?

Log in

LiveJournal for Complex Questions.

View:User Info.
View:Friends.
View:Calendar.
View:Memories.
You're looking at the latest 20 entries. Missed some entries? Then simply jump back 20 entries.

Wednesday, November 15th, 2006

Posted by:foolishship.
Time:5:00 pm.
From Glenn C. Conroy's "Reconstructing Human Origins: A Modern Synthesis":

To all creatures still wild and free,
I dedicate this book.
The success of human evolution has not been kind to you.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Monday, September 19th, 2005

Subject:The Question of Hurricane Katrina
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:12:21 pm.
This is a topic that always stirs up good discussions.

Do you think Hurricane Katrina was handled well? Do you think Canada would have handled it differently or better? What sort of extenuating circumstances do you feel made the disaster even worse?

I do not think Hurricane Katrina was handled at all well. I think it was botched on all levels of government and that there was a severe failure to lend aid in the beginning stages. I think many of the deaths could have been prevented and the people given more support from their own country.

I am not sure if Canada would have handled it better, persay, but I am certain it would have been handled differently. The small bit of me that is patriotic suspects it would have been handled better if only because I like to believe that, in current day, racism is less prevalent than in the United States. I do think that racism and poverty were two extenuating circumstances that resulted in Katrina's victims being treated as they were - often left behind, without aid, etc.

Stupid quotes about Hurricane Katrina:
"Considering the dire circumstances that we have in New Orleans, virtually a city that has been destroyed, things are going relatively well." –FEMA Director Michael Brown, Sept. 1, 2005 (Source http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fthinkprogress.org%2F2005%2F09%2F01%2Fchertoff-reality%2F)

"We finally cleaned up public housing in New Orleans. We couldn't do it, but God did." –Rep. Richard Baker (R-LA) to lobbyists, as quoted in the Wall Street Journal
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

Thursday, July 14th, 2005

Posted by:hdshrnkngfin.
Time:6:57 pm.
Define power.

I've asked this to many people many times and don't get a satisfying answer. Yet power seems to be at the center of many dialogues in various fields.
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

Thursday, June 2nd, 2005

Subject:Socio-Economic and Political Factors Promoting the Continuation of Infanticide in India and Brazil
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:1:12 pm.
Socio-Economic and Political Factors Promoting the Continuation of Infanticide in India and Brazil

Cut for extreme length.Collapse )

Written for Anth 220: Cultural and Social Anthropology in 2004. (c) Robbin Shandler.
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

Sunday, May 29th, 2005

Subject:Objectification of people.
Posted by:infinitycool.
Time:11:55 pm.
I don't know why, but I was thinking of this today.

Waaay back we had cultures that worshipped gods. Now it seems that has shifted to ourselves.

Consequences?

- more power to the individual
- a more complex moral stucture. (less good vs evil, more gray area)


What do you all think?
Comments: Read 2 orAdd Your Own.

Friday, May 27th, 2005

Subject:Hot Topic: Safe Injection Sites
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:3:39 pm.
Hi all.

This is a pretty hot topic in Victoria right now. They are considering implementing "safe injection sites" for drug users here. Vancouver already has one, and the mayor is in favour of it. They have not yet decided if or where a safe injection site might be located, but it's definitely being considered.

Alan Lowe (the mayor) went to Germany and Switzerland to witness their use of safe injection sites and see if their model could potentially be followed in Victoria. I believe Vancouver is piloting a 3 year program that has federal approval and is it's own "model." But I think the German and Swiss models were the ones we might end up with here.

What do you all think about safe injection sites? I personally think it's a good idea. Drug abuse isn't going to go away and can't simply be swept under the carpet. To stem off the spread of HIV and other blood transmitted diseases, I think it's a good idea to provide users with locations where they can be sure that they will be safe if they need a "fix." I believe it's also intended to help with other needs such as counselling, and while I think that's a good thing, I doubt it will actually lessen the number of users.

I think having drug abuse simply ignored or having people just hope it will go away is not going to actually deal with the problem. I don't think drug use will ever really go away. People will get caught up in it regardless of how well known the downfalls of drugs are. I would like to see it made safer, because if we are going to have to live with it, the less amount of danger associated with it, the better. Potentially, if people are provided with sterilized needles and a safe place to inject, maybe that would result in less HIV positive individuals ending up in our hospitals... and less disastrous overdoses on the street and elsewhere.
Comments: Read 15 orAdd Your Own.

Tuesday, April 19th, 2005

Subject:Rwanda Genocide
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:5:03 pm.
Has anyone else seen Hotel Rwanda? Jay and I saw it last night with my mom. It was pretty good, and held up as accurate in comparison to some of my notes from my cultural & social anth class from last semester. It's highly recommended.

It re-piqued my interest in the topic and I now hope to pick up a couple of books on the subject. It's such a dark time in history.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Saturday, April 16th, 2005

Subject:GMO's
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:5:52 pm.
Mood: bitchy.
I recently came across a discussion on the treatment of animals and it reminded me of my "Ecosystems & Human Activity" class from last semester. I really enjoyed that class. The teacher, who lives on Saltspring (which says a little bit about her!) was a big advocate for environmentalism and non-genetically modified foods. I agreed with her on more than one level and on innumerable points.

Of course, most people are aware that we have to consume an obscene amount of meat to get the same amount of energy from grains. By eating the grains directly, we would be saving ourselves that trouble. I'm not necessarily advocating vegetarianism here - I'm not a vegetarian myself and I don't think I could be.

But I'm also grateful for Canada's policies on genetically modified foods (specifically milk). In the United States, or so I gather, the use of GMO milk is a big thing. It has to be labelled blue on the shelf, if I remember right, but no one really knows what "genetically modified" means. The cows are injected with something that makes them produce more milk, and in the process of being so heavily milked, get infections in their udders. The pus and antibiotics, which are given to them like one would give candy to a child, wind up in the milk. This instantly sets off a red flag for me.

I'm kind of mulling over the issue of GMOs, humane animal treatment, and vegetarianism right now. There is no real question here, aside from maybe opinion or even the sharing of relative information on GMO's, vegetarianism, or what-have-you.

But I would like to say the use of pregnant mares for their urine and their absolutely horrible treatment apalls me. We use them to create PreMarin, used to treat menopausing women, but what about the horses? And the foals? They live horrible, painful lives, and die horrible, painful deaths. With synthetic versions available, why must we forgo the extra cost and instead inflict this suffering on animals? I very nearly threw something at my television when PreMarin was advertised not too long ago.

Here is a relevant link I found on the milk that sort of sums up what it is all about: http://www.mercola.com/2001/dec/12/gm_hormones.htm
Comments: Read 8 orAdd Your Own.

Monday, March 21st, 2005

Subject:Empires
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:6:05 pm.
My question to you is this: What do you consider an empire? The dictionary definitions of empire vary greatly. They can be "a region controlled by an emperor or empress" or "multiple countries controlled by a single authority." Given the amount of wiggling room there, just from the use of language in those definitions it's fairly obvious that an empire could be great or quite small.

What kind of things do you feel go hand-in-hand with what you would call an empire? Monumental architecture? Intensive agriculture? Large population?

This question was brought to my attention the other day, when someone asked why Native American and Australian Aborigines did not have "empires." To me, some of the great Pueblos of the American Southwest (such as Cahokia or Pueblo Bonito in Chaco Canyon) would be empires to me, but I suppose you could minimize their scale to simply trade centers or cities. I would probably say, in these cases, 1000 is a large population, because vegetation and sustenance was so scarce for them, but in comparison to something like the Roman empire, they are miniscule. The Romans did not have to use manpower to carry in logs from miles away across pretty unfavorable land, whereas the Hopi (sometimes called 'Anasazi,' which is actually a derogatory term) ancestors would have had to.

Personally, I think the dictionary's definition is somewhat suitable. The amount of variation (from potentially small to potentially huge) is probably fitting: What might be an empire in the American Southwest or Australia might be different from what might be an empire spanning multiple countries in Europe. To me, houses of mud or built into cliff sides is just as impressive, and simply because they are not made of marble and stone does not necessarily mean they are not equally amazing or worthy of being called an "empire."

This was something that somewhat bothered me, because I felt it was somewhat derogatory to incinuate that Native Americans of the American Southwest who built their homes into the sides of cliffs in Chaco Canyon were not as "advanced" as Romans with their larger populations and cities. (Although Cahokia itself was the largest city of its time.)
Comments: Read 2 orAdd Your Own.

Subject:Clarification & Minor Changes
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:3:23 pm.
I just want to let everyone know that the point of this community is for intellectual discussion on all kinds of different subjects. I know it's pretty slow, but the last entry made me think about the regulations on the community. The only reason I would impose any additional regulations would be to really persue active discussion that does not offend anyone, even just initially.

The first one is quite simple... no logfiles! I'm sorry, I don't care if both people consent, but sometimes maybe not what *you* are saying is offensive, but the other person *is* being offensive. I know it's a pretty steriotypical rule, but I think it's a good one, and only under rare circumstances have I ever seen logfiles *add* to a discussion.

The second one is that I would prefer if people's opinions, questions, thoughts, curiosities, or what-have-you are worded in a way that is not a logfile or outright "I am right, you are wrong, everyone who is this is like this," and so on... making other people defensive from the get-go is really going to lessen the quality of discussion, and I'd like to see mature, intellectual discussion that does not result in people wind up being either defensive or outright offended. Sometimes, simply rewording a question or statement is all it takes, and you can still get the message or question across, just without having anyone get upset.

I left the last post up because I thought it resolved itself nicely, but I don't want to see something like that happen again. I kind of feel that simply rewording what Ayumi was asking about would have resulted in some more productive comments right away, instead of waaaay after the fact and after offense had already been taken. It seemed like a really anti-productive way to bring the discussion up, and I was hesitant to respond to it myself because of my feelings around Otherkin (and the people involved in the convo). My reply specifically skirted around the actual issue of "otherkin," because I was left a little bit speechless by the way the topic was originally brought up.

This is not criticism of anyone, I just feel that it was not as productive as it could have been.

Any comments or questions are more than welcome, I would be happy to breach the topic with anyone. I haven't ever modded a community before, so please be patient while I learn how best to deal with a situation like this. It's difficult to know what rules to add and not add, because I don't want anyone feeling restricted.
Comments: Read 21 orAdd Your Own.

Thursday, March 17th, 2005

Posted by:ayumisnowe.
Time:7:38 pm.
Talking about MPD and otherkin. Cut for oh no naughty language! and also stupid sarcasm.

Wheeee!Collapse )

I never actually ask questions here. Oh well. Thoughts? (Ho. Ho. Ho.)
Comments: Read 34 orAdd Your Own.

Tuesday, February 1st, 2005

Subject:Whoops! Debunked
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:5:20 pm.
In regards to my last post:

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

It looks like the previous article may not be true, but just a technical possibility under the current way Germany's unemployment is set up.

Talk about needing to assess sources better, I'm glad someone brought it to my attention in the anthropologist community that it might be a bit of a game of "telephone gone awry."

But it's interesting to get input on such a scenario anyway, it certainly is something worth considering.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Monday, January 31st, 2005

Subject:Germany's Dilemma
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:12:05 pm.
Mood: blah.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml

What is your take on this?

It sounds to me like morality coming at odds with law and they have not figured out if prostitution is immoral or "just another job." In the mean time, their legal system takes away unemployment benefits if women refuse a job at a brothel.

I'm not sure what I think, aside from my feeling that no one (male or female) should be forced into prostitution.
Comments: Read 3 orAdd Your Own.

Monday, January 17th, 2005

Posted by:neumania.
Time:9:05 pm.
You know what really get's me sometimes? When people say "I completely understand how you feel." Ummm...no you don't! Trust me, my life would be a thousand times easier if you could crawl into my head and have a grasp on what I am expressing, but you can't! Maybe it's wrong of me to think when people are just trying to be there for you, but why does everyone think they have to relate. Can't they just say "I have no idea but I'm sorry." Or "I'm here to listen." Isn't that all I am asking for when I go to them anyway? I get that they could try to understand or connect it to something they have been through. Yet it isn't the same. This is probably why I keep everything to myself.

Phew, that was a good rant. Sorry about that one.
Comments: Read 5 orAdd Your Own.

Sunday, January 16th, 2005

Subject:Howdy, Good Corpses
Posted by:ayumisnowe.
Time:7:44 pm.
I've thought on why it is statements such as, "Well, nobody feels x about y," or, "Everyone thinks z," bother me so much. I've decided that it's because I take them as a challenge to my (or someone else's) humanity, and urge me into a near competitiveness. My first instinct is to step up to that challenge.

There are many tangents this could lead into.
Comments: Read 3 orAdd Your Own.

Sunday, December 19th, 2004

Subject:Scary.
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:2:59 pm.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6732499/

I now have two potential subjects for my third year anth paper... Infanticide and this!

Very scary stuff, but definitely worth looking into and certainly interesting. If people don't acknowledge it's a problem, nothing can be done about it.

Posted previously at anthropologist by komakin0.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Saturday, December 18th, 2004

Subject:Mistake
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:2:53 pm.
Ah, pardon me, my mistake -- it was Jeb Bush, not President Bush. (Referred to in the previous post.)
Comments: Add Your Own.

Subject:Vanity & Brain Death
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:2:39 pm.
I just saw a commercial for a medication called something like "Vaniqa."

Apparently, it's a med for women to rid themselves of excess hair, that you use in conjunction with whatever other form of hair removal you use.

The narrator for the ad says, "Don't you want people to see your natural beauty without that distraction?"

My first thought is... isn't some body hair natural?! It's almost as bad as those teeth whitening product ads. I can't stand those. Your teeth are not MEANT to be white, and those things damage your tooth enamel and are not good for you. It's amazing the kind of ads that plague women in the name of vanity these days. Our society's idea of beauty is just so messed up.

---

In other news, I'm watching a show about a bulemic woman who goes into cardiac arrest (due to potassium deficiency, a problem associated with bulemia) and becomes (arguably) brain-dead. It's about her family (mother, father, brother) trying to save her from being euthanized, and her husband wanting to let her die (he's her official care-taker).

I'm not sure who I side with, the family or the husband. She does not appear to have any kind of conciousness. It's hard to say, because the husband argues videos of her being responsive are edited to be persuasive. (IE: They tell her 30 times to open her eyes and she doesn't; the 31st try she does, and they only tape that 31st try.) They have neurologists fighting back and forth -- rehabilitation will help her, rehabilitation won't help her, she's brain dead, she's not brain dead...

What do you think? I don't know if I would want to live that way. I don't really think so. And yet, without being in the position of being the woman, I can't say if I would for sure or not.

Ironically, the governor of the state this fiasco takes place in is President Bush.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Monday, December 13th, 2004

Posted by:foolishship.
Time:12:58 pm.
Ooh, this is good:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/headline/world/2944042

Has anyone been watching the Discovery Channel's "Egypt Week"?

I've caught a bit here and there about Jason and the Argonauts (not enough, unfortunately), and that show "Rameses: Wrath of God or Man?"

I get such a kick out of it when educational channels mention anthropologists and forensic anthropologists... =D

Maybe I'm a little biased?
Comments: Read 3 orAdd Your Own.

Friday, December 10th, 2004

Subject:Politics
Posted by:foolishship.
Time:4:09 pm.
"And in a Franklin County, Ohio, a precinct where 638 voters cast ballots, a computer recorded 3,893 extra votes for President Bush. The error was corrected in the certified vote total, and local election workers have been unable to reproduce the error."

Absolutely crazy -- I can't believe the whole situation over there. How can you put any faith in democracy if your vote can be thrown out so easily?
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

LiveJournal for Complex Questions.

View:User Info.
View:Friends.
View:Calendar.
View:Memories.
You're looking at the latest 20 entries. Missed some entries? Then simply jump back 20 entries.