In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

The 10 most harmful books of the 19th and 20th centuries

Because book burning isn’t a bad thing, is it? The list is topped by The Communist Manifesto — which, apparently, is even worse than Mein Kamf. Huh. Forget that, even if you disagree with the Communist Manifesto, it’s still a pretty impressive work. Also on the list: The Feminine Mystique (because it let the ladies out of the kitchen), The Course of Positive Philosophy (because it brought about sociology), Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil (Nazis liked it), and the economist John Maynard Keynes’ brilliant General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money.

Honorable mentions include On Liberty by John Stuart Mills (!), Origin of the Species and Decent of Man by Charles Darwin, Foucalt’s Madness and Civilization, de Beauvior’s Second Sex, Silent Spring by Rachel Carson, and Freud’s Introduction to Psychoanalysis. Of the 15 “scholars” who created this list, there was only one female — Phyllis Schlafly.

Love is the Drug

Grace Jones had it right:

In an analysis of the images appearing today in The Journal of Neurophysiology, researchers in New York and New Jersey argue that romantic love is a biological urge distinct from sexual arousal.

This research specifically covers infatuation, the time period in which one may actually devote 3-4 hours developing the perfect mix tape to snare one’s beloved.

It is closer in its neural profile to drives like hunger, thirst or drug craving, the researchers assert, than to emotional states like excitement or affection. As a relationship deepens, the brain scans suggest, the neural activity associated with romantic love alters slightly, and in some cases primes areas deep in the primitive brain that are involved in long-term attachment.

…This distinction, between finding someone attractive and desiring him or her, between liking and wanting, “is all happening in an area of the mammalian brain that takes care of most basic functions, like eating, drinking, eye movements, all at an unconscious level, and I don’t think anyone expected this part of the brain to be so specialized,” Dr. Brown said.

This could explain why I find Bill O’Reilly smarmily attractive even if I wouldn’t touch him with a ten thousand-foot pole. But Keith Olbermann, baby. Keith is my Other Boyfriend.

Did I just say that?

Posted in Sex

A shameful cover-up

When are the American people going to get sick of the Bush administration’s lies? It blows me away.

And of course, we still have people as prominent as Alan Dershowitz and Charles Schumer defending and even promoting torture.

Posted in War

Bush & Co. defend Guantanamo

We are apparently embracing freedom at the notorious prison camp, and Amnesty International’s report is “absurd.”

“It’s an absurd allegation. The United States is a country that promotes freedom around the world,” he said, adding: “We’ve investigated every single complaint against the detainees. It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on the word of — and the allegations by — people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble — that means not tell the truth. And so it was an absurd report.”

Because they should have asked… him?

Cheney also weighed in.

“Frankly, I was offended by it,” Cheney said. “For Amnesty International to suggest that somehow the United States is a violator of human rights, I frankly just don’t take them seriously.”

…really? The United States isn’t a violator of human rights, ever? Also, when people are lying, don’t they tend to use words like “truthfully” and “frankly” repeatedly to try and convince their audiences that they’re telling the truth?

Posted in War

5 is the Magic Number

Last week was another hard one. But I spent a lot of time alone in reflection, signed myself up for a sock knitting class, aced a test, and worked in the garden. Ethan whistled to amuse himself, and unbeknownst to him, he amused me too. Family came to town. We ate birthday cake and exchanged presents, and my older sister allowed me to kidnap her pug for an afternoon in the park. Doug shredded yet another roll of toilet paper while I was sleeping, and as the cherry on top, Pablo decided to puke all over my nicest piece of furniture. I love my kitties. I met up with a friend who was in town and have made plans to take the little one up north to see her next weekend. Plans, distractions, all good.

I tried very hard to have a good time. Sometimes worked, sometimes didn’t.

Read More…Read More…

Pope speaks out on fertility treatments

No surprise here. The current Italian law is incredibly restrictive; it “bans donations of sperm and eggs, defines life as beginning at conception, and allows fertility treatment only to married heterosexual couples.”

It ramins to be seen how the Italian people will react to this move. One thing that has always been interesting about Italy is that, while its people are deeply religious and overwhelmingly Catholic, there is a strong resistance to the intrusion of religion into the political sphere. And there has been an equally strong push by the Catholic church to do just about anything to maintain its influence over the populace — even its opposition to abortion didn’t really begin until Papal states shrunk and a decline in the church’s political power became obvious.

The church has the right to issue whatever boycotts it deems necessary in preventing people from donating sperm and eggs (gotta protect potential life, right?). I think it’s unfortunate that they are choosing to dedicate such energy to preventing people from having children, but that’s their call. But when an organization is dealing with a wide range of issues and only has access to limited resources, don’t they usually focus on the most important issue/s? I understand, they think fertility treatments end life. But how about taking a louder stand against the invasion of Iraq? That hasn’t been the most life-affirming mission. Or calling on all Catholics to petition the UN and their own governments to do something in Darfur? How about mentioning the Church’s opposition to the death penalty (something that many Christian and “pro-life” groups out here manage to conveniently forget)? Hell, what about the 78,000 women (probably more unreported) who die of illegal abortions every year? What about the 12 million street kids in Brazil — a country where the Catholic church has been instrumental in limiting access to contraception and sex education and illegalizing abortion (which means lots more dead mothers and orphaned children)? Priority, I guess, isn’t being placed in protecting real, actual, living people — it’s being put on getting into a political fray intended to block families from having children.

Excuse me if I’m a little testy tonight. But given the current state of things, I think any feeling person would be. (p.s., please excuse the typos — I’m sure there are many. It’s after 3am, and I’m so tired I’m seeing double. Plus, I’m pissed, and that doesn’t help).

141 days and counting

Since George W. Bush publicly mentioned the word “Darfur,” or made any other reference to it. In the meantime, the American public is apparently more interested in the Michael Jackson trial and the story of the “runaway bride” — that is, if you judge the American public’s interest by what you see on network news.

There’s an overwhelming frustration in reading op/eds like this one, because it comes down to the most basic collective action problem: I look at the situation in Darfur and I think, if there was something I could accomplish on an individual level, I’d do it. But it would take hundreds of thousands of people to ever be loud enough for the American government to listen and intervene. And hundreds of thousands of individuals simply do not have any incentive to raise up that kind of yell — in part because each of those individuals knows that, alone, their voice is meaningless. So I read op/eds like these, and for 45 minutes or so I feel overwhelmed and deeply frustrated and incredibly angry, and I write about it and I pray about it and I can’t help but ask myself, “Where is God in this one?” and I curse our despicable “pro-life” administration for not giving a damn about African lives, and I know it’s wrong but I can’t help wishing for a little Karmic justice. And then I shut off my new computer and I go to sleep in a warm bed and I wake up and I think about my upcoming summer trip, how I miss my friends from New York, my impending entrance into law school, and all these things that, compared to what the people over there are living through, are shallow and stupid and frivolous. I’ll think about that until I make myself cry out of frustration — I’ll admit it, I’m a sensitive person and yes, things like this upset me — and then I beat myself up for having the audacity to cry out of guilt when, really, I have nothing to cry over, and it’s even worse that I would be self-centered enough to allow myself the privilege of crying — to even think that I have the right to cry, as if this is in any way about me — over someone else’s situation that I can never possibly comprehend. I think, “Quit crying, you fucking moron. Go do something.” But then there seems like there’s nothing that can be done. So I get stuck in this back and forth in my own head, and it just feels like running into a brick wall.

And if that isn’t the definition of liberal middle-class white girl guilt, then I don’t know what is.

But I have to wonder — do you think George Bush goes to bed thinking about the people in Sudan? Do you think those millions of lives sit on his chest at night?

For what it’s worth, here aere are some ways to take action. If anyone else has suggestions, I’d love to hear them.