(no subject)

[srin]

Assorted links!

From cuteoverload:
Video of someone playing with a ktten. Volume up, you can hear it purring, especially towards the end.
Ultimate cat-on-rack? Also, ow, if that kitten gets unhappy there.

So we've got all this nuclear waste that's still going to be dangerous in 10,000 years, which is longer than any civilization has lasted so far. Interesting article about how to warn people away from it in The Future.

ITALIAN UNICORN deer. Not kidding. Morgan, I expect you to find this and frolic with it.

And from that old dodgy-news-standby, the BBC:
Romanian village elects dead mayor. Not sure how this compares to dead voters back in the day, but, uh.

Actual snail mail. With real snails. I am not making this up.

Space cameras to monitor forests. Not actually funny except for the SPACE CAMERAS part, but pretty cool nonetheless.

Not sure how I feel about this one, but it's definitely interesting. Scans see 'gay brain differences'. Basically they're saying that there are similarities between the brains of gay men & straight women, and between gay women & straight men. Which seems reasonable, except I really want more information about what they get for people who identify as any degree of bisexual... On the one hand, this sort of thing is good ammunition against the whackos who think gay people can be "cured", although I kind of doubt those types will really listen to science anyway. On the other hand, it seems to be reinforcing the idea of sexuality as a switch with only two options, which is just not true. ...For that matter, I wonder what they get for asexuals.

Comments

[revelationtrib.livejournal.com]

my dad sent me that story too, and i lol'd at our race [or at least, half of mine].

[dragonfly-mei.livejournal.com]

Pheromones!

I didn't actually read the link, but I read an article like that last year and basically they were saying that sexuality is probably linked, at least in some ways, to pheromone response in the brain. So, gay men and women would have a heightened response to pheromones given off by men. And the other way around. And I suppose it would follow that the neural response of someone identifying as bisexual would be to the pheromones given off by both women and men.

I think studying pheromones in relation to people who are trans would be really interesting. (:

[xhuxus.livejournal.com]

THERE ARE NO BISEXUALS OR ASEXUALS IT WAS JUST A GUY IN A PAIR OF NOSE+MOUSTACHE GLASSES PRETENDING

I am just kidding of course! Bisexuals and asexuals are very real.

Basically, no, the kind of person who wants to cure the "gay disease" will not listen to science, or at least will quibble endlessly over any nitpicky perceived fault they can find with the scientific data that disagrees with them (a la Intelligent Design vs Not Intelligent Design).

Which is why I think it is good to just advocate that people having relationships with whomever they want* is a basic human right regardless of what motivates said people to pursue and form said relationships.

*provided that both/all parties are willing and capable of giving informed consent to whatever kind of relationship is on the table

[srin.livejournal.com]

YES.
I'm really not comfortable with using the claim that sexuality can't be changed as the reason for gay rights, because it shouldn't matter whether it's genetic or not. No one (well, no one anyone listens to) says women should have equal rights only because they can't help being women; sex, gender, sexual orientation (race, religion, etc. etc.) shouldn't have any bearing on a person's status as a rights-holding individual. And like you said, the freedom to have relationships with whomever one wants as long as everyone's fully consenting ought to be regarded as as much a basic human right as anything else.

[xhuxus.livejournal.com]

YES.
Basically, it is like Bill and Ted said towards the end of their most Excellent Adventure: people should "Be Excellent To Each Other." It is pretty much the only rule you need.

[kumokasumi.livejournal.com]

THERE ARE NO BISEXUALS OR ASEXUALS IT WAS JUST A GUY IN A PAIR OF NOSE+MOUSTACHE GLASSES PRETENDING

well, if someone hands me another copy of that study that implies that bisexual men are really just gay men afraid to own up to their repressed homosexuality, i swear i will rip them a new one.

[xhuxus.livejournal.com]

That and also my plans to blow up the DSM if "gender identity disorder" is not removed from it soon.

[kumokasumi.livejournal.com]

i know i must seem dense, but could you explain that to me?

i guess my hesitancy stems from the notion of a subpopulation of transgendered people who desire medical intervention (whether hormone therapy, reassignment surgery, or maybe even voice lessons) to bring their physical presentation / reality in line with their self-image. it seems at once reasonable and practical to recognize and assign a set of diagnostic criteria to enable the medical profession to accept and treat these individuals on their own terms, and perhaps even seek insurance coverage. (if i had to guess, i might suggest that this is probably not how these criteria are currently being applied, but i have not researched the subject.)

GID is different from homosexuality, which was justly removed. i would imagine that essentially no homosexual individuals request any sort of comparable medical interventions to fully effect their personal identity.

am i missing the point?

in which many overly long sentences were had by all

[xhuxus.livejournal.com]

Yes kind of.


I can't really explain the scope and breadth of the genderqueer movement as succinctly as I need to be at the moment, but basically I'll say that yes, I agree, being transgender, genderqueer or transsexual is different from being homosexual. The lone fact that these groups are different from homosexuals does not explain why the individuals in these groups should be diagnosed as having mental conditions rather than natural states of being.


Additionally, a transsexual is a person who requires surgery to actualize their identities. Many transgender and genderqueer individuals do not require surgery to actualize their identities, and whether or not transsexuals should be considered a subset of transgender persons is a largely semantical debate in which I take the firm position that no, they should not be merely considered the subset of transgender persons who 'take transgenderism to its natural conclusion,' so to speak. Transvestites are individuals who are not considered transgendered or genderqueer, but simply dress as and/or assume the social roles of members of the opposite gender for a wide variety of reasons. All of these individuals may currently be diagnosed as having GID, despite the wide range of circumstances, behaviors, and identities they have.

[simplyshadowcat.livejournal.com]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[smashingpopcorn.livejournal.com]

Snail mail :DDD

The nuclear-waste-warnings article is v interesting.

As to the 'gay brain differences', I imagine the idea wasn't to imply a binary sexuality thing, but rather that it was a limitation of the study design. They had to find enough of [male/female]+[gay/straight] people who fit all the other incidental requirements for the study, there may've been time limitations or scheduling for the scanner or whatever. I'd be kind of surprised if an early study like this was so thorough as to try to look at other flavors of orientation.