Links of Great Interest: WISCON!!!!!!!!!!!

Signal Boost: This DC high school library NEEDS BOOKS! If you’ve got books you don’t need/want, or if you’re an author wanting to share your work with teenagers, please mail them to this high school in need!

Signal Boost: This petition is to help the HS cheerleader who refused to cheer for her rapist.

Signal Boost: Sistah Vegan needs help to finish her doctoral program.  Remember, she posted a while ago for Hathor? Pass the hat!

Interracial couple murdered.

From Attackfish:
[Post has been removed] of the classism, racism, sexism, and lookism that play into this situation [Schwarzenegger's affair]  and the reporting of it both in the MSM and in the feminist blogisphere.

I’ve also been trying to find a good link about Senator John Ensign’s coerced affair, but can’t find any. Google has failed.

OH GOD BARBARA HAMBLY IS AWESOME.

High school student threatened with rape for disagreeing with politician.

Leigh and I received a lovely note complimenting our review of Sucker Punch and offering this link, with a collection of Sucker Punch responses. <3 Thanks, Tsode! <3

From Gabbie:

Article about Aus PM Julia Gillard forcing teenage mothers into training or lose their welfare payments. I like the idea of encouraging people on welfare to undertake education or training, but a policy of ‘abandon your kid or lose your welfare’ totally sucks. And, as the article says, totally defeats the purpose of a left-wing government.

A bit on sex trafficking in the US.

Scroll down for some major eye-rolling from your favorite Psychology Today blogger.

Comments

  1. Shaun says

    Re: the Satoshi link, it was also nice to get punched in the face by the Baron-Cohen’s continued assertion that Autistic people do not have theory of mind and are unable to grasp the thoughts and feelings of others. Apparently, though, I should be grateful there is a distinction between this and having a “psychopathic personality.”

  2. says

    Shaun:
    Re: the Satoshi link, it was also nice to get punched in the face by the Baron-Cohen’s continued assertion that Autistic people do not have theory of mind and are unable to grasp the thoughts and feelings of others. Apparently, though, I should be grateful there is a distinction between this and having a “psychopathic personality.”

    Wha…? I admit my experience of autistic people isn’t a huge sample group, but based on my unusual level of experience with people who REALLY lack empathy, I have never thought any autistics I knew lacked it. I didn’t even realize some people believe that. But I don’t. I can see that they have trouble getting in sync with others, but so do I, and I’m very empathetic – I always thought that was a socializing issue, not an empathy issue. I have no idea where this gas bag is coming from, but this is hardly the first vomitous thing I’ve come across him saying.

  3. Shaun says

    Jennifer Kesler,

    Yeah Baron-Cohen is one of the leading autism researchers. He has some pretty extreme gender essentialist views (in the, men systemize, women empathize kinda way) and believes Autistics universally have extreme male brains. He also believes Autistics lack theory of mind, kind of like pre-sentient toddlers, and are unable to attribute thoughts and feelings to others.

    I don’t think or know that he falsifies any data, but he does go looking for evidence that supports his theories, and discards as anomalous any evidence that doesn’t. If Kanazawa supports his theories, I suppose I really shouldn’t be surprised, it’s just one more pretty vile thing about him.

  4. Shaun says

    Wow just browsing Satoshi’s archives is a canoe ride into absurdity. Apparently you can tell if someone is a criminal by looking at them (except women can’t tell who are rapists or the rapists wouldn’t be genetically successful, because rape is merely a viable reproduction strategy apparently), nice people look nice, nasty people look nasty, and (almost) all stereotypes are empirically true or they wouldn’t be stereotypes. So I guess, like, if we go to war against Germany or Afghanistan and then publish a whole bunch of propaganda about what those people are like it was all true to begin with.

    Oh, and by the time a boy is born, he is either gay or straight, and nothing in between. Exact quote.

  5. Casey says

    Shaun: Oh, and by the time a boy is born, he is either gay or straight, and nothing in between. Exact quote

    Yay for bi/omni/pan/trans erasure! (except not)

  6. says

    Shaun:
    (except women can’t tell who are rapists or the rapists wouldn’t be genetically successful, because rape is merely a viable reproduction strategy apparently)

    Well, yes we can tell which men are rapists – that’s how scientists know we sekritly wanted to be raped in every case where it happened. We wouldn’t have been hanging out with rapists otherwise. Women’s intuition: it’s empirically true (when convenient; not available where prohibited).

    nice people look nice, nasty people look nasty, and (almost) all stereotypes are empirically true or they wouldn’t be stereotypes. So I guess, like, if we go to war against Germany or Afghanistan and then publish a whole bunch of propaganda about what those people are like it was all true to begin with.

    Right. He’s somehow missed the fact that stereotypes sometimes change over a few decades, or shift from one group to another group, depending on who’s Moving In And Bringing Down The Neighborhood this week or whatever, and that different groups apply different stereotypes to the same group.

    Oh, and by the time a boy is born, he is either gay or straight, and nothing in between. Exact quote.

    Wow, freaky! The exact same thing is true of male unicorns! Is that far out or what?

  7. Shaun says

    Casey,

    Nah I didn’t have a problem with what you were saying. Any rational person would think the existence of bisexual women would imply the existence of bisexual men. I can’t quite bring myself to say if he was erasing one it would make sense to erase the other, but he really is an especially strange sex essentialist.

  8. says

    Off topic, can someone explain the difference between pan and omni? I get that pansexual implies attraction to people at all points of gender identification, but what’s omnisexual? I tried looking it up, but everything I got either defined it as “pansexual” or “fucks everything that moves” which I assume is not a self-description. *eyeroll*

  9. Shaun says

    Sylvia Sybil,

    I’m pretty sure it’s just a competing term for pansexual. I also totally tried to research that and instead ended up learning all about the hate campaign against Vanessa Williams as Miss America, the fact that Penthouse published her photos without consent, that Playboy published science fiction and it was pro-LGBT science fiction at that, and Hugh Hefner is supporting a Jenny McCartney autism program.

  10. Finbarr Ryan says

    Casey,

    Also asexual erasure. And I imagine the concept of a distinction between sexual and romantic attractions would blow his mind. :/

  11. Attackfish says

    About the terms bi- pan- and omnisexual, I really wish there were a term for people like me who are attracted to multiple different genders, but aren’t attracted to all genders, and aren’t attracted to all genders they are attracted to equally. I also wish large swaths of the genderqueer community would stop seeing multisexual (as opposed to monosexual) people who aren’t attracted to all genders equally as a personal insult. I’m not making a value judgement about anybody else’s gender by not being attracted to it than a gay guy is making a judgement about women by not being attracted to them. Most of the time, I’m left identifying as queer, and i use bisexual when interacting outside of the queer community, but really.

  12. Attackfish says

    Attackfish: ’m not making a value judgement about anybody else’s gender by not being attracted to it

    In case it wasn’t clear, the “it” in the above meant to refer to the person’s gender, not to the person. I just realized my phrasing was a bit ambiguous.

  13. says

    Attackfish,

    I do remember reading a theory that bisexual people are attracted to both genders* sexually but only one romantically. I think it’s biphobic to apply this to all bisexuals, trying to fit bisexuals into the homo/hetero binary. But I can see that some people would have attractions in that pattern. Others would have attractions in the pattern you describe. I’ve met several people who use “bisexual” to describe a limited form of polyamory, in which the bisexual was committed to one boyfriend and one girlfriend.

    I think just generally we don’t have enough words for variations under the queer umbrella. Or other sexual variations; we need words for relationship orientations, too.

    *I know there’s more than two genders but the theory’s author didn’t.

  14. Shaun says

    Attackfish,

    There’s not a lot of acceptance for non-monosexuals, inside the queer community or not. I don’t think bi or any other bi/multisexual arrangement requires equal attraction, though. It’s not as though a person who, say, only likes her similar gender 25-30% of the time isn’t queer.

  15. Shaun says

    Casey,

    A monosexual is someone attracted to only one sex (or, alternately, only one broadly similar sexual category). Heterosexuals and homosexuals are both monosexuals, and can be talked about as a group, monosexuals.

  16. Diavola says

    Attackfish,

    I used to use ‘polysexual’, as in, attracted to multiple genders. I now identify as omnisexual, but that could always change. Polysexual has about as much usage as omni, so I guess I just like being really obscure. :P

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.