My guest column in the Exponent: Non-theists, you are not alone on this campus

I’ve always been a bit notorious for writing letters to the editor for our campus newspaper, but this is even more exciting: The Exponent let me write a guest column on atheism at Purdue and the Society of Non-Theists for their opinions page! It’s an area usually reserved for opinion pieces for Exponent staff, and I had over twice as much space as a letter. Writing it was a lot more challenging than blogging, since it had a word limit (I can’t ramble?! Nooooo!), has to be a lot more formal (aka, intelligent), and is to a totally different audience (mainly Christians instead of a mob of atheists). It’s not revolutionary and probably won’t incite the masses to send hate mail, but it’s a message that needs to be seen on campus. Consider it my last hurrah after three years of being President.

And since I wrote it, I’ll reprint it below in its entirety.

Non-theists, you are not alone on this campus

By Jennifer McCreight
Guest Columnist
Publication Date: 04/14/2010

I grew up in Indiana, but coming to Purdue was a culture shock for me. Some people in my town were religious, but no one really cared about what others did or didn’t believe.

Less than a month after I arrived on campus, I sat in the McCutcheon laundry room reading Richard Dawkins’ “The God Delusion.” Another freshman approached me, wide-eyed, and asked if I was an atheist. When I said I was, she asked with sincere worry, “But how will you ever find a husband?”

Let’s ignore the assumption that getting a husband should be the most important goal in life. Actually, she was voicing a concern that many atheists and agnostics share. Sometimes it can feel like you’re the only person who doesn’t believe in God. I certainly felt that way when I came to Purdue.

There were over 50 Christian student organizations, a club for every other religion, religious advertisements in my mailbox, and preachers on the mall telling me I was going to hell. Political or ethical discussions and even small talk started with the assumption that I was a Christian.

That’s why I started the Society of Non-Theists in 2007: Not to convert or offend the religious, but to let other atheists and agnostics know that they weren’t alone. For our first callout, I expected maybe 15 people to come. So many students showed up that they were spilling into the hallway. People looked across the room as if to say “Where were you guys all this time?!”

While we’re a minority, we certainly do exist. About 16 percent of Americans are non-theists, and that number grows every year (1). Unfortunately, many are afraid to come out, and those fears are legitimate. Club members constantly share stories of discrimination, stereotyping and rejection from their families because of people judging their non-belief. Groups like ours provide a safe environment where non-theists can speak freely, something that is necessary to stay sane and happy.

Of course, we do more than serve as a community. Something as simple as being open about our non-theism can dispel negative stereotypes many have about us. We try to ensure the separation of church and state is upheld at Purdue and in Indiana. We hold events to promote skeptical thinking, and we help others by volunteering and raising money for charity. We encourage open dialogue about religion through group discussions and sometimes-controversial public demonstrations.

Even with all these activities, community has always been our focus. I’ve made dozens of close friends that I’ll have for a lifetime, and other members say the same. Who knows if we’d have met if we were too afraid to express our skepticism of the supernatural? Even people who don’t come to meetings frequently e-mail me, thanking me for letting them know that they have a voice on campus. Making Purdue more welcoming for non-religious students is more important than any grade I’ve received, and the club will be what I miss most when I graduate.

Future club members still have a lot of work to do keeping Purdue secular and increasing the acceptance of non-theists. We’ve had minor success cooperating with religious groups, but most still seem hesitant or unwilling. I will definitely feel disappointed if my graduation ceremony in May is full of thinly veiled prayers, religious commentary and the choir singing “Amen” like in the past.

Club flyers are torn down or defaced within hours of putting them up, and it’s rare to have an outdoor event without someone shouting something hateful. Our mere existence will always offend some, but we’ve come a long way. I’m no longer afraid or ashamed to call myself an atheist, and neither should anyone else on campus.

Just remember: Non-theists are good people, with similar morals and goals as theists. We don’t eat babies, we don’t hate religious people, we don’t wallow in depression and we don’t have drunken orgies (well, not all the time). We aren’t rebelling against our parents or God. We simply agree with Carl Sagan that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

1. Pew Forum’s U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, May 8 to Aug. 13, 2007

Jennifer McCreight is a senior in the College of Science and the president of the Society of Non-Theists (www.purduenontheists.com). She writes at the popular atheist blog www.blaghag.com and may be reached at [[email protected]]*.

Major thanks to Tom, Mark, Bryan, and Jon for helping me revise it! And of course, thanks to the Non-Theists for a great three years. It’s hard to believe that I won’t be your President any more in a week.

*My Purdue email was printed in the paper, though I prefer that you guys email me here.

My professor's Holocaust story

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day. On Friday our newspaper ran a piece about the upcoming Greater Lafayette Holocaust Remembrance Conference, which featured the story of one of my former professors here at Purdue. As a former student, her story was especially touching to me, but I thought all of you would enjoy it. I’ve added some more information in sparse parts, taken from here.

Anna Berkovitz had a normal childhood until 1944. Now, years later, she still has nightmares of her family being taken from their home by the Nazis.

“I was 13 years old at the time when I was taken with my family to Auschwitz, just before D-Day,” said Berkovitz, Purdue Professor Emerita of biology.

At the concentration camp, Berkovitz and her family faced grim odds of survival. Six hundred thousand Hungarian Jews entered the camp between May and September of 1944. In just three months, 500,000 were killed.

“The killing machine was so effective that names were not even taken when we arrived.”

Berkovitz’s grandparents, aunts, uncle, cousin and probably her father were among the victims of the genocide conducted by the Nazis.

Her survival, as Berkovitz says, can only be accounted for by a series of miracles. …

Anna and Elizabeth were taken to Camp-C in Birkenau. To this day Anna ponders how she survived six months of brutal treatment, harsh conditions, starvation and disease there.

In November 1944, Anna and Elizabeth were transferred to a slave labor camp near Magdeburg, Germany, where they were put to work in an underground ammunition factory. Ten days prior to the end of World War II, they were liberated by the Swedish Red Cross and taken to Sweden, where they spent three months in a sanatorium recovering from malnutrition and physical and emotional traumas. …

This year, Berkovitz will be attending the conference, but participating in these events brings personal pain.

“It’s very difficult for me … to me it’s just like it happened yesterday, so I don’t need a conference to remember.”

Still, Berkovitz recognizes and even asserts the necessity of the conference and sees participating as a duty.

“I think I owe it to the people who died to be remembered.”

Berkovitz’s story does not end in Sweden; rather, her rescue from tyranny marks the start of a new journey that defies the unthinkable trauma of the Holocaust.

In Sweden, Berkovitz maintains that she suffered from no depression or bitterness and looked forward to the future.

“I could have lived my life as a victim, but I did not,” she said. …

In April 1946, Anna and Elizabeth emigrated to the United States. They arrived in Los Angeles pennyless and not speaking English. In order to resume her schooling, Anna worked as an au-pair for several years. During this time she completed four years of high school and four years of college, graduating from U.C.L.A. in January 1952 with a B.S. degree in bacteriology and with Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude honors. While working as a laboratory technician, Anna met Leonard Berkovitz, who was then a post-doctoral fellow at Caltech. They were married in June 1953, and their sons Dan and Kenneth were born in 1956 and 1960, respectively. During this period Anna worked part time in various cancer research laboratories.

In 1962 Leonard accepted a position at Purdue University, and the family moved to West Lafayette, Indiana. When Kenneth was in kindergarten, Anna decided to continue her formal education. She was accepted as a graduate student in the biology department at Purdue University. She was working on her Ph.D. thesis when, in 1967, she was asked to take a temporary teaching position to fill an unexpected vacancy in the department. This temporary position turned into a lifetime career of teaching, and while Anna never obtained her Ph.D., she earned a tenured position from which she retired in 2003 as Professor Emerita in Biology.

Anna’s efforts as a teacher, her dedication to her students and to the discipline were amply recognized by her students, colleagues and the administration. She was selected by the students as one of the Top Ten Outstanding Teachers in the School of Science 14 times, she received the Murphy Award, the top recognition of teaching excellence by the University, and was given the Chiscon Award for outstanding teaching performance by the Biology department. Anna was elected to the Teaching Academy at Purdue and her name is in the Purdue Book of Great Teachers.

In her retirement Anna has more time to travel, attend theater, to be active in her Temple, and to winter in California. But, what she most enjoys is still interacting with young people, be it her own five grandchildren or students at the University. She currently participates in the University Honors Program, where she developed a new course, “The New Genetics – New Perspectives, New Dilemmas,” which she teaches in the Fall semesters. …

Marveling at her accomplishments for the time – raising a family while entering a competitive career field as woman when it was rare – Berkovitz attributes much of her drive to a belief that humanity was good. Only a small group of evil was responsible for her painful experiences.

“Unfortunately, now I see that there are still evil groups of people in the world killing or wanting to kill innocent people just because they are different from what they are,” she said. …

Though Berkovitz’s story is one of inspiration, she still bears emotional scars.

“I have recurring nightmares that I’m told that I have to pack up and leave home … that’s part of me; that’s part of my existence.”

Preventing scars such as these in others is a duty for Berkovitz; an obligation driving her to participate in programs such as the Holocaust Remembrance Conference.

“It’s very relevant to what’s going on in the world today.”

I had Dr. Berkovitz for the Honors Genetics course (mentioned in the article) and for Human Genetics, and she was one of my favorite professors here at Purdue. You could tell she was passionate about the subject, and she did a great job of explaining genetics. In class she would encourage stimulating discussions on eugenics, genetic testing, gene patenting, and abortion.

When she overheard me telling another student about the Society of Non-Theists, she asked to be put on the mailing list and has attended all of our pro-evolution events (including my talk about the Creation Museum). From our class discussions, I could tell she shared my liberal views. She even once showed us a clip of Stephen Colbert talking about DNA, and we were the only two to giggle when he talked about Jesus burying the dinosaurs.

But in addition to being a great professor and skeptic, she was a wonderful person. She would always take time to talk to me about random articles in the news she thought I would be interested in. She encouraged me to shoot for the stars when it came to genetics. When I was still considering becoming a genetic counselor, she encouraged me to get a PhD, saying someone with my skills in genetics should be doing research or running the clinic. And when I had asked her to write me a letter of recommendation for grad school, I discovered that her husband had passed away just a week before. Seeing someone I looked up to so much distraught and crying was horrible. I quickly told her I could easily find someone else to do it, but she insisted – even when overwhelmed with grief, she wanted to help her students.

I always said that this is exactly how I want to be when I was 80 – compassionate, skeptica
l, witty, and still excited
about science. That was before I knew her history as a Holocaust survivor. To think that she became such a strong woman and wonderful scientist even through that tragedy is amazing. She’s a role model to everyone, but especially to female scientists. I can only hope to be half the woman she is when I’m 80.

My professor’s Holocaust story

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day. On Friday our newspaper ran a piece about the upcoming Greater Lafayette Holocaust Remembrance Conference, which featured the story of one of my former professors here at Purdue. As a former student, her story was especially touching to me, but I thought all of you would enjoy it. I’ve added some more information in sparse parts, taken from here.

Anna Berkovitz had a normal childhood until 1944. Now, years later, she still has nightmares of her family being taken from their home by the Nazis.

“I was 13 years old at the time when I was taken with my family to Auschwitz, just before D-Day,” said Berkovitz, Purdue Professor Emerita of biology.

At the concentration camp, Berkovitz and her family faced grim odds of survival. Six hundred thousand Hungarian Jews entered the camp between May and September of 1944. In just three months, 500,000 were killed.

“The killing machine was so effective that names were not even taken when we arrived.”

Berkovitz’s grandparents, aunts, uncle, cousin and probably her father were among the victims of the genocide conducted by the Nazis.

Her survival, as Berkovitz says, can only be accounted for by a series of miracles. …

Anna and Elizabeth were taken to Camp-C in Birkenau. To this day Anna ponders how she survived six months of brutal treatment, harsh conditions, starvation and disease there.

In November 1944, Anna and Elizabeth were transferred to a slave labor camp near Magdeburg, Germany, where they were put to work in an underground ammunition factory. Ten days prior to the end of World War II, they were liberated by the Swedish Red Cross and taken to Sweden, where they spent three months in a sanatorium recovering from malnutrition and physical and emotional traumas. …

This year, Berkovitz will be attending the conference, but participating in these events brings personal pain.

“It’s very difficult for me … to me it’s just like it happened yesterday, so I don’t need a conference to remember.”

Still, Berkovitz recognizes and even asserts the necessity of the conference and sees participating as a duty.

“I think I owe it to the people who died to be remembered.”

Berkovitz’s story does not end in Sweden; rather, her rescue from tyranny marks the start of a new journey that defies the unthinkable trauma of the Holocaust.

In Sweden, Berkovitz maintains that she suffered from no depression or bitterness and looked forward to the future.

“I could have lived my life as a victim, but I did not,” she said. …

In April 1946, Anna and Elizabeth emigrated to the United States. They arrived in Los Angeles pennyless and not speaking English. In order to resume her schooling, Anna worked as an au-pair for several years. During this time she completed four years of high school and four years of college, graduating from U.C.L.A. in January 1952 with a B.S. degree in bacteriology and with Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude honors. While working as a laboratory technician, Anna met Leonard Berkovitz, who was then a post-doctoral fellow at Caltech. They were married in June 1953, and their sons Dan and Kenneth were born in 1956 and 1960, respectively. During this period Anna worked part time in various cancer research laboratories.

In 1962 Leonard accepted a position at Purdue University, and the family moved to West Lafayette, Indiana. When Kenneth was in kindergarten, Anna decided to continue her formal education. She was accepted as a graduate student in the biology department at Purdue University. She was working on her Ph.D. thesis when, in 1967, she was asked to take a temporary teaching position to fill an unexpected vacancy in the department. This temporary position turned into a lifetime career of teaching, and while Anna never obtained her Ph.D., she earned a tenured position from which she retired in 2003 as Professor Emerita in Biology.

Anna’s efforts as a teacher, her dedication to her students and to the discipline were amply recognized by her students, colleagues and the administration. She was selected by the students as one of the Top Ten Outstanding Teachers in the School of Science 14 times, she received the Murphy Award, the top recognition of teaching excellence by the University, and was given the Chiscon Award for outstanding teaching performance by the Biology department. Anna was elected to the Teaching Academy at Purdue and her name is in the Purdue Book of Great Teachers.

In her retirement Anna has more time to travel, attend theater, to be active in her Temple, and to winter in California. But, what she most enjoys is still interacting with young people, be it her own five grandchildren or students at the University. She currently participates in the University Honors Program, where she developed a new course, “The New Genetics – New Perspectives, New Dilemmas,” which she teaches in the Fall semesters. …

Marveling at her accomplishments for the time – raising a family while entering a competitive career field as woman when it was rare – Berkovitz attributes much of her drive to a belief that humanity was good. Only a small group of evil was responsible for her painful experiences.

“Unfortunately, now I see that there are still evil groups of people in the world killing or wanting to kill innocent people just because they are different from what they are,” she said. …

Though Berkovitz’s story is one of inspiration, she still bears emotional scars.

“I have recurring nightmares that I’m told that I have to pack up and leave home … that’s part of me; that’s part of my existence.”

Preventing scars such as these in others is a duty for Berkovitz; an obligation driving her to participate in programs such as the Holocaust Remembrance Conference.

“It’s very relevant to what’s going on in the world today.”

I had Dr. Berkovitz for the Honors Genetics course (mentioned in the article) and for Human Genetics, and she was one of my favorite professors here at Purdue. You could tell she was passionate about the subject, and she did a great job of explaining genetics. In class she would encourage stimulating discussions on eugenics, genetic testing, gene patenting, and abortion.

When she overheard me telling another student about the Society of Non-Theists, she asked to be put on the mailing list and has attended all of our pro-evolution events (including my talk about the Creation Museum). From our class discussions, I could tell she shared my liberal views. She even once showed us a clip of Stephen Colbert talking about DNA, and we were the only two to giggle when he talked about Jesus burying the dinosaurs.

But in addition to being a great professor and skeptic, she was a wonderful person. She would always take time to talk to me about random articles in the news she thought I would be interested in. She encouraged me to shoot for the stars when it came to genetics. When I was still considering becoming a genetic counselor, she encouraged me to get a PhD, saying someone with my skills in genetics should be doing research or running the clinic. And when I had asked her to write me a letter of recommendation for grad school, I discovered that her husband had passed away just a week before. Seeing someone I looked up to so much distraught and crying was horrible. I quickly told her I could easily find someone else to do it, but she insisted – even when overwhelmed with grief, she wanted to help her students.

I always said that this is exactly how I want to be when I was 80 – compassionate, skeptical, witty, and still excited
about science. That was before I knew her history as a Holocaust survivor. To think that she became such a strong woman and wonderful scientist even through that tragedy is amazing. She’s a role model to everyone, but especially to female scientists. I can only hope to be half the woman she is when I’m 80.

Homeopathy: Now for vaginas too!

Phil over at Skeptic Money is always keeping his eye out for silly homeopathic scams. Now he’s “found one just for the ladies“:

There is now a “treatment” for a yeast infection. It is called Yeast Gard. It has no side effects. Actually, it has no effects. Here are the “active” ingredients: Candida albicans 28x, Candida parapsilosis 28x, Pulsatilla 28x. Since I had no idea what these things are – I had to look them up. You’re gonna love this…. (From Wikipedia)

Candida albicans is a diploid fungus (a form of yeast) and a causal agent of opportunistic oral and genital infections in humans.

Candida parapsilosis is a fungal species of the yeast family that has become a significant cause of sepsis and of wound and tissue infections in immuno-compromised patients.

The genus Pulsatilla includes about 30 species, many of which are valued for their finely-dissected leaves, solitary bell-shaped flowers, and plumed seed heads. The anthers are bright yellow and the purple bell consists of sepals.

Ah, that’s lovely. Add a bunch of gel with the “memory” of yeast (aka, a bunch of gel with nothing in it) to your vagina, and your yeast infection should clear up in a couple of days! Even though your yeast infection probably would have cleared up in a couple of days if you did nothing. Ah, scams, aren’t they lovely?

Though the thing I find most amusing is that whenever someone recommends a post or article to me (like this one), 90% of the time it’s about vaginas/penises/boobies/sex. Well, there’s usually some sort of skeptical bent to it, or it’s inane enough to need my commentary or debunking. You guys know me too well (I mean, look, I already had a “vagina” tag). Kind of love it that sex makes you think of me!

James Randi = Dumbledore

The atheist blogosphere is overflowing with coverage about the news that James Randi has come out as gay. Like everyone else, I want to congratulate him on being brave enough to make this public. It’s a bit sad that he had to wait until he was 81 to do so, but I think that really shows the progress that’s being made for LGBT people.

But that’s all been said before. I have something much more important to say.

James Randi totally is Dumbledore1. Both are known for their awesome magic skills
2. Kickass white beards. ‘Nuff said
3. Wise, old men that many people respect
4. In charge of movements against stupidity/lies/evil
5. Excessive amount of middle names: “Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore” and “Randall James Hamilton Zwinge”
6. Both have a younger brother and younger sister
7. Gay

If only I knew if Randi had a fondness for sweets or enjoyed a good pair of socks…

My Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, and Santa stories

This is a question from formspring.me. Go ask me something!

OK so we are covered on the god side, but when/how did you figure out the more realistic things like Santa™ and the tooth fairy? And sorry of we are taking away FF time. This is kind of entertaining though.

Even though I’m a life-long atheist, I did believe in Santa, the tooth fairy, and the Easter bunny. But since my dad instilled a good sense of skepticism in me, those beliefs didn’t last very long.

I loved the Easter bunny when I was little. I’m half Greek, so we usually celebrated two Easters – one for the American side of the family, and the other for the Greek side. They were usually a week or two apart, which meant I got double the Easter bunny action. There’s nothing better than looking for eggs and eating a ton of chocolate.

And when I was very little, I sincerely believed in him. I remember once when I was probably six or so, I was playing upstairs in my room while all the grown ups talked downstairs. The doorbell rang, but I ignored it since I wasn’t allowed to answer the door. Then about ten minutes later someone came up to told me the Easter bunny came, but I missed him since I was playing.

I was pissed. Why wouldn’t they tell me?! Why wouldn’t they ask him to wait?!? Could we see if he was visiting any of the houses nearby?!?! Of course I got a lot of BS answers about how little kids weren’t supposed to see him, how I shouldn’t worry about that and just go look for the eggs… But that started the seed of doubt in my mind. By the next year I was convinced one of my family members had rang the doorbell, and it was all an act. But since I still received lots of chocolate, I didn’t really care all that much.

Everything else started to seem suspicious after that. Wasn’t it interesting how the tooth fairy only knew I had lost a tooth if I told my parents about it? That one I didn’t ask about, since I liked receiving money under my pillow (I was skeptical, not stupid). Santa was the same way. How could he get to all the houses in the world in one night? Or more importantly, why was his handwriting on the presents the same as my mom’s?

My mom’s reply? “Do you want presents or not?”

She’s not exactly the best encourager of skeptical thinking, but I did want presents. We kept up the act for a while, eventually with me thanking “Santa” while winking at my mom.

My experiences are one of the reasons I think it’s important for atheist families to keep perpetuating the Santa/Tooth Fairy/Easter Bunny myths. By learning to work through those myths, your kids will gain a set of skeptical thinking tools that they can apply to other parts of their life. By the time someone was telling me about Jesus rising from the dead, it was so ludicrous that I couldn’t believe anyone actually believed it. Thank you, Santa!

PS: And no, you’re not taking away from Final Fantasy time. I’m just doing this inbetween grinding. Much…get…ultimate weapons…

Guest post: Evils of constructive empiricism

This is a Guest Post by Frank Bellamy, a reader and content manager for the eMpirical, the newsletter for the Secular Student Alliance. He recently wrote an interesting article on why Humanists should not deliver invocations, but today he’s going to talk a bit about philosophy. So, discuss your hearts out while I’m away!

Evils of constructive empiricism

Philosophers routinely entertain and foster ideas which are not only stupid, but also an affront to science: dualism, intelligent design, qualia, the list goes on. Another item on that list that I have only recently discovered is constructive empiricism. That phrase may sound harmless enough, after all, scientists like empirical evidence, and being constructive is good, right? It’s anything but harmless when one looks at its meaning. According to the Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, “the constructive empiricist holds that science aims at truth about observable aspects of the world, but that science does not aim at truth about unobservable aspects.” In other words, science gives us no reason for thinking that the unobservable constructs posited by scientific theories actually exist.

A few concrete examples may be useful here. According to the constructive empiricist, we have no good reason to think that atoms exist. After all, no one has ever seen, heard, felt, tasted, or smelled an atom. Atoms may be a useful computational tool for determining what will happen when we mix two substances together, but that is not a reason for attributing actual existence to them. Scientists may even believe that atoms exist, but if they do they go beyond what the evidence warrants.

Evolutionary biologists are in equal trouble. Since we can’t actually observe history, we have no reason for believing historical claims. The idea that humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor more recently than humans and cats may be useful for explaining and predicting various features of the genomes, morphology, or cognitive capacities of these species, but that is not a reason for thinking that any of these species share common ancestors, or indeed that they even have ancestors at all.

To use a more every day example, I have a theory that Jen believes that the christian god does not exist. This theory may be useful in predicting what sorts of things Jen will write on her blog in the future. It allows me to predict, for example, that the next time Jen writes about some amazing new scientific discovery, she will explain it in naturalistic rather than theological terms. But according to the constructive empiricist, that is no reason for thinking that Jen actually has such a belief. Since I can’t directly observe any of Jens beliefs, I am completely unwarranted in believing that she has beliefs at all. So much for theory of mind being a positive aspect of human cognition.

Lets set aside the fact that constructive empiricism entails that scientists are liars and consider its practical implications for science. A scientist who believes in constructive empiricism doesn’t have to waste time considering such irrelevant questions as whether his pet theory is true or not, or how it relates to other theories in other parts of science. All that matters is whether his pet theory can account for the available data.

One implication of this is that it completely undermines the motivation most scientists have for doing science in the first place. Scientists don’t just want equations and models that predict data, we want to understand whatever phenomenon we have chosen to study. We want to know what’s actually going on in the world. We want to know how what we’re doing relates to other parts of science. If constructive empiricism is true, then we are deluding ourselves. Science isn’t in the business of telling us how things really are.

Another implication of constructive empiricism is that it doesn’t really matter how well theories in different domains of science match up with each other. If we explain the movement of objects on earth in terms of forces and masses, and the movement of objects in the sky in terms of Ptolemy’s spheres, so long as we can predict the data that’s ok. If we have physically, neurally, or evolutionarily implausible theories of human cognition, that’s ok, so long as we can predict the behavioral data. If scientists were to truly adopt this view, it would change the face of science forever, and not for the better.

And why would I, a grad student with many other non-philosophical demands on his time be worrying about constructive empiricists you may wonder? It’s because I’ve recently discovered that my adviser is one. Frack me.

Friday Feminist Roundup

No, I don’t plan on making this a weekly tradition – I’m not organized enough to have required themes for certain days. I just have a bunch of feminism related articles that I’ve accumulated throughout a busy week, and I figure I’d dump them all at once.

  • Australia bans porn containing female ejaculation and small breasts. Why? Apparently they think female ejaculation is just urination and fake body fluids. Yeah, not sure how it can be both. And the small boobies? Apparently if you’re an A cup, that’s too close to pedophilia. Thank you Australia, as if women weren’t insecure enough about their bust size, now a huge group is too creepy to think about sexually because they’re not womanly enough. Awesome.
  • School district pulls Diary of Anne Frank because Anne, a developing young woman, dared to talk about vaginas. Apparently female genitalia is the most horrifying aspect of the book, not the fact that she was forced to live in hiding from fear of death and then later died in a concentration camp. Overprotective parents are awesome.
  • In case games for girls weren’t mollifying enough, you can now get a Ouija board in pink! Because apparently the gender neutral versions don’t channel ghosts who can answer girl specific questions like “Who will call you next?” and “Will you be famous?” Come on, we all know girls only care about talking on the phone, becoming the next Paris Hilton, and pink woo bullshit.
  • Being attractive and feminine in the sciences isn’t easy. Go read about this chemist who also happened to be an NFL cheerleader, and the stereotypes she faced along the way. I actually think being more of a tomboy has helped me avoid negative stereotypes – which isn’t necessarily a good thing.

There's still time to support Skepchicamp!

While I will no longer be able to speak at Skepchicamp, I still think it’s a great cause worthy of support. If you want to help fund this awesome mini conference, there are still tickets left for the big godless party in Chicago this Saturday. For $30 dollars you get booze, food, and the company of awesome people like multiple Skepchicks, Hemant from Friendly Atheist, and me! EDIT: And Hilary Mark Nelson, who is so inconceivably wonderful not only because he is bribing me with chocolate, but he’s also driving, which leaves myself and others able to imbibe alcohol. Woooo! How could you resist?

Oh, though if you’re a single lady, you definitely shouldn’t come. I don’t want any competition in the auction for a date with Hemant. Though gay guys are still encouraged to come – if I’m going to lose, the outcome might as well be hilariously awkward for Hemant.

Now if you excuse me, I’m going to go hide from a certain someone who’ll be angry that I’m scaring away all the cute females…

There’s still time to support Skepchicamp!

While I will no longer be able to speak at Skepchicamp, I still think it’s a great cause worthy of support. If you want to help fund this awesome mini conference, there are still tickets left for the big godless party in Chicago this Saturday. For $30 dollars you get booze, food, and the company of awesome people like multiple Skepchicks, Hemant from Friendly Atheist, and me! EDIT: And Hilary Mark Nelson, who is so inconceivably wonderful not only because he is bribing me with chocolate, but he’s also driving, which leaves myself and others able to imbibe alcohol. Woooo! How could you resist?

Oh, though if you’re a single lady, you definitely shouldn’t come. I don’t want any competition in the auction for a date with Hemant. Though gay guys are still encouraged to come – if I’m going to lose, the outcome might as well be hilariously awkward for Hemant.

Now if you excuse me, I’m going to go hide from a certain someone who’ll be angry that I’m scaring away all the cute females…