:
Hahahahahahahaha! If only it were that interesting.
Caine:
I meant more, why would somebody who is happily in a relationship feel the need to tell me this?* Wouldn't it be odd if a happily married hetero woman walked up to you and said "I'm straight"? I mean, thanks for sharing and all, but what was the purpose behind that?
*Outside of the context of a discussion about sexuality, like is happening in this thread.
Janine:
I'm trying my best not to be obtuse here, but must I question the sexuality of every person I meet in order to not marginalize people? Why would it matter to our hypothetical married bisexual woman if I naively presumed her to be straight?
@Caine:
Just so. Rorschach's earlier post is exhibit number one:
Yep. My objections were merely emotional. No content. Nothing substantive to see here. Move along.
pcarini, you are being obtuse. Very much so. What, exactly, makes you think I (or anyone else) would walk up to you on the street and announce their sexuality? These matters do come up among friends and family.
What you're saying is that you're very happy placing people in sexual boxes based on what you see, but have zero interest in a person's orientation. Your previous writing of "not that I'd doubt her" was insulting, and I would have every reason to think you did, in fact, doubt. You exhibit no interest whatsoever in acknowledging a person's orientation and you're coming across as someone who would be offended by the knowledge, because it doesn't matter. It does matter. Ideally, would it be wonderful if all orientations were accepted as matter of fact? Yes. That is not the case however, and attitudes like yours do marginalize people, by making their feelings and struggles meaningless.
House passes Healthcare and Education bill.
It's a moment when it makes me particularly happy that Obama was elected president and not McCain.
It also helps to diffuse the worries one could have had that Obama might turn out as a wishy washy democrat à la Carter who can't get anything major accomplished.
Good job Mr president, good job Ms speaker !
Josh @ 334,
Let's look back at ambu's comment :
Look, to me, dispassionately in this context just means "from a viewpoint of someone not involved and emotionally invested in the issue". There was not anyone here who suggested that you being emotional about something doesn't mean you don't have at the same time valid arguments to make.I disagreed with the arguments you made, not the way they were presented.
I'm getting a bit tired of your strawmen and misrepresentations.This is a simple discussion about one particular topic we disagree on, but you seem to fall apart at the seams already and resort to all sorts of ducks and weaves, I'm not sure what to make of it, the standard here is usually higher.
Rorschach, if you seriously believe that proclaiming one's status as a "straight white guy" qualifies one as:
1. Politically neutrual
2. Dispassionate
3. Emotionally neutral
4. Objective
. . .constitutes a legitimate conversational stance, then what am I to say? You think I'm the one erecting straw men?
Also, pcarini, read posts #241 #251 #257 #266 #288 #292 #296 #298 #301 #312. Perhaps they'll provide a clue. I'll repost Ol'Greg's comment at 257:
When this sort of attitude is prevalent, it matters whether or not people are marginalized, especially when they are marginalized simply because you're more comfortable that way.
Your stereotypical characterizations are noted.
Rorschach:
So, in other words, he's too emotionally invested in the issue, eh?
It could also be said you're resorting to all manner of ducks and weaves, waving a flag of 'dispassionate guy' here! I don't think you should mention standards at this point.
He didn't say anything about being politically or emotionally neutral, just that he doesnt have an investment in the issue at hand.You're still not getting it.
Yeah, and it's getting boring.I'm out of this one.
OurDeadSelves, if you have a courtyard you might want to experiment with climbing vegetables. If the bricks aren't cemented in, can you remove a row or two next to the wall? A couple of nails and a bit of netting and you could grow these: scarlet runner bean, pole beans, cucumber, zucchine, summer squashes, tomatoes (you'll have to train them and tie them but home-grown tomatoes are worth a bit of trouble--plant them on your sunniest window).
... I mean your sunniest wall!
Josh, sorry to leave you, but it's 3:10 a.m. and I'm supposed to be somewhere this morning. Ugh. So, off to court sleep I go. I'll be back (/Terminator) to battle um, sometime later today. :)
But atheists have been stigmatized in society during Randi's lifetime as well, so it's interesting why someone would be (apparently) comfortable as an out atheist but not about their sexuality. I don't mean to deny the significant differences between the two ways of "coming out", and for Randi it might seem much more natural to talk about non-belief because of his "professional identity" as a skeptic.
But still, taking it as a thought experiment: if he had waited until his '80s to announce his atheism, I imagine my reaction might be very similar to what Josh said above.
I don't know whether to say "good" or "too bad." You aren't listening, and you have decided you don't have to take on board, or re-think, any of your opinions. Us protest-ey loudmouths are just irrational.
Meanwhile, you are just merely detached, completely objective, emotionally uninterested, and therefore we all should recognize your neutral and Objectively True (TM) take on the whole affair. You needn't bother yourself with the Emotional(TM) "opinions" of people like us - we're far to close to it. Only detached observers, like you and amb, can have an objective opinion.
Do you really believe this? If you do (wait for it Rorschach, I'm about to get "emotionally involved), then f*ck you.
I spent several posts above outlining exactly why I think what I do. You don't have to agree with me, but you do owe me some engagement beyond "you're emotional." That is, if you don't to be a massive, self-centered dick.
Gosh, this place is such an echo chamber!
Ain't that the truth! It's also where misspellings and dropped words are commemorated forever, to my shame:( I have brought the grammatical reputation of Pharyngula low, and it is a right heavy albatross about my neck.
Josh, please point out to me where I accused you of being emotional(whatever that means) and how that was my only way of engaging with you, thanks.
Josh OSG
I have brought the grammatical reputation of Pharyngula low,
.. it is only because you stand on the shoulders of giants. And I'm looking firmly in the direction of the Rev BDC here.
Oh, please. Go back and read your dismissive, snotty posts. Don't act so shocked. Jesus, you're smarter (and better)than that.
Good night.
I can't believe you actually told Josh that he should be more civilized, because being able to talk about things in a civilized manner would be good.
hint: passionate is not the same as irrational.
if you have to force yourself to stay faithful, you're doing it wrong; at which point staying away from commitment might indeed be the best choice.
for the same reason assuming everyone on the internet is male is harmful; you're assuming a default.
also, I didn't know mansplaining worked on men too... but apparently it works when you're talking to a gay man!
hint: I didn't say it was.
Point me to where exactly I did say exactly this.
I dont know about that, might just have been the wrong person at the wrong time(long story and TMI), and with another person in different circumstances I would never look anywhere else ever again.
Now that it's pretty much mainstream to have gay and lesbian characters on TV, it's interesting how rarely the possibility of bisexuality gets mentioned.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoBisexuals
Caine @ #335
I don't think somebody would just walk up and announce it, which is why I'd find it both odd and impertinent. Among friends and family, I can see your point. I'm under the impression that I know them well enough that there are no surprises to be had, but I'll admit I could be wrong. If such were the case, should that person be angry with me for not having already known? Should I double-check with all of them just to be sure?
Again, I hardly see where it matters to them what possibly mistaken impression I might have. As much as it pains me to be wrong sometimes, my impressions !== reality. If friend or family member needs me to know, she'll tell me.
You're tacking a lot more meaning onto my saying it doesn't matter than I had originally intended to give it. Sexuality is just one cross-section of a whole person, sexual orientation an even smaller cross-section of that. I try my best to not judge people based solely on a single aspect of who they are. That's all I meant.
Why on earth would I doubt a person's sexuality once she'd made an effort to tell me? Take as much offense as you'd like from "not that I'd doubt her", but I meant it as neither offensive nor patronizing.
Since the distinction between friends/family and other acquaintances was just brought up, I need to clarify. I did (perhaps insensitively) take it for granted that my friends and family would have nothing to tell me about their orientation that I did not already know.
For somebody that I don't know all that well, I would have to question why they felt the need to share.
In neither case would I be offended.
I try my best not to marginalize people, so if I do than I do so unintentionally. Saying that somebody's orientation doesn't matter to me isn't the same as saying I don't care about their feelings and struggles.
My take one it is this: Anytime a person is judged based on some single aspect of their being, rather than who they are in total, then they've been done a disservice. As much as possible I refuse to do this.
And with that I shall be off to bed, where I no doubt will continue to unintentionally offend. I spent too much time, a little to buzzed at that, editing the above for clarity -- obviously needed because I did so poorly in my previous posts.
sure:
this is privilege talking about how much better it is to not get emotional about things. blecch
also, I'm highly amused that you'd think being straight means not being biased in a discussion about homosexuality
Windy @356, what about Anything That Moves.
(Sorta SFW)
Privilege?How so? And you are, like Josh, confusing personal investment with being passionate.I can be passionate about gay rights and argue for them without being gay.As I said above, to me "dispassionate" here just meant, "not personally involved".
You did btw not point to the line where I said Josh should be "more civilized", because I didn't write anything like it.
I seem to have missed much of this quite interesting discussion due to being asleep.
While I may be a bit behind the curve of the argument here, I do want to say that I don't think there is a moral obligation on anyone, celebrity or otherwise, to make his or her sexual orientation public. If people want to keep these things private, they are entitled to do so.
There is, in my view, a moral obligation for everyone - whether straight, gay or bisexual - to speak out against homophobia, and support equal rights for gay, bisexual and transgender people. This applies a fortiori to celebrities, politicians and people in positions of influence. But I don't see why a person's own private sexual feelings should make any difference to this. I don't feel the need to talk about my sexuality to most people I know, whether here or in real life; it's just none of their business, and there's no particular reason why they should care.
In short, as long as someone actively supports LGBT rights - which we all have the opportunity to do, regardless of our own sexual orientations - why should it matter whether he or she keeps his or her own sexuality private? It is none of the public's business. People have the right to make their own decisions about these things.
Can't talk for Randi, but I've never had any problem to be outspoken about my non belief. But Gee, how hard it was to come out as gay. It took me more than 10 years from the moment I realised I was gay. The main difficulty was my father, who I love very much but was always clearly homophobic. I've never felt it could impact my reltationship with anybody I know who is a believer to let them know I'm not. And that's wherever I've lived, in Europe, Morocco, Malaysia, or the US. But it was much more difficult for me to discuss openly about my sexuality.
I've never considered coming out an act of bravery. Before anything it's an act to restore one's personal sanity. Good for Randi but I'm not going to aplaud. That he waited for so long is nothing to be particularly proud of.
I'd love to agree with Josh that one has a moral duty to come out. It's just that selfish reasons seem to always trump this.
because if you're a homosexual youth, all this is highly and uselessly hypothetical. without there being a sufficient number of "people like you" somewhere visible out there, you still end up severely alienated.It is also a lot easier to structurally discriminate against an "invisible" group. some historical/political context for the attitude that people should identify themselves whenever possible.
I must be missing something. How can we criticise people who are reluctant to come out because we want them to set an example and make it easier for people who are reluctant to come out?
The set of people that are in the closet can't be guilty of letting down the same set of people by all failing to be leaders.
Also couldn't such criticism be counter productive? What if the typical response to be expected from the out community was negative? As a prominent person, I'm thinking of coming out and I can expect to be put down for not doing it soon enough? Maybe later…
This question seems a little too close for comfort to those activist gays who deliberately out anyone they find, for the good of gays everywhere. Careers, loved ones, mere collateral damages; because the ends are justified.
My own personal opinion is that there could easily be no such thing as a pure heterosexual or homosexual orientation. Referring to Kinsey's old scale, I suspect people who report themselves as zeroes and sixes are polarised by the homophobia in our culture. They are in denial about actually being a 0.7 or a 5.3, about having fleeting, quickly suppressed thoughts. Then again, as we see on the Klein grid, what you are or what you were can change somewhat as life rolls along.
I say the sooner we get these old religion-inspired prejudices out of the way the better, just don't hurt any innocents while you're at it.
Besides, if I'm right then we are all bisexual to varying degrees, though I don't expect to live to see it taken as a given in society.
Because you wouldn't have one without the other ?
I think there is a difference between putting down someone and simply not applauding. I'm not criticizing Randi for not coming out before. I just don't think it's something to be particularly proud of.
Should he have done it earlier ? Yes, it would have been better for him and for others.
no one is criticising "people reluctant to come out" in general; the discussion was about it not being particularly brave to come out when you live/work in a very liberal environment (the skeptic movement and hollywood respectively), and that people have a responsibility to come out when possible to support those whose situations are actually bad and dangerous, precisely to make them increasingly less so.
on a different note, anyone have an idea when exactly the expansion of medicaid would come into effect?
Oh Jebus, I was going to say I wish I'd never typed the D-word. But I suppose I'm glad I did. I cringe reading it now because a) it looks so pompous and condescending and b) I now see that I have been unknowingly carrying that pompous condescension around with me the whole time. I sit here chastened and enlightened. Once again, sorry for the offence I caused.
I'm surprised that Josh, Rorschach and Jadehawk are still talking about it, though.
Rorschach is right in that I didn't mean anything bad by it. I certainly never meant to imply that GLBT people can't discuss GLBT issues in a calm, rational manner.
But Josh, Jadehawk and others are right in pointing out that it was stupid and offensive of me to think that my straightness gives me some sort of special qualification to talk about GLBT issues.
All I was trying to do was stick up for Randi.
Josh said: 'If this were a conversation about racial inequalities, it wouldn't even have occurred to you to say, "as a white guy, I think I can comment on this dispassionately." '
True, I probably wouldn't have put it like that, but if you were questioning the morality of a random 80-year-old black guy because he wasn't active in the Civil Rights movement, I'd probably stick up for him as well.
Oh, wow. I was so nervous about calling up the newspaper this morning for the headline. So relieved now. Also irritated at every facebook friend of mine who is now praying for our hell-doomed country, but I can deal with that. :D
Just read here that Stupak failed - overjoyed at that part!
You might not question his morality, but you wouldn't praise him either for not having been active in the civil rights movement, would you?
I haven't read anybody questioning Randi's morality. But that doesn't mean one should consider what he did as particularly brave.
Late to the party. I think that a decision to "come out" has to be a private matter--sexuality, rightly or wrongly, is one of the most private matters in our society and one about which many if not most feel some shame. But there is a distinction between private/public and right/wrong. The right thing to do is probably to come out.
Gay kids have a helluva time in school, and having people "like them" they can look to as having been successful and well adjusted is bound to help.
It is probably also better to not have shame about a characteristic that is at the core of one's identity.
However, the pressures to stay in the closet in our society are very strong. It is probably too much to expect that everyone will be able to overcome them. So while it is understandable to remain in the closet, that does not make it right.
abortion still won't be covered though
ambulocetacean, it's part of a larger argument. Telling a frustrated minority that they can't possibly speak to their own situation because they're just too emotional about it has been a silencing and dismissing tactic for, well, ever. It's a really neat little trick whereby the only people allowed to talk about it are the ones not affected, and therefore with no stake in it or any real knowledge of what's happening, and therefore nothing changes because all those "neutral" people really don't think there's anything wrong with the current situation. I'd argue that in some cases being dispassionate about a situation is a really bad thing, because it keeps one from really realizing the impact the situation is having on people.
I think (from my privileged status viewpoint) that there's no problem in being disappointed with Randi for not having come out sooner. There may indeed be people who have said/are saying this to him. My initial reaction was along the lines Menyambal stated - the first thing you do is acknowledge that for the person, this was a big step, so congratulate them for it, and that's the stage that most people are reacting with now. I would guess that talk of whether it was ethical from a philosophical standpoint of being an example will rise up more later. I guess my own personal point of view is that I don't hold anyone personally responsible for becoming an activist or role model; it's too much of a burden to impose on anyone. But I can still be disappointed in people who don't, especially if they have a lot of other privileges that would make it relatively easy for them to do so. I personally give Randi more leeway because of the time period he grew up in, but I understand that's also not the easiest thing to defend given that other people did find that courage. (He made this decision after watching Milk, for example.)
Pretty flower pops up again after 23 years. It's a bit shy.
Starting in 2014 probably
Hi Negentropyeater,
Re: Questioning morality, in his original posts Josh was saying that it was an ethical obligation to come out, especially for someone as well-known and comfortable as Randi.
Hi Carlie,
Oh, I didn't realise the political significance of the term at all, or even that that kind of tactic existed.
What I don't know you could just about squeeze into the Grand Canyon.
ambulocetacean - I didn't think you did; you clarified pretty quickly after your initial statement. I was just trying to explain that the explosion was due to the land mine you accidentally stepped on, not your footfall itself.
Oh yeah, I just want to say, "Well done, USA!".
(re the passing the vote for health care reform legislation).
Ambulocetacean,
I didn't read Josh as if he were questioning Randi's morality, but just that if someone is to be considered praiseworthy, he has to rise to a higher standard than what Randi did.
Josh #222:
I thought that was quite clear an I completely agree with him.
As it's sinking in, I just have to say a big huzzah. It's a crappy bill, and it will be at least 4 years before any changes are really seen, but it's a bill. Voting to take care of people won out marginally over selfishness. I know the fight is in the details and it's still a long slog ahead, but I have one small less thing to be cynical about, and I'm surprised what a load it was now that it's gone.
Some of its effects will be felt almost immediately, the end of lifetime limits on coverage, preexisting condition coverage exclusions for children, or insurance rescissions, as well as the extension of coverage to adult children, many of whom cannot find jobs or affordable health insurance.
Good point, neg. I must be still in denial that something happened that will actually make things better.
Think Rush Limbaugh will leave the country now like he promised?
I thought he wouldn't have to leave, since the Republicans and Teabaggers assured me - over and over again - that the entire world would come to an end with the passage of this health care bill.
They wouldn't be using hyperbole to drum up opposition to the bill, would they?
This bill will make things better for many Americans right away. It's true that one could have wished it'd make things better for many more and much faster but it seems this is too much to ask for taking into account the influence of the many selfish pigs who still wonder around with their big fat gobs wide open.
We have to recognize it for what it is: not the end of the process, but the beginning. Two hundreds years of the American dream myth, and forty years of the New Conservatism (where the tactic of dividing the poor and middle class and putting them at odds so that the wealthy could continue to misgovern the nation to their own benefit became a true art form), won't get scrubbed away overnight. This reform is the first step on the way to becoming a true "melting pot" (to use another tired myth), where we strive to advance together, rather than at the expense of someone else.
Crap. Take a weekend off from pharyngula and find a The Thread renewed with 387 posts, along with two more posts with over 200 comments total on them.
Goodbye, morning productivity...
Fortunately or unfortunately teh Thread never takes a weekend off, and sometimes it turns into fucking* Pandagon over here and other times it just kind of swirls around aimlessly but it does keep on going.
So I see it's still fucking "Euphemism Week" and the permalink on the sidebar is still a subThread behind, which means teh poor CO isn't home yet, poor guy.
Now, I am a taciturn Swede as is my father and as was his and all the way back to the invention of taciturn Swedes. I am probably as close to the full kolinahr, at least outwardly, as anybody you will meet (and this has cost me dear). I will not remark on my unremarkable sexual orientation. So you can tag me as 'privilege' and ignore me if that's your wont and no hard feelings. But I have to say that I found this:
way off base.
*getting really tired of typing all these pointless ital tags
Jadehawk:
I understand your point, but it's still not fair to impose a moral obligation on people to be open about their sexuality if they don't want to. For some people, those things are private.
Health Care: Take a Deep Breath
Before dissecting the bill, take a moment to realize something. For the first time in 30 years, a President has cared enough to invest sufficient political capital to force the legislative branch to pass legislation that will actually help people in the bottom half of the economy.
It's not perfect. It's far from perfect, but it's a little, tiny baby step away from the philosophy that government is the problem--the philosophy that Republican's have been doing their best to prove every time they got hold of government.
We all had a big scare a few months ago when, Lynna, someone we all care about, had a TIA. We were all worried about how she would pay for the tests she needed and how she would deal with what those tests showed with no health insurance. Others on this very board have similar stories.
Well, maybe now those stories can have happier endings. Maybe this is a first step toward reclaiming the country's economy and government from the giant monopoly game they've become.
So, take a moment. Feel good. Then get right back in there and take the country back for reality!
By my calculations, PZ should be on the shuttle bus back to Morris. Sniff...Sniff. The odor of euphamism week is begining to dissipate as he nears home.
HCR Bill Passes. Three cheers....
Complain all you want about what the Health Care bill has and doesn't have... it's something, where before there was nothing, and I applaud it.
The faucet of health care reform is now open, even if but a trickle. I think it will be much easier to open even wider going forward than it will be to shut it off again.
[/2 cents]
I admit it - it makes me feel kind of good that there are several arguments going on and I haven't been involved in any of them.
:)
Two videos (I hope they can be watched in other countries):
First, BookTV had a nice talk by the authors of The Spirit Level, the book that Knockgoats has been mentioning here for the past few months:
http://www.booktv.org/Watch/11197/The+Spirit+Level+Why+Greater+Equality…
The other has Stephen Pinker and his wife, Rebecca Goldstein, talking about her new novel, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God. Unfortunately, it's not great - he's not nearly critical enough,* she attributes various phenomena to a "religious impulse" that are questionably so attributed, some of the arguments that she claims as novel (:P) contributions are not new in the slightest, and I find some of her use of fiction in this context problematic (the book may be good - hard to tell from this). But some might find it interesting (I was particularly thinking about Kel during the short discussion of math at the end).
http://fora.tv/2010/03/05/Pinker_and_Goldstein_Reason_Fiction__Faith
*They should make more clear in the title that it's a discussion of her book rather than any sort of two-way exchange about these questions.
Apropos of nothing: I'd like to report a 199-year-old concern troll.
I am currently reading about the various 'blasphemy cases' that took place in the 19th century, and I recently came upon the case of People v. Ruggles. The following is part of a statment from that case written by New York Supreme Court justice James Kent:
Bill Donohue must have this framed somewhere.
:D
Oh, MrFire - while you're around: Thanks so much for your link to the Chomsky/Roy event. I didn't know about it. I would go, but that's Good Friday and I'll be visiting family. Hope you enjoy it!
I had spelt it like that but then I made the mistake of checking WP to if I was right. D'Oh. (Actually, for some reason I wondered if the ^ could be on the a - I have no idea now, why.)
I admit it - it makes me feel kind of good that there are several arguments going on and I haven't been involved in any of them.
That is only because you have not commented much the past few days.
Oh, I wasn't saying I wouldn't have been involved had I been around/commenting more, just that things were equally contentious in my absence.
But you left such a huge target. It would have been wrong not to take a swing.
The Thread has been growing too quickly for me to follow recently, but when I read the news of Randi's coming out, I really wanted to see what everyone was saying about it here and chime in.
I'm somewhat impressed by Randi's coming out. Actually, I think anyone's coming out publicly should be followed by celebration, especially for the older folks who lived through America's shameful past, unless the freshly out person has been actively destroying the lives of other bi/trans/gay people (Roy Ashburn) at which point a cold reception is appropriate. But in Randi's case, I think it was brave of him as an individual with a huge public reputation to get past his fears and put it out there.
That is kind of in line with my past experience even though I wasn't out in high school. But I don't feel resentment for the teacher who turned out to be a lesbian, only wonderment at what could have been if only she had come out earlier, such as maybe giving some of us gay younglings a strong role model against what otherwise was a thoroughly gay-bashing culture. (She did come out years later from what I've heard.)
It's a good question that would be great to get an answer to. He kind of hints at the answer here, but he should write more about it!
Quite the opposite for me, Pikachu. ;) I was finally free and got more in touch with myself by going on a rampage of sorts. Everything my magic wand touched sparkled.
That's what irked me about Governor James McGreevey's coming out. Why couldn't he just finish his dang term instead of pretending that being an ex-straight gay man is shameful? I don't think he helped the larger cause at all by acting that way after coming out.
Hey SC, my pleasure. Strange Gods expressed a lot of interest, and I said I'd try to record the talk if they allow that (and assuming they don't post the whole thing online). In that event, let me know if you'd like a copy :)
HDTV Crab
Something slightly funny.
My ass of a Senator (all apologies to donkeys out there) said that Health Care Reform is going to be Obama's Waterloo.
Well check out what people have been doing in response on his facebook fanpage.
For got this link as well.
http://leftake.com/
I guess Obama was Wellington then.
I have never really understood why people say something or other is someone's "Waterloo". It is almost as though they forget it was an overwhelming victory for the Allies.
Rev BDC
Does it say if Obama in this context is Napoleon, Blucher or Wellington?
Nope.
But details were never DeMint's strong point.
Actually beyond acting like a far right reactionary asshole I don't think he has a strong point.
Bollocks - too late again!
After much deep thought, I have decided that this song is my official response to tone trolls.
Toadies-The Minutemen
Number seven
On the chump list
Playing stooge
Eatin shit
Toadies
Toadies
Using that
As a reason
For kicking shit
All the dumb fucks
Toadies
Toadies
We are cuss words
Nearly illiterate
Dedicated
To fighting toadies
Toadies
Toadies
Toadies
I have spoken!
Ever heard of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"? This is so easy! You wouldn't appreciate it if someone stole your stuff, so don't steal someone else's stuff. You wouldn't want to be beaten up or killed by someone else, so don't beat up or kill someone else. Lather, rinse, repeat.
What's wrong with orally, as part of a standard upbringing? What's wrong with providing an example for them in your own life, by the choices you make? What's wrong with explaining why you made those choices?
A.Noyd:
This is kinda my thought, too. And I'm guessing that those people will be trying to retro-dismiss him, in fact have probably already started, as well as dismiss his future work. IMO, it was brave of him to come out now, if not as brave as it would have been if he'd done it years ago.
But then, what do I know? I'm only half-way out as an atheist. Not brave, not a role model.
Caine:
Yup. Dichotomies seem to come more easily to people in general, than nuance. And goodness knows, sexuality is nuanced!
Well we can look to experts to help. Scientists and doctors can have important things to say in debates on ethics and morality. Science and medicine does not tell us what is right or wrong, but they inform any debate on the subject. Sociologists also have a role to play. They can tell us how people actually behave in different situations, and that can be very useful in deciding on policy. There will be other disciplines I have forgotten that also have an important job in informing the debate.
Moral and ethical philosophers can also perform an important function. They can help us avoid falling into logical fallacies, and formulate better arguments. They will also have considerable experience of ethical and moral issues in general and quite possibly insight into the best way to resolve them.
Politicians will also have a role, since many moral and ethical issues may require legislation.
There are also groups who claim to be able to offer some important insight but seldom do. There is no reason why religious groups should be accorded any special status in discussion on moral and ethical issues. They should be entitled to a say, but what they say is no more important than other groups not directly affected by the issues in hand.
None of this is especially easy. We will not know we are right, all we can do is the best we can. We need to accept we can make mistakes, and that if new evidence comes to light then our moral and ethical positions may need to change. It requires a public with an understanding of how science works, of how statistics work and that understands the importance of evidence. It also requires all those taking part do so willing to look at their own positions, and ask to what extent those positions are arrived at on the basis of reason, and to check they are not taking a position based on some kind of pre-held dogma.
Ummm...What!?!
First of all, congratulations to the US of A.
Ah. I saw "unites the advantages of the pill and the copper coil" on the German company website (the first ghit) and didn't read further.
Strange that they write Kupferspirale instead of just Spirale there – the latter would have been completely unambiguous in this context, and the former sounds like the copper is important. ~:-|
Exactly. :-)
It has almost become a fashion for Hollywood actresses (!) to come out as bi. Lindsay Lohan, Megan Fox, Angelina Misnamed-Jolie… not a single man, however. :-/ windy linked to TV Tropes; a likely reason is mentioned there, and it doesn't count as "better".
If you're a straight white nerd like me, you do know ;-)
Sounds likely to me.
If they have enough potential partners available!
That's probably the biggest reason, and the one that motivates those homophobes who don't merely express disgust but call for legal or lynching action. It's probably very important among the origins of homophobia in religion, but it extends beyond religion – witness this rather spectacular example. (If you're into morbid fascination, or if you like staring at train wrecks, read that guy's other comments.)
But I think another reason, while probably less strongly motivating in most or all cases, is perhaps even more widespread. This is that, if you're straight enough, the thought of sexual attraction between members of your own sex sends mixed messages – people who are not sexy engaging in otherwise sexy acts –, and this contradiction produces disgust.
This might be part of the explanation why homophobic patriarchal cultures hate male homosexuality so much more than the female version. (Lesbians are mentioned a single time in the Bible, and that's the place in the New Testament that seems to list homosexuality as a consequence of sin rather than as a cause.)
Just for the record, zeroes exist. It may well be that we're very rare, though. Maybe it's just me ;-)
MAJeff has reported being a six – he once commented, with amusement, that when evangelical zealots ask him if he has ever looked at a woman with lust*, he can say "no" without lying. :-)
* As part of the missionary strategy: prove to him he's a sinner, prove to him he needs a big-S Savior.
:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
(Now I can laugh.)
<headdesk>
Consider that metaphor stolen.
I must say that it came across to me the same way. I was going to say pretty much the same thing as Jadehawk – it's true that Josh, OSG, gets emotional more easily than most others here, sometimes so emotional that it distracts from his point if you aren't used to this, but he still has a point, and not a bad one. What he says matters, not how he says it.
Let's have a look at comment 337 again:
By way of empathy, you can be emotionally invested even if you're not involved. In fact, I submit you should be.
"If you're not outraged, you haven't been paying attention"…
I maintain that good and bad are contextual to the self replicating informational organism which is holding the view.
Example:
A cetacean may hold the view that He/She won't harpoon you in your living room if you don't harpoon him/her in theirs. However, it would still be the case that that individual would hold the view that being harpooned is bad.
A company (though I can't see one as conscious) must feel that evil is a negative balance sheet.
The usual golden rule argument for morality gets sort of mixed if you have to grant the franchise to individuals other than people. I find it not at all odd that people find little to decry in mistreatment of cephalopods. They see things through a filtered human perspective.
Majroer - sorry.
Re Randi: Just listened to the interview and - meh. So what? Why now? Good for him.
I agree, that it's silly to call it a brave thing to do now. And I think I understand Josh' curiousity and agree that this is not a subject that cannot be discussed.
LOL!
!!!!!
Awesome.
My favorite love song:
On the back of a winged horse, through the skies pearly grey. Love is leaf-like... you and me, baby.
Twinkle, twinkle, blah, blah, blah, etc.
?
Talk of Toadies has put me in mind of Toad in the Hole.
So here in a recipe.
1lb Pork sausages, best quality you can afford.
2 Eggs
4 oz Plain Flour.
Milk.
Start by making the batter.
Add flour and the eggs to a bowl and mix well.
Slowly add milk until you get something the consistency of single cream. Add a generous amount of salt, and pepper to taste.
Set aside for 30 mins.
Now prepare the sausages.
Pre-heat oven to 220C.
If you have a pan that is safe on stove, and in the oven use that, otherwise start off in a frying pan and pre-heat a dish with a small quantity of oil in the oven.
Quickly fry the sausages so they brown on all side, but they do not need to cook through.
If using a pan than can go in oven, add the batter mix and ensure the bottom of the pan is evenly coated.
If using a frypan, transfer sausages to the pan from the oven, and then add batter mix ensuring that the bottom of the pan is evenly coated.
Cook for about 25-30 minutes. Do not be tempted to check on how you batter is doing in the early stages of cooking, as opening the oven door can cause it to collapse.
The key is having the oil that the batter is added to very hot. Hot enough to be smoking and a little scary.
Serve with onion gravy and veg.
Variation:
Fry a large quantity of onions very slowly over a low heat until they are caramelised. This can take an hour or more and they will reduce in volume considerably. Reserve some onions for gravy, and add remainder when you add the batter mix.
Hmm, do you think that perhaps our culture makes it easier for women to come out as bi than men? I don't know enough to answer that question.
Do I detect a fellow SoSZ, or did you get lucky with the acronym lol?
I'm resisting the urge to make that into a sexual joke...Oh what the hell. My, Aratina! You must work your wand an awful lot to make everything sparkle!
Ok on the serious side. I'm glad for any who comes out and choose to express themselves the way they want. For me, I just like things as they are, except now I will not make it a secret to others that I think guys are hawt!
One other variations to the above:
Wrap the sausages in bacon and omit the browning stage. Otherwise proceed as above.
This is probably my favourite variation.
You can also add sage leaves to the hot oil just before pouring the batter.
A crushed clove of garlic adds something to the dish as well.
Just play around with it. No recipe should be cast in stone and never varied.
Scholar of Shen Zhou? The folks who contribute to the early Chinese history site, including Rot3K related stuff? The folks who took a bit from Xiahou Mao on April Fools Day last year or the year before? Really?
Josh:
I'd sub in "not stereotypically masculine" (or maybe, "not conventionally masculine") for "feminine", thus covering the nerd-guys of yesteryear, denigrated for their disinterest in sports, and not accepted for their interest in science, math, computers, etc. Come to think of it, this would also cover girls who were interested in cars, or sports, or whatever (you know, "guy-stuff"), too.
I suspect you are right. Look at how popular girl on girl porn is with males who identify as being straight. Or how popular Xena: Warrior Princess was, with its suggestion of a lesbian liaison between Xena and her sidekick.
MAJeff would be able to give far better insight
Ay, that be they. I wasn't there for the Xiahou Mao bit, but I was there when the headmaster banned himself under a technicality.
@425: Maybe I don't see all that much girl on girl porn made in Merika (Actually, I don't see any at all, so grain of salt), but it always appeared to me that girl on girl porn is acceptable because it's implicit that if a guy were there, he'd be granted automatic access and it would become a threesome oriented on servicing the male.
I suppose it's possible lesbians get more truck then gay men, but it's a bit hard for me to imagine since women generally get less then men. Then again, maybe that's what it'd be about.
Ol'Greg, you really are just a hopeless romantic, aren't you. And I ain't talkin' about love.
Yeah, I was listening to Double Nickles On The Dime this morning.
Oh absolutely. It is all about men. It is all about titillation, and the belief that no woman would truly be a lesbian if she had ever had sex with a "real" man.
Neat, Gyeong. He was really proud of being allowed to write for their april fools gag. Not very familiar with the site in general, but I'm peripherally aware of them due to being attached to the Rot3K sim.
Or how popular Xena: Warrior Princess was, with its suggestion of a lesbian liaison between Xena and her sidekick.
It went beyond suggestions. Plenty of times, subtext became text. And not just when, for one episode, Xena and Gabrielle were thespians.
Janine @413:
Do you, like me, find crazy foreign ads all the funnier for not understanding what's being said?
I have never heard of this dish, or of a dish called this before. Not that amazing because there are lots of things I haven't heard about... but where is it from?
I remember some gay activists were angry that Tara (lover of Willow) got killed off in Buffy. They thought it was an example of this trope. However, Joss Whedon isn't anti-homosexual, he's just anti-happy. Honestly, if you see two characters in a happy, loving relationship or about to enter one on his one of his shows chances are one of them is gonna end up dead (e.g, Buffy-Angel, Giles-Ms.Calender (aka, the technopagan), Angel-Cordelia, Wesley-Fred, Echo-Paul, Topher-Bennett, etc.).
I got into that community because of Dynasty Warriors, which turned out to be notoriously in accurate in history.
I think it has much to do with the consumption of the female body as object of male pleasure. Could be wrong, though.
MrFire, even if I knew what was being said, I would still be freaked out by the visuals. But was is easy enough to guess what was going on.
Now you've done it! Next he'll show you his spotted dick.
--o--
Mmmmh - thespians ...
I just got lucky :) I haven't even played The Romance of the Three Kingdoms games or their spin-offs before, so I wouldn't make a very good SoSZ.
Heheheh. I knew I was taking a chance with that one but I thought the word "magical" might deflect it. Guess not, LOL.
That's actually how it ended up being for me too. There was the period of self discovery and daring, however.
How about soup?
Xena's an interesting case. From what I understand from a TVLand special on gay icons in TV, Xena was one of those cases where the writers decided she was straight and they'd tease the viewers...
...And the actresses thought they were gay. Well, Xena was bi, but her actor said that once they did the on screen kiss of life bit, she considered them married. So subtext was written as subtext, and played out as text, and in general it's not as clean cut as when JK Rowling said Dumbledore was gay.
@ Matt Penfold -
Yay for Toad in the Hole recipe! That's a favorite, and I've snagged it for the cookbook.
To all the rest: thanks for the conversation above, even though it got overwrought a few times.
#433 Ol'Greg
I've always understood that toad in the hole was a traditional British, indeed, English dish. Probably originating from Yorkshire. Certainly, TITH traditionally consists of suasages in a Yorkshire Pudding batter. I note that the recipe given calls for very hot (smoking) oil and that is absolutely required for Yorkshire Pudding.
Plate-sized Yorkshire Pudding with gravy used to be served as a separate course before the main meat course as a filler. Well made Yorkshire Pudding can be a delicacy in its own right. I went to Uni in Yorkshire - in the mysterious East - and my landlady used to give us Yorkshire Pudding.
TITH has all the features of food for a poor family: lots of filling at low cost with cheap ingredients, including home grown onions. The separate Yorkshire Pudding course then becomes combined with cheap meat in a single course.
Cheap "sausages" contain little that is recognisable as meat as most people know it - gristle, fat, breadcrumbs, and machine recovered meat, miscellaneous offal. Up to a few years ago (I may not be up to date) pork sausages need only contain 40% pork of which half could be fat. Beef sausages need only to contain 30% beef, again with lots of fat. (Of course, sausages of far higher quality are available with a huge range of meats (venison, wild boar, kangaroo, ostrich etc. etc.) and with very high lean meat content.)
Have you read the Catholic Encyclopedia article on blasphemy?
Note that technically, by the explication in the article, simply saying "There is no God" or "I deny the Holy Spirit" is blasphemous.
I find it amusing, though, that in giving an example of the extremes of blasphemy, a Catholic Encyclopedia -- quite possibly Bill Donahue has a copy on his shelves -- has the phrase "Jesus Christ was a bastard and his mother was a whore" inside it.
Amen, Catholic Encyclopedia. Amen.
PS:
f
u
censorshit
k
Feynmaniac:
You can add Zoe-Wash to your list. Although, given that he knew he wouldn't be doing anything more with Firefly/Serenity, he did leave a possible happiness openings for Mal and Inara and Kaylee and Simon.
If someone were to start a fund to buy it a one-way ticket, I'd consider donating…
Euphamisism week is over.
Here is a fourteen year old article with Liz Friedman, at the time, co-producer of Xena. (She is now the supervising producer of House.)
Thanks Alan B. The breading sounds very good on it actually. I don't know much about English food.
actually, I think it's just an extension of the madonna/whore thing: madonnas don't fuck anything, whores fuck everything; and "everything" includes other women. So those who feel the need to play out the "whore" role (hollywood starlets definitely belong in that category) would almost feel like bisexuality is a job requirement.
Beat me to it, Caine... was thinking the same thing.
Damn, but I miss that show. Just watched the whole series again on BluRay this weekend.
Missed that bit about Whedon before. Reading back on this from Feynmaniac..
It IS an example of that trope. Period. Tropes are not suddenly not-tropes because you like that example. Gay people enter screen, Gay people leave it for a senseless reason. Bury your Gays. It made for an interesting plotline, but it remains that trope, even with a justifying edit.
However, the REAL reason gay activists were livid over Tara and Willow is because Whedon specifically promised that he would not kill or make them psycho. In interviews with the fans, he made it very clear that he understood their icon status, that he understood how rare role models were, and specifically said he'd leave them alone in deference to that. Regardless of how one feels about Black Dude Dies First and the like, once you make that kind of statement to your fans, when you renege, the fans will be angry.
I agree with this. Likewise bi women are assumed to be completely hypersexual and even indiscriminate with mates.
I guess I fit more into pansexual, but since I'm not really that sexual in general it seems sort of silly for me personally to worry to much about it. I kind of hate having to have all these words and rules.
I like people. I love people. Some times I *REALLY* love people! :D
#451
{pedant mode on} So is euphemism week {pedant mode off}
[Ed. Someone should tell Alan B that "pedant" is a euphemism for irritating b*****d.]
freak. I hate people. a lot of them are such bores, and the ones that aren't are mostly infuriating morons. :-p
Grrrrrr...
Fucking David Mabus still trolling my blog...
Apparently the dimwits at Google's 'Blogger' don't think death threats are worth their time to look into.
yeah, mine too. fucker is even starting to give me advice about comment policy
#453
English cooking runs the entire gamut from un-utterably dreadful to sublime. Unfortunately, the former is more likely than the latter.
English food can be some of the best in the world when it uses fresh local ingredients and is done by someone with skill and passion. But the same can be said for many (all?) styles of cooking.
He did that with me once, on his first and last post. Something about it being a southeast asian politics blog must have turned him off.
He always does that. It's a form post, where he posts some inane thing, a death threat or otherwise apocalyptic warning and says "You should add some comment moderation to your blasphemy". Every damn time.
Celtic_Evolution:
So do I. I was watching the series again this weekend myself. :D
My sympathies. I had to shut down the guest book on my photography gallery, thanks to his trolling.
I had mixed feelings about the killing of Tara. While not the most dynamic of characters, she did provide a calm center when the rest of the Scoobies were going apeshit. And while the relationship was caring, dammit, Willow was abusive. The act of changing Tara's memories was an act of violence.
I did not see this as a stable relation, therefore, I did not see it as a betrayal. Also, I looked at it this way, what if Joss chose a more trivial reason to bring about Dark Willow? I think that would have been more insulting.
Yep, same to mine. Though it's really not hard to just permanently delete the comments as they appear.
I've been thinking of moving my blog to someplace with a little more control, so I could block by IP address... haven't investigated enough to find out what blog hosting services provide what yet.
Dunno... i like Blogger ok... provides more or less what I want... just wish I had a bit more control.
Rutee:
Anyone truly familiar with the way Whedon works would never have believed that - he has stated freely and often that he always kills the ones he loves the most, and he does. Every time.
We have to recognize it for what it is: not the end of the process, but the beginning.
in more ways than one.
do recall that this must make it past reconcilliation in the Senate, WIHOUT basically even a single word change, or it goes back AGAIN to the house to be voted on AGAIN.
yes, this could get VERY messy yet.
Celtic_Evolution, I think you can block with an external service. There are some free ones you add to your blog that allow you to block certain IPs.
I have one on my blog, but that's on blogger.
Yeah people are just a waste.
They're all over the place.
Ya see 'em everywhere ya go.
And I don't like their face.
Ol'Greg -
I think I did know that at one time... thanks for the reminder... I think I'll look into that again.
he has stated freely and often that he always kills the ones he loves the most, and he does.
"I'm a leaf on the wind... *BAAAKKK*"
Caine, Fleur du mal:
Arghhh....how did I forget about that?
Ceiling River is watching you have sex.
_ _ _ _
Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom:
I liking it has nothing to do with it. The trope is more than just having a gay character die. It's explained in the article I linked to:
In #439 I gave many examples of people in a relationship on a Whedon show dying.
Interesting, I'd never hear this. In any case, Willow remains a lesbian after Tara's death and eventually finds someone else.
I guess that's the advantage of having an "unblog." I don't have trolls. I also don't have commenters, readers, or content. Every time I start to think of something to post/rant about, PZ or a Pharyngulite has already said it better than I could hope to. So instead I just post occasional brain droppings which I know nobody will ever read (mainly because I don't link to it anywhere). I'm rambling. My point: Sorry to hear you're having to deal with Mabus, he seems very unbalanced and I'm glad I don't have to put up with him.
You're being thought of with deep sympathy here in Austin . . .
thanks muchly.
:)
It is really hard to say which death was more pointless, Wash or Anya. While she had a very long existence, only towards the end did she become her own person.
"Emulsified high fat offal tube"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tbwYTKjQrM
(1:07 onwards)
Civil Service rhetoric
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eikb2lX5xYE&feature=related
Who reads the UK papers?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2M&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Ugh. Always hated that scene. Seemed totally unnecessary to me. Yeah, I get how it sets up Zoe's frame of mind as the reavers close in and sets up some tension about just exactly how she's going to react with almost no time to process what just happened...
But man... why'd they have to kill Wash???
Emulsified!
Celtic_Evolution:
I remember from interviews that Whedon said the fans already had a strong suspicion he'd kill Book and he didn't think one crew death was enough and he wanted one of the deaths to shock and upset people. Alan Tudyk was very excited about having a possible chance to die and agitated strongly for Wash being the one to croak. I love Serenity, but that damn scene still gets to me.
I have no clue what this means, but it amuses me muchly.
You can read it in the Sunday papers.
Yeah, I think in both cases the series was ending and someone needed to die for dramatic effect. Sad, because I liked both characters. It was weird to see the actor who played Wash be the psycho murderer Alpha in Dollhouse.
Also, while on the subject, rumour has it that Whedon killed off Jenny Calednar because the actress, Robia LaMorte, was an annoying godbot. While LaMorte is a born-again Christian and Whedon is an atheist, I have no idea if the rumour is true.
Then you must, without hesitation, immediately find your nearest DVD reseller and purchase / rent / steal the Firefly series and the concluding movie, Serenity.
You must. Really.
seconded.
I think Robia became a godbot between the time Jenny was killed and when she came back to be The First. She saw The First as Satan and was not happy about it.
Thirded.
I have no clue what this means, but it amuses me muchly.
Ranks right up there with; "Your shirt...".
Sorry. Lazarus gets very hot and bothered when I ask him to play video. I haven't even watched Sean Carroll's Dark Universe lectures yet.
http://www.greatestmoviedeaths.com/2009/04/serenity-leaf-on-wind.html
Eh? The news services here in Europe are all(?) saying basically the same thing—what the House of Turds passed is the Senile's version, plus at least one bill of “fixes”. That allows Obama to sign into law the core bill since it doesn't differ.
Here, for instance, is how France24 puts it:
The Turd's “fixes” bill now has to go to the Seniles. I've no idea what is in this “fixes” bill(s?), or, for that matter, precisely what is in the core bill which both chambers have pissed-on.
p.s. My use of the terms House of Turds, Seniles, et al. does not mean I disapprove of universal health care. On the contrary, I'm quite happy this has happened (despite not knowing details). My use of those terms is simply that I have almost no respect or confidence in the moorons infesting the capital.
Really? I'll have to stop using such disgraceful language.
<*clutches pearls, swoons*>
PS:
Fuck psychotic trolls.
HAH!
Or rather /'iʔ'iʔ'iʔ'iʔ'iʔ'iʔ'iʔ'iʔ/ or a close approximation thereof.
that's how it's being reported here, too. next step: Obama's desk.
What a surprise.....
Limbaugh backtracks on threat to "leav[e] the country" if health reform passes
Eh? The news services here in Europe are all(?) saying basically the same thing—what the House of Turds passed is the Senile's version, plus at least one bill of “fixes”. That allows Obama to sign into law the core bill since it doesn't differ.
you're right, i was a bit unclear. it's the fixes themselves (which are significant), that have to go back to the Senate.
republicans can introduce as many new changes to the "fixes" bill as they wish (though each has a simple thumbs up/down, so one wonders just how much time they will waste with that).
if any changes are actually made to the bill, as it it left the house, with the "fixes", then it has to go BACK to the house for another vote.
that's simply the way it works. even though the original bill passed, these "changes" could compromise what is there significantly.
it's why significant legislation in the states is so rarely ever completed; it seems there are procedures in place to drag things out indefinitely.
here's an article on that:
http://www.examiner.com/x-5738-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m3d21-Healt…
and has links to explain what the current "fixes" are:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-5738-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2010m3…
which, as i said, could have any number of riders attached once it leaves the Senate again.
"Republicans are preparing to try to derail the reconciliation bill by using budget points of order that would require 60 votes to block. Democrats want Frumin to prevent votes on Republican points of order that are intended to knock out all or parts of the bill.
Any change would force the House to vote again on the bill, although it would not affect enactment of the original Senate bill.
A key GOP challenge will focus on changes to the "Cadillac tax" on high-value plans included in the reconciliation bill. Republicans argue that the changes are prohibited by the Congressional Budget Act because they would affect Social Security tax revenue.
Democrats are expected to argue that there is a less-direct impact on Social Security than the law contemplates.
Reconciliation allows 20 hours of debate. The Senate will then start a "vote-a-rama" on a long list of GOP amendments. It remains unclear how long that will take, but aides from both parties said the bill can pass by Friday. The key will be whether Frumin at some point judges amendments to have become dilatory, the equivalent of a filibuster, which is not allowed under reconciliation."
link
While I normally would not give the loathsome David Frum the benefit of a hit on his site, his latest post is well worth the read. It is a good analysis of why the Republican party is self destructing even if his conclusions about what the HCR vote means is nonsense. Wonder how long before he is forced to apologize to Rush.
http://www.frumforum.com/waterloo
Also, via a tip on DailyKos I noticed Shep Smith, the only semi journalist on Fox, took Steele to the woodshed. Also fun to watch.
Ciao y'all
I've long since lost track of the current changes to the bill, so I don't have any detailed knowledge of what it does. But as I understand it, its provisions include preventing insurers from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, requiring insurers to cover preventive care, and allowing children to remain on their parents' insurance policies until their 27th birthday. Maybe I'm missing something, but won't that just push up the cost of insurance even more? I realise the bill also contains an expansion of Medicaid, but Wikipedia says that part doesn't come into effect until 2014, so I don't see how the bill is going to make insurance more affordable for the poor in the short term. As I said, though, I'm not very clear on the current state of the bill (which is my own fault, but I've been very busy) and could be talking nonsense, so please correct me if this is the case.
Fourthed. I'm a leaf in the wind . . . I was so shocked, my heart literally stopped for a moment. I saw Serenity in the theater; had no warning.
the poor don't have insurance and will continue to not have it until the expansion, the exchanges, and the subsidies kick in.
hence my entirely selfish interest in when the expansion will kick in.
Exactly, which is why a public option was needed to induce insurance companies to cut costs and overhead to be competitive with the public option.
I believe the rationale now is that since people will be forced to buy insurance of some kind (meaning mainly the 20-somethings who confidently assert that THEY will never get into an accident or anything so they don't buy health care), that extra input will make up for the difference. It's basically a public plan funneled through private companies, which I think is just about the worst possible scenario. My hope is that it will become unworkable in a few years and that the people who are acting like selfish idiots now will then start screaming for a public option.