?

Log in

No account? Create an account
[links] Link salad nervously eyes chemo Friday - Lakeshore — LiveJournal
An author of no particular popularity

Jay Lake
Date: 2011-09-29 05:36
Subject: [links] Link salad nervously eyes chemo Friday
Security: Public
Tags:cancer, christianism, culture, gay, healthcare, media, parenting, personal, photos, science, weird

Parenting: Harder Once You Actually Do It — Andrew Wheeler on parenting. I was amused by this.

Facing down my eighth-grade tormentor — Sigh. (Thanks to [info]shsilver.)

Throwing Horses: 1900Shorpy with a photograph that I really don’t understand.

Modified ecstasy ‘attacks blood cancers’ — Wild and weird, this. (Thanks to [info]danjite.)

Einstein was wrong: Wait, no he wasn’t… general theory of relativity proved by cosmic experimentCentauri Dreams with more on this.

What should have been Headlines in the Corporate Media: Today’s Best of the Blogosphere — Juan Cole with an interesting, and sobering, roundup of things you probably didn’t hear on the morning news.

Rights Collide as Town Clerk Sidesteps Role in Gay Marriages — As a public employee, she has obligations that aren’t magically obliterated by her religiously endorsed personal bigotry.

Refusing to Kill Daughter, Pakistani Family Defies Tradition, Draws Anger — Another reason I am a staunch atheist is disgust at the behaviors which can be privileged by religion. Islamic ‘honor killings’ rank very, very high on the list of reasons I’ll have no truck with the Abrahamic God.

Erasing false balance: the right is more antiscience than the left — Which, fundamentally, is what comes of endorsing the idiocy of evolution denial while trolling for votes. (Yet another reason I’m an atheist, btw; the degree to which religious belief privileges wilful ignorance.) I am not saying that anyone who calls themself a Republican is antiscience. I am saying the leaders of the party and their mouthpieces are, and Chris does a good job of showing that this is now the mainstream thrust of the party. If you are a conservative person who is pro-science, it is up to you to talk to your leaders about this issue.

Michael Reagan: Dad might have lost 2012 primary — Funny stuff. Except the part where Mike smokes crack and says his dad was the greatest president of our lifetimes.

The 21st Century Another American Century? Don’t Bet on It — Note the key events cited in this post as undermining American power and credibility, and which gang of patriots presided over them.

Anti-Antichristianity influences politicsSlactivist Fred Clark on the widespread Christianist lunacy in Republican politics.

Charisma Isn’t Enough — Conservative commentator Daniel Larison on Chris Christie and Jon Hunstman. I especially liked his closer: I won’t discount the importance of a candidate’s visceral appeal, but I would point out that the things that conservatives may find viscerally appealing in politicians also tend to be the things that make them politically toxic to many others.

?otD: Ever had chemo?


9/29/2011
Writing time yesterday: 2.5 hours (WRPA)
Body movement: 30 minute stationary bike ride
Hours slept: 7.25 hours (solid)
Weight: 222.8
Currently reading: The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer by Siddhartha Mukherjee

Originally published at jlake.com. You can comment here or there.

Post A Comment | 17 Comments | | Link






russ: zen
User: goulo
Date: 2011-09-29 12:45 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:zen
From the article:
Kainat said that despite the pressures her family refused to kill her.

"It is the tradition, but if the family doesn't permit it, then it won't happen. My father, my brother, my mom didn't allow it," she said.

And that defiance has left the family fearing for their lives. The family's new home in Karachi has been attacked a number of times.

I bet a big part of the mob's anger at the family for not "honor killing" her is that this kind of refusal to question the "honor killing" mentality means that the mob is forced to consider the disturbing possibility that maybe they've been murdering people for no good reason and that "honor killings" aren't actually so "honorable"...

"Hey, what do you mean there's something wrong with killing a woman because she got raped? I killed MY daughter after she got raped, so you BETTER kill yours...!"
Reply | Thread | Link



fjm
User: fjm
Date: 2011-09-29 13:08 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Islam demands two witnesses for adultery and specifically excludes rape.

Do not confuse the patriarchal desire to control women/fight battles of pride over the bodies of women, with the tenets of a religion. Do not confuse "the religious" with their religion.
Reply | Thread | Link



Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2011-09-29 14:06 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Do not confuse "the religious" with their religion.

I take your point, yet it is the cloak of their religion that privileges many truly pathological behaviors on the part of the religious. The politics of the USA provide many sterling examples of this. Standing as I do outside that cloak, it can sometimes feel like a distinction without a difference.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



fjm
User: fjm
Date: 2011-09-29 14:23 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
In the absence of religion, people find other cloaks very easily:

eugenics
over population
consensus politics

Aetheists are no more immune to this than any other group. You stand outside *this* particular cloak but only because aethism is not the dominant meme of your culture. If it were, we'd have the same kinds of extremism--see various people's Cultural Revolutions.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Jay Lake: religion-belief_rev2
User: jaylake
Date: 2011-09-29 14:32 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:religion-belief_rev2
Perhaps it's a purely American phenomenon (a function of our First Amendment), but there are in fact a number of behaviors which would be criminal if not explicitly protected by religion. For example, as an atheist, I can't deny my daughter needed medical treatment without being charged with child abuse/neglect or even manslaughter. As a Bible-believing Christian, I could do precisely that as a tenet of my faith. There's an ongoing issue here in Oregon where faith healing was recently removed as a defense in criminal child endangerment cases in an attempt to address this. In many other states claims religious belief are a still valid affirmative defense for such charges.

On a less explicitly charged basis, look at the influence of evolution denial on American politics and educational policy. It's a piece of intellectual idiocy on a par with moon landing denial, but because it comes from a religious perspective, it is privileged and honored in a way that non-religious idiocies are not and cannot be.

It's not that I think atheists, or anyone else, aren't capable of all manner of dangerous idiocy. It's that in my country, dangerous religious idiocy enjoys protections in law and culture that most other groups do not.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



fjm
User: fjm
Date: 2011-09-29 15:28 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I think we just talked into agreement :-)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



daveraines
User: daveraines
Date: 2011-09-29 14:31 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
We followers of the "Abrahamic God" are responsible for enough bad stuff that I'd ask you to be careful about the details. As far as I know, there are no honor killings in Judaism nor in Christianity, two Abrahamic religions. Nor are there honor killings among Muslims in the United States, for example.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2011-09-29 14:41 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I apologize if I overstated my comment. And I fully recognize that honor killings are a specific cultural behavior being privileged by a religious claim, rather than an inherent property of Islam and its tenets. Or an inherent commandment from an Abrahamic God. (Much like gay hate in this country, for that matter.)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



daveraines
User: daveraines
Date: 2011-09-29 15:09 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
See now, just because I mentioned that there was other "bad stuff," did you have to start -naming- some?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



daveraines
User: daveraines
Date: 2011-09-29 15:10 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
(forgot to add the )
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2011-09-29 17:03 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Is all good, sir. (Yes?)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



daveraines
User: daveraines
Date: 2011-09-29 17:54 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
All good from my perspective. I tried to add a "grin" at the end of the previous 2 comments, but LJ apparently doesn't want me to grin at you.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



scarlettina: Madness
User: scarlettina
Date: 2011-09-29 13:09 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:Madness
The interview with the bully was interesting. I was bullied throughout elementary school, less so in junior high and high school (though there was one girl...). I often wonder what happened to the girl in elementary school who made a point to gang the kids up against me and make sure I got beaten up after school as often as possible. It got so bad that in third grade the principal actually gave me permission to leave school 5 minutes before the rest of the kids so I could get home safely. I don't know what I'd say to her today. Frankly, I don't think there's anything I want to say. As I think about it now, all I feel toward her is anger and disdain. And it was nearly 40 years ago. Wow.
Reply | Thread | Link



Elf M. Sternberg
User: elfs
Date: 2011-09-29 13:53 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Re: "Throwing Horses"

What's not to understand? To "throw" a horse is to force the horse to lie down flat. That's a cavalry troop. It looks to me that they're teaching the horsemen to flatten their horses to the ground, and teaching the horses to tolerate it. Given that soldiers being shot at lie down flat to present as little profile as possible, this looks like a fairly ordinary military maneuver to preserve their mounts as well as themselves.
Reply | Thread | Link



zxhrue
User: zxhrue
Date: 2011-09-29 17:09 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

actually the shorpy description explains it fairly well -- the throwing horses is a maneuver to give the rider cover during a fire fight.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2011-09-30 00:53 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
It was also done if the horse needed medical care of any kind.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



(no subject) - (Anonymous)
Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2011-09-30 13:47 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Sure, honor killings aren't privileged in the Quran any more than gay hate is privileged in the Bible. They're both cultural artefacts. But the people who practice them use the cloak of religion to justify themselves, which was all I was really trying to say.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
my journal
links
January 2014
2012 appearances