The Four Principles of Why Sex is Binary

In order to deal with any controversy, including biology, it's important to get the facts right first. Only after we understand the basic facts can we discuss the ramifications of those facts, including the politics and morality. At the Paradox Institute, Zach Elliot has created memes and videos setting forth the fundamental principles of the biology of sex, a topic that was completely uncontroversial until three years ago, when ideologists reverse-engineered the "facts" based on political preferences.

Zach Elliot of the Paradox Institute has created this easy to understand chart:

For the full collection of short information videos regarding the biology of sex, visit Paradox Institute. For instance, see this video on "The Biology of Sex."

Continue ReadingThe Four Principles of Why Sex is Binary

Vitter went a whoring

I wrote the following poem to commemorate the ongoing rampant hypocrisy. Tim Hogan -- Rep. Vitter (R-LA) went a “DC Madam” whoring, he was elected US Senator and the GOP found it boring. Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! Sen. Craig (R-ID) had a “wide stance” but, the GOP said; “so what?” to his advance. Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! The National Republican Campaign Committee twice went a Vegas sex clubbing, the GOP gave it no drubbing. Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! The RNC youth went to club featuring bondage and had its fill; the GOP didn’t blink an eye paying the bill! Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang; the GOP made it into a big thang! Gov. Mark Sanford (R-NC) went a “hiking;” the GOP still kept its liking! Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) preyed upon a married staffer; to the GOP, it was a laugher! Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! Rep. Jim Gibbons (R-NV) pushed and threatened a server when rebuffed, the GOP elected him Governor, the charges were stuffed! Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! Reps. Bunn (R-OR), Burton (R-IN), Calvert (R-CA), Dan Crane (R-IL), Chenoweth (R-ID), Gingrich (R-GA), Hyde (R-IL), Scmitz (R-CA) and Sherwood (R-PA) cheated and lied; the GOP just sighed. Rep. Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! Sen. Thurmond (R-SC) had knowledge of his family’s “colored” maid, had a child and about the races the Senator ranted and raved; the GOP and the South were saved! Weiner tweeted his clothed wang, the GOP made it into a big thang! The Republicans have cheated, whored and upon women and children preyed, all the while politics they’ve played. Me, I’m just dismayed. [And here's a one-stop source for Republican sex scandals]

Continue ReadingVitter went a whoring
Read more about the article Makeup is the new girdle.
Original photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

Makeup is the new girdle.

I stopped wearing cosmetics a few months ago, after about half a year of using the stuff only sparingly. I started weaning myself off makeup because I had come to hate the hassle of applying it, and because I hated fretting about my appearance. I was also beginning to think of makeup as old-fashioned, an antiquated 'modesty' that inspires shame in one's true appearance. The longer I go without a cosmetic product on my face, the more I believe that makeup needs to go the way of the girdle. The restrictive, uncomfortable, needless, obsolete girdle. How many undergarments are you wearing right now? I'm guessing two at most. Likewise, I only wear two small undergarments below my clothes, even on the most formal occasions. Interview? Presentation? Class? Wedding? A bra and underwear are always adequate. Since I've never had to wear more than two undergarments, I find it staggering that women used to wear massive bras, high-waisted underwear, girdles, pantyhose or stockings, garter belts, slips, and camisoles. I often wear less than that as a full outfit. Anyone who knows me in real life can confirm that I regularly step out in leggings and a t-shirt (plus two small undergarments beneath). I don't say this to titilate, just to illustrate, because I suspect my bare-bones attire is quickly becoming the norm. I've spent a lot of time on college campuses- big and small, public and private, Jesuit and blessedly godless. Everywhere I've seen legions of women and girls decked out in equal or greater states of undress than my own. Gone are the girdles. [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingMakeup is the new girdle.

Mark Tiedemann Interview – Parts IV and V

This is a continuation of my interview of Mark Tiedemann, who is both an established science fiction writer and an author here at Dangerous Intersection. In the first video in this post, Part IV, Mark discusses science, religion and morality. In the second video in this post, Part V, he discusses sex. I had an extensive discussion with Mark, and I will actually have one more post featuring video of our conversation. I expect that those will be published tomorrow night.

Continue ReadingMark Tiedemann Interview – Parts IV and V

Is that a gun in your pocket or do you really dig my Neocon fundamentalist tea party ideas?

How is it that so many Republican men find Sarah Palin credible when she claims that we can drill our way out of the energy crisis? There simply isn’t that much oil in Alaska—anyone with a small bit of curiosity can do the math and find out that Alaska has only six months of oil to offer the rest of America. It gets much worse, of course. Republican men tend to love fact-less, self-contradictory female Republican politicians and commentators (including more than a few at FOX), especially those that push their sexuality hard based on the manner in which they dress and act. And consider the recent reactions of conservative pundits regarding the issue of whether Sarah Palin had breast implants. This anomaly leads to my question: Do Republican men really and truly think that the current crop of female Republican politicians/commentators are offering ideas that work, or are they confusing sexual arousal for patriotic fervor or intellectual inspiration? Consider that “misattribution of arousal” is well-established through numerous experiments. In 1962, psychologists Schacter and Singer told participants that the psychologists were studying the effect of vitamin injection on visual skills. This was prior to modern day ethics restrictions, and many of the students were secretly given injections of adrenaline or a placebo (to control for the effect of sticking a needle in one’s arm). Strong emotional reactions to subsequent stimuli (a “nosy” and “offensive” questionnaire) were strongest in participants who had been given the adrenaline but told that it was only vitamins and that it would have no effect on them. They misattributed their chemically-enhanced emotions to the questionnaire, whereas those who told that they were receiving the injection of a stimulant (and those receiving the placebo) did not misattribute their emotions. Here is a succinct description of the phenomenon of misattribution of arousal. (and see here). republican-babes What follows is an excerpt from Social Psychology and Human Nature, by Roy F. Baumeister and Brad Bushman (2007) (p. 187):

The intriguing thing about the Schachter-Singer theory is that it allows for arousals to be mislabeled or relabeled. That is, an arousal may arise for one reason but get another label, thereby producing a different reaction. For example, someone may not realize that what he or she is drinking has caffeine (e.g., if you think that you have decaffeinated tea when in reality it has caffeine . . .) it may create an arousal state. If something frustrating happens, someone who has this extra, unexplained arousal may get much angrier than he or she would otherwise. This process is called excitation transfer . . . The arousal from the first event (drinking caffeinated tea) transfers to the second event (frustration).
Consider that large numbers of conservative/fundamentalist men are not comfortable acknowledging the sexual arousal they feel when they see images of Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter or Michelle Bachman. Therefore (as my hunch goes), when they experience intense sexual arousal that they are not comfortable acknowledging (when they “dissociate” these toxic thoughts of “inappropriate” sexual attractiveness), they are left without any obvious explanation for their increased arousal. They are thus ripe for misattribution. They are easily self-fooled that they are feeling passionate about their country or fearful about Middle Eastern “terrorists.” Whatever it is that these vapid/deceitful Republican babes are uttering, it must be true too. “Why else would my blood flow thusly whenever I hear Sarah Palin give a talk?” Why, indeed?

Continue ReadingIs that a gun in your pocket or do you really dig my Neocon fundamentalist tea party ideas?