Oh boy. I wish I was lying when I said that videos and images of female ejaculative orgasm and small breasts were being banned. I really wish. Really truly.
Unfortunately this is the kind of errant stupidity that our politics fosters. There is no scientific background to this. No logic either however I will explain the apparent reasoning.
According to the Board female ejaculation is just another form of urination and they detest golden showers like nothing else. Personally, watersports aren't my style, but if someone else wants to they're more than welcome to. What boggles me is how easily female ejaculation becomes a freakish, unclean thing (Noted as "abhorrent". I mean come on.) when male ejaculation is all fine and dandy. It's a scientifically noted occurrence.
I love the reasoning for the small breasts. Apparently they're too "childlike". It's too close to kiddie porn to be allowed on our Intarwebz.
Oh where to start with this crock of shit.
Women are already targeted for low self esteem. We're told we MUST be prettier, MUST be thinner, MUST be sexier. Now we're told again that ejaculation orgasms are freakish. I already know of people who have been hugely uncomfortable with themselves sexually because they've had bad reactions to how much they come.
Small breasts are much the same as angst over a small penis really. Are we going to ban all depictions of small penises because they're juvenile? Wait, I keep forgetting this is war against female sexual expression most of all at the moment.
Or we could all just go live in Victorian England.
Showing posts with label stupidity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stupidity. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Saturday, October 10, 2009
"Real Women"
Ever heard the phrase "Real women are..." or something similar? I can't stand it. Those three words smack of so many problems faced in the Bitch battles of today. If we're trying to escape from traditional definitions of gender why the fuck are we in such a rush to re-define the restrictions? It's like enforcing gun control with an M16.
"Real women have curves" gives me particular problems. I know a lot of fat women. I am one myself. That doesn't make me any more or less a woman than say, a friend who is thin by benefit of that wonderful 75% genetic influence on ones weight. It just makes me fat. Real women don't give a shit about their weight. Other real women do. Real women are also trapped in the feeling that they absolutely must care about their image because that's the only way that they're going to land a man.
"Real women are intelligent." Nah, not all of us all the time. Not even close. And y'know what? It's not our place nor right to expect that everyone have a high IQ. We can have certain expectations of everyone as people but if we apply the logic to men and expect them all to be intelligent we'll be falling over ourselves with angst and disappointment. It works two ways.
"Real women don't have 12E breasts (32E US)" Really? I've met a few. They're also really intelligent and have curves.
Real women are mothers. Real women hate children. Real women simply couldn't care less either way. We are tall, short and in the middle. We have PhDs and are still in highschool, or have dropped out of highschool, or were home schooled, or never got the chance to go to highschool because we had the wrong downstairs equipment. We are bleach blond and all shades of the rainbow right up to black. We have pimples. We wear make up, or don't wear make up. We fart. We sweat. We wash as often as we can or hardly at all. We write. We type. We do complex mathematics because it's our first love alongside food. We love our 'sisters' and hate them and in the end, whether we like it or not we are all real women. The super models to the physicists to the feminists and the bull dykes.
We also need to grow the fuck up and get on with life without telling each other what to be.
"Real women have curves" gives me particular problems. I know a lot of fat women. I am one myself. That doesn't make me any more or less a woman than say, a friend who is thin by benefit of that wonderful 75% genetic influence on ones weight. It just makes me fat. Real women don't give a shit about their weight. Other real women do. Real women are also trapped in the feeling that they absolutely must care about their image because that's the only way that they're going to land a man.
"Real women are intelligent." Nah, not all of us all the time. Not even close. And y'know what? It's not our place nor right to expect that everyone have a high IQ. We can have certain expectations of everyone as people but if we apply the logic to men and expect them all to be intelligent we'll be falling over ourselves with angst and disappointment. It works two ways.
"Real women don't have 12E breasts (32E US)" Really? I've met a few. They're also really intelligent and have curves.
Real women are mothers. Real women hate children. Real women simply couldn't care less either way. We are tall, short and in the middle. We have PhDs and are still in highschool, or have dropped out of highschool, or were home schooled, or never got the chance to go to highschool because we had the wrong downstairs equipment. We are bleach blond and all shades of the rainbow right up to black. We have pimples. We wear make up, or don't wear make up. We fart. We sweat. We wash as often as we can or hardly at all. We write. We type. We do complex mathematics because it's our first love alongside food. We love our 'sisters' and hate them and in the end, whether we like it or not we are all real women. The super models to the physicists to the feminists and the bull dykes.
We also need to grow the fuck up and get on with life without telling each other what to be.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
I Don't Own My Genes? What?
I had hoped, in my heart of hearts, that people working in the forefront of medical technology would be more mature and altruistic than to do something as fucking stupid as patent a gene. The particular genes I'm so pissed off about are two which, when mutated, give a 60-90% chance of the person developing breast cancer. All up it seems that about 20% of our genes are patented already. What the fuck is with that?
In it's normal state, BRCA (1 and 2) is a cancer-suppressant. As mentioned a particular mutation can cause the opposite. There has been a test developed to see whether an individual carries this mutated gene or not. To me, this raises all sorts of moral quandaries but we'll get to them later. For now money is the target.
The patent for this gene is held by Myriad Genetics, preventing other groups from testing for the gene, studying, working with or even looking at it. In other words it's an intellectual monopoly with thousands of lives in the balance. They argued that because they extracted and isolated the gene it becomes liable to patent, rather than being called a discovery. Did the Curies patent radioactivity? Rutherford, the atom? Cook, Australia? I don't fucking think so. Not only were they not that outright stupid, or selfish, the patent office at the time would have hardly let such claims stay.
The gene itself occurs naturally, and to the best of my knowledge the methods of isolation are not some wonderful new invention either. So, in short, it's money grubbing. Both Myriad Genetics itself and the patent office seem to be scrabbling for cash and thinking through their pockets rather than through the medical profession. This kind of thing only hurts medicine, and the people who would otherwise benefit from the technology.
Of course the ability to identify high-risk genes like BRCA 1 and 2 raises issues of its own. Should having it affect health insurance? Should the availability of such tests be regulated? Should individuals be obliged to divulge the information to employers? Do people want to know? How should those with the gene conduct their lifestyles with that knowledge?
The health insurance question is, to me, a no-brainer. Such things are a shared rish within the community and as such one individual's susceptibility is cushioned by the people around them. My god, what a horribly communist idea! Yes, insurance companies are out to maximise their profits. This is where public health comes into play as a base-standard that should be upheld rather than the low class alternative. Unfortunate that the governing bodies run like corporations in the first place save the relative respect of shareholders.
Testing for this gene should be entirely up to the individual. Some will want it so they can know and act accordingly, others prefer ignorance. That's their call. If they do know then it's their business and right to divulge at choice. It's not something that employers need to make special workplace provision for, though psychological stress could be an issue. No doubt much of the resources in testing centres will go towards counselling and the like. If people wish to know let them.
In a similar fashion the actions of those who do know are up to them. One woman who had the test come back positive had her ovaries, fallopian tubes and breasts removed as a precautionary measure. Other options include stringent, regular checks such as screening mammograms. Or there's the option of ignoring it all together. More issues come into play with the idea of offspring crops up. I think that unless society is prepared to limit any number of other genetic distinctions in regards to giving birth (Let's not, okay?) they should leave this well enough alone, to the discretion of the parents. The offspring should be given the information for their health's sake, but what they do with that knowledge is up to them.
Unfortunately I doubt my ideas will have any impact upon government or corporations. I'm just a crazy teen after all.
The whole deal with medical corporations patenting genes is one which needs addressing. It's greed. It's harmful and disgusting. These patents represent but a part of the whole festering mess. The scientists and many individuals may have altruistic intentions but someone on the policy bench clearly doesn't.
Links:
http://www.pubpat.org/brca.htm
http://www.nswccl.org.au/issues/breast_cancer.php
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2398822.htm
http://www.doublex.com/section/health-science/enough-patenting-breast-cancer-gene
In it's normal state, BRCA (1 and 2) is a cancer-suppressant. As mentioned a particular mutation can cause the opposite. There has been a test developed to see whether an individual carries this mutated gene or not. To me, this raises all sorts of moral quandaries but we'll get to them later. For now money is the target.
The patent for this gene is held by Myriad Genetics, preventing other groups from testing for the gene, studying, working with or even looking at it. In other words it's an intellectual monopoly with thousands of lives in the balance. They argued that because they extracted and isolated the gene it becomes liable to patent, rather than being called a discovery. Did the Curies patent radioactivity? Rutherford, the atom? Cook, Australia? I don't fucking think so. Not only were they not that outright stupid, or selfish, the patent office at the time would have hardly let such claims stay.
The gene itself occurs naturally, and to the best of my knowledge the methods of isolation are not some wonderful new invention either. So, in short, it's money grubbing. Both Myriad Genetics itself and the patent office seem to be scrabbling for cash and thinking through their pockets rather than through the medical profession. This kind of thing only hurts medicine, and the people who would otherwise benefit from the technology.
Of course the ability to identify high-risk genes like BRCA 1 and 2 raises issues of its own. Should having it affect health insurance? Should the availability of such tests be regulated? Should individuals be obliged to divulge the information to employers? Do people want to know? How should those with the gene conduct their lifestyles with that knowledge?
The health insurance question is, to me, a no-brainer. Such things are a shared rish within the community and as such one individual's susceptibility is cushioned by the people around them. My god, what a horribly communist idea! Yes, insurance companies are out to maximise their profits. This is where public health comes into play as a base-standard that should be upheld rather than the low class alternative. Unfortunate that the governing bodies run like corporations in the first place save the relative respect of shareholders.
Testing for this gene should be entirely up to the individual. Some will want it so they can know and act accordingly, others prefer ignorance. That's their call. If they do know then it's their business and right to divulge at choice. It's not something that employers need to make special workplace provision for, though psychological stress could be an issue. No doubt much of the resources in testing centres will go towards counselling and the like. If people wish to know let them.
In a similar fashion the actions of those who do know are up to them. One woman who had the test come back positive had her ovaries, fallopian tubes and breasts removed as a precautionary measure. Other options include stringent, regular checks such as screening mammograms. Or there's the option of ignoring it all together. More issues come into play with the idea of offspring crops up. I think that unless society is prepared to limit any number of other genetic distinctions in regards to giving birth (Let's not, okay?) they should leave this well enough alone, to the discretion of the parents. The offspring should be given the information for their health's sake, but what they do with that knowledge is up to them.
Unfortunately I doubt my ideas will have any impact upon government or corporations. I'm just a crazy teen after all.
The whole deal with medical corporations patenting genes is one which needs addressing. It's greed. It's harmful and disgusting. These patents represent but a part of the whole festering mess. The scientists and many individuals may have altruistic intentions but someone on the policy bench clearly doesn't.
Links:
http://www.pubpat.org/brca.htm
http://www.nswccl.org.au/issues/breast_cancer.php
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2398822.htm
http://www.doublex.com/section/health-science/enough-patenting-breast-cancer-gene
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
