First of all, screw you for ruining my potential placebo effect when I need it the most.
But I am a skeptic, and this was a topic I had never really given much thought to. How many energy drinks are based on BS? Are they really anything more than caffeine and sugar?
But I admit, I haven’t done a lot of research into this, nor am I going at this moment. If anyone’s more informed, please enlighten us in the comments!
This is post 30 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
A guest appearance
Me: Who’s that? I didn’t give you permission to chat with anyone.
Jason: Don’t you recognize his voice?

John: Who’s that?
Me: That’s Hemant! …From Friendly Atheist?
John: Never heard of him.
Me: Ouch.
Hemant: I’m going to go back to taking off my shirt now, bye.
No, there’s really not more context than that.
This is post 29 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
How to cure feminism
According to the purported manifesto of Anders Behring Breivik, who recently confessed to being responsible for the Norway killings:
1. Limit the distribution of birth-control pills (contraceptive pills): Discourage the use of and prevent liberal distribution of contraceptive pills or equivalent prevention methods. The goal should be to make it considerably more difficult to obtain. This alone should increase the fertility rate by 0,1 points but would degrade women’s rights.
2. Reform sex education: Reform the current sex education in our school institutions. This may involve limiting it or at least delaying sex education to a later age and discourage casual sex. Sex should only be encouraged within the boundaries of marriage. This alone should increase the fertility rate by 0,1 points.
3. Making abortion illegal: A re-introduction of the ban on abortion should result in an increased fertility rate of approximately 0,1-0,2 points but would strip women of basic rights.
4. Women and education: Discourage women in general to strive for full time careers. This will involve certain sexist and discriminating policies but should increase the fertility rate by up to 0,1-0,2 points.
Women should not be encouraged by society/media to take anything above a bachelor’s degree but should not be prevented from taking a master or PhD. Males on the other hand should obviously continue to be encouraged to take higher education – bachelor, master and PhD.
He’s right. Want to control women? Reduce them to baby making machines.
(Side note: Why is it still okay for women to get PhDs? …Why am I trying to use logic to analyze something like this?)
The really scary part? While people while be eager to dismiss this as the crazed ravings of a madman, these are the exact tactics the religious right is using in the United States. And that’s a hell of a lot more than one person.
(Via Pharyngula)
This is post 28 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat did I just watch?
“Men should have veto power over abortions; Women should be held criminally liable if they refuse”
Put on your rage hats, folks. This one’s a doozy.
Keith Ablow – psychiatrist, psychological thriller author, and Fox News personality – thinks that not only should men have veto power over abortions, but women who ignore said veto should be held criminally responsible. Why? Take it away, Keith.
I have limited the scope of my argument intentionally, in order to focus on what I consider to be a question that puts fairness front and center: If a man has participated in creating a new life and is fully willing to parent his child (independently, if necessary), why should he not have any control over whether that life is ended?
Because I man doesn’t have to carry said child for nine months. When we achieve the technology to remove a fetus and put it in a mechanical womb chamber, then we can have the discussion on paternal input.
We are ignoring the quiet message that current abortion policy conveys to every American male: You have no voice in, and, therefore, no responsibility for, the pregnancies which you help to create. Your descendants are disposable, at the whim of the women you choose to be intimate with.
Or maybe you should know if a woman is pro-choice or not before you stick your penis in her, and if it’s so goddamn important to you, then don’t stick your penis in her. A mindblowing proposal, I know.
Giving would-be fathers a lack of veto power over abortions is connected psychologically to the epidemic of absentee fathers in this country. We can’t, on the one hand, be credible in bemoaning the number of single mothers raising their children, while, on the other hand, giving men the clear message that bringing new lives to the planet is the exclusive domain, and under the exclusive control, of women.
Whether stated or not, the underlying message of withholding from men their proper rights to father the children they create is that they are not proper custodians, nor properly responsible, for their children.
The notion that there is no emotional injury done men by depriving them of decision-making power as to whether the children they father are aborted is naïve.
Just in my own practice of psychiatry, I have listened to dozens of men express lingering, sometimes intense, pain over abortions that proceeded either without their consent, or without them having spoken up about their desires to bring their children to term and parent them.
Should we really continue to give men the clear message that that they should deny, and that we have no regard for, their feelings about the unrealized lives of their potential sons and daughters?Isn’t it interesting that we don’t generally even ask fathers how they are feeling in the days leading to abortions, nor in their aftermath? We don’t even ask how they are feeling in the aftermath of abortions of fetuses who have reached the second trimester, even if they have been seen by their fathers during ultrasound imaging. Aren’t we at risk of suggesting that we don’t much care how they feel?
Men haven’t been taught that they should consider the lives they help create as their responsibility from conception (other than providing financially for the child if born), but I believe those lives are their responsibility. And I believe that with that responsibility ought come certain rights.
Citation needed.
I understand that adopting social policy that gives fathers the right to veto abortions would lead to presently unknown psychological consequences for women forced to carry babies to term. But I don’t know that those consequences are greater than those suffered by men forced to end the lives of their unborn children.
Um, actually, the consequences aren’t unknown, because we have data from thousands of years of women not being able to have abortions. We’ve historically been nothing more than baby incubators, and that’s exactly what you want to return to. And you know what happens when women are forced to carry babies to term? They still try to get back alley abortions, and women die.
Adult humans dying. Kind of more important than emotional consequences or the abortion of some cells that don’t have feelings or memories or dreams.
And I am absolutely certain that no woman needs to become pregnant who wishes not to become pregnant. Women taking full responsibility for their sexual activity and their bodies would mean that no woman would face the prospect of being compelled to bring a child to term.
But men can’t take responsibility for their sexual activity by choosing to have sex with someone who’s anti-choice. Because that would restrict men’s ability to have sex freely, when this issue is really about punishing women who have sex.
Seriously, if this paragraph doesn’t illustrate that mindset, I don’t know what will. In what world do we live in that we force people to suffer through all negative consequences instead of trying to alleviate them when possible? If you go skiing, you know there’s a chance you might break your leg. If it happens do we scream “WELL YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE GONE SKIING, SUFFER THROUGH IT!”?
No, we let you go to the fucking doctor.
It’s time to give men their due as fathers—from the moment of conception. Allow men who want to be fathers, and who could be good parents, to compel the women they impregnate to bring their children to term.
Because a man’s feelings are more important than control over your own body. Hear that, ladies?
Look, I do think open communication is important in relationships, and that serious issues like abortion should at least be discussed before making a decision. That’s assuming a healthy relationship, and not cases of rape, incest, abuse, etc where the woman’s disclosure may put her at risk. But we can’t ignore the fact that there’s a biological difference here – women carry children, men do not. That’s why the final decision ultimately lands in the hands of the woman, even if it does cause some distress to men. There’s absolutely no reason to give a man veto power other than the patriarchal idea that men deserve control over women.
I wish I didn’t have to explain this, but anti-choice and anti-women sentiments are rapidly growing in the US. A fact more terrifying than any of this guy’s novels.
This is post 26 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
Skepticism & fiction
A reader asks,
How can you be ok with all the shiny-afterlife-awaits-you and stuff in Harry Potter?
…Because it’s fiction? Seriously, it’s a fantasy novel that’s full of magic, dragons, unicorns, giants, goblins, ghosts, elves, pixies, potions, charms, hexes, teleportation, and soul splitting… and you’re worried about the concept of the afterlife? You could suspend disbelief for all of that, but not one vaguely religious concept?
Dude. Come on.
Sorry, but it’s a pet peeve of mine when skeptics are so skeptical that they can’t even enjoy fiction. Okay, maybe you just don’t like fiction. But how do you not understand that lots and lots of people do enjoy fiction without eliminating their skepticism? We can watch a movie while still knowing it’s just actors and special effects. Humans love telling and hearing stories – that doesn’t mean we have to literally believe everything within them.
And I wouldn’t talk about this if it was a one off question. I hear this view quite frequently. Heck, at TAM8 Richard Dawkins spent a good portion of his interview talking about how he didn’t like fiction because he thought reading fantasy novels as a child contributed to irrational thinking.
Bah humbug. In my case, it was the complete opposite. I knew that The Witches, or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, or the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, or Harry Potter, or Greek mythology were all just stories. That’s exactly why when I heard about the Bible, I immediately recognized it as just another story. Fiction doesn’t erode at skepticism – it can enforce it!
So, boo hiss. Let me enjoy Harry Potter in peace without overanalyzing the religious aspects. I don’t give a damn if they celebrate Christmas when people are able to magically turn into cats.
This is post 25 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
What makes men gay?
The final top donor request (the rest didn’t request a topic):
“blog about this“
Since this is from a friend and not a stranger, I can safely say this: I hate you for making me read a scientific paper and review it during Blogathon. Hate. So much hate.
But you have my word, so I’ll do it. Onto the science!
A lot of people like to ask the question “What makes men gay?” It’s pretty clear it’s not a willy-nilly lifestyle choice, but scientists still aren’t really sure what the biology behind homosexuality actually is. Is it genetic? Hormonal?
Research on the latter is what a recent review article in the journal Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology summarized. You probably heard about the starting premise, since it received a lot of attention in the media. A study in 1996 found that gay men had a greater number of older brothers than heterosexual men. This is known as the “fraternal birth order” (FBO) effect, and has been replicated in many studies. It’s independent of potentially confounding variables like year of birth, age, socioeconomic status, and parental age. Non-biological siblings had no effect on sexual orientation.
The main hypothesis for why you see this pattern is known as the maternal immune hypothesis. Just like your body mounts an immune response against bacteria or ill-matched transplants, moms may develop an immune reaction against a male specific protein that’s present during development. Those proteins are normal for a male fetus, but a mother’s body still recognizes them as foreign. The immune response may then alter parts of the brain associated with male specific proteins like the anterior hypothalamus, which has also been linked to sexual orientation.
Recent research is finding more and more support for this hypothesis. One study showed that mothers of boys do develop an immune response to H-Y antigen, which is a protein expressed in the brain that is important in male fetal development. This immune response becomes stronger and stronger with each son a mother has.
This isn’t a totally crazy hypothesis. This exact thing happens in terms of blood type:
A medical model for a maternal immune response underlying the FBO effect is Hemolytic Disease of the Newborn (HDN). When a mother does not have the Rh factor in her blood (i.e., a mother is Rh negative), after gestating and giving birth to an Rh positive (Rh +) fetus, she may mount an immune response against the Rh factor. This immune response may affect subsequent Rh + fetuses, potentially attacking their red blood cells and causing anemia. The likelihood of an immune response becomes increasingly likely with each Rh + fetus a mother gestates.
There’s a problem though. H-Y antigen isn’t just produced in the brain – it’s also expressed in the gonads. Homosexual and heterosexual men don’t have any major difference in terms of gonads or fertility. Is there a way that the immune response would only effect H-Y proteins in the brain, but not in the gonads?
Possibly. Mice testes can develop without H-Y. And male gonads don’t reach maturity until puberty, so maybe a maternal immune response wouldn’t affect sperm too much.
The most compelling point is that there are three different forms of H-Y protein. It’s possible that the different forms are localized in different tissues, with only the one in the brain being targeted by the maternal immune response. However, there’s currently no information on where different forms of H-Y protein are localized.
Despite all of this evidence, this still doesn’t provide an actual mechanism. There’s a big gap between “increased immune response” to “homosexual behavior.” What are all of the steps in between? And is H-Y the only male specific protein that a maternal immune response targets? Probably not, but more research still needs to be done.
So do we definitively know what’s going on yet? Not quite. But feel free to slap homophobes with some science the next time you hear “lifestyle choice.”
And there goes all of the Blogathoon buffer time I had built up. Curses!
This is post 24 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
Harry Potter and the end of my childhood
(Obviously, spoilers below)
Typing “final” is odd for me. The end of Harry Potter oddly marks the end of my childhood. Well, maybe not so oddly. I read my first Harry Potter book when I was in 6th grade. I was Harry’s age – 11. After that, every time I read a new book, I was the age of Harry. It slipped a bit at the end when Rowling took more time to write the later books (I was 19 when Harry was 17), but it oddly marked my own childhood.
But the “sweet” part of bittersweet was so worth it. I saw the final movie at midnight in Vegas sitting next to Greta Christina – how does it get any better than that? And we saw it in 3D, complete with my Ravenclaw shirt and Harry Potter shaped 3D glasses:As for the movie itself, I have one thing to say:
Omfg Snape.
Snape has always been one of my favorite characters. I was defending him from the beginning – I knew he wasn’t simply evil, it was too simple. And Alan Rickman was one of my favorite actors long before he became Snape. So to finally let Rickman show his full acting potential – holy crap. Seeing Snape do the tiny smile as he’s dying? Who was cutting onion in the movie theater?!
…Of course, there could be a movie of Alan Rickman reading the phone book and it would still be awesome, so…
The other highlight of the movie had to be Neville being a fucking badass. I have to give kudos to the movie for making you think he might not get his moment – they made you think someone else was going to kill Nagini a bunch of times. I would have raged if the most badass part of the 7th book didn’t make it to the screen, but thankfully it did. Props to Matthew Lewis for the superb acting.
Speaking of Neville…forgive me, but when did Matthew Lewis suddenly get super, super hot?
…yet another sign we’re all growing up.
Though it was oddly appropriate ending my childhood in Vegas. After the credits I turned to Greta and said, “Alright, time for the hookers and blow.”
Goodbye, Harry Potter!
This is post 23 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
Q&A Quickfire!
Blogathon is pretty much the one time a year I check my ancient formspring.me account. So here’s a quickfire answering some random questions from the last 12 months:
Have you ever played any Pen and Paper RPG’s if so, which?
I’ve played Dungeons & Dragons twice after my friends guilted me to no end. The first time was mainly spent drawing up character sheets for 4 hours. The second time two of the guys in the group spent the whole time trying to have their characters rape mine. IT WAS A BLAST!
Now you know why I only played D&D twice.
How do you sleep?
Actually, quite crappily. It usually takes me a long time to fall asleep, and I’ll wake up a couple of times every night. I used to sleep walk when I was a little kid, so maybe that has something to do with it.
How do you play on clue Plum, White, Green, Peacock, Scarlet, Mustard
Pfft, Scarlet, no question. Professor Plum if she’s taken. Yes, it totally matters.
Would you rather have sex with Ronald McDonald or the Kool-Aid man?
Oh god, terrifying clown or someone obnoxiously yelling “Oh yeeeaaaah” the whole time? ..Ronald McDonald. I can close my eyes; it’s harder to close my ears.
Custard cream or bourbon biscuit?
I don’t even know what either of these things are. Is this British? Is this like spotted dick? Heh heh heh, spotted dick.
finish this sentence “kids these days…”
…will in ten years be complaining about kids these days.
If you have any additional random mindless questions, feel free to leave them in the comments so I have something to blog about at 3am, haha.
This is post 22 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
A new religious type of RNA discovered?
Adjacent pic is from a whiteboard in a student clubroom at the University of Helsinki, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry (or, as we call it, “Wood & Weed Science”). Someone had drawn a crude chart of plant floral induction pathway and another(?) person had made some additions, including labeling “mRNA” as “missionary RNA”. I thought your readers might want to explain in comments what exactly is “missionary RNA” :)
I loved Arctic Ape’s PS:
Poop jokes: A universal staple in graduate student humor.(By the way, almost all our student clubs are curriculum-related, but we’re still mostly not huge nerds. For example, the rest of the whiteboard featured a poop joke in Finnish.)
This is post 21 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.
- «Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- …
- 187
- Next Page»
