I didn’t go.
Like this article? Follow m…
Oh, did you want more than that? Um… yeah okay I think I can find a couple of things to say. … Continue Reading
Category: Blogmeta
19 My summation of my time at the Reason Rally
9 Liberalization of Canada’s sex work laws: a more informed perspective
One of the things I’ve learned in my years (ironically, from a friend of mine) is that nobody can possibly be an expert on everything – as such, it’s a good idea to have a lot of friends who are experts at different things. That way when I need advice on understanding physical sciences, politics, law, current events, philosophy… basically anything that I don’t understand well, I can “cloud-source” it to any number of buddies who will be able to give me a much more in-depth look at things than I could manage on my own.
One of these is my pal T, who has devoted a lot of time and energy to understanding issues surrounding sex work and sex workers. Ze found me through the blog (coolest thing about this job – awesome people find me rather than me having to put in the effort to make it work the other way ’round) and we started talking about stuff. Ze opened my eyes up to some viewpoints I’d never considered before, and so when I heard about the Ontario ruling I immediately asked hir for hir thoughts. Ze was kind enough to school me a bit on some of the details and implications of the ruling. Hir response is below the fold. … Continue Reading
11 Please sign this petition
Natalie Reed’s audience is much larger than mine, and I can’t imagine that there are too many of you reading this who aren’t reading her as well (and if you’re not, you should be). However, this issue is important so I’m going to signal boost as much as I can:
Next month, in April, an extremely pivotal bill is going to be up for debate in the Canadian parliament. It’s Bill C-279, which will add gender identity and gender expression to the list of statuses protected under the Canadian Human Rights Code, and amend the pertinent sections of the Criminal Code in regards to anti-transgender violence, assault, and harassment.
Currently, transgender Canadians have no such protections, and may be discriminated against on the basis of their gender by employers, businesses, shelters, institutions (public or private) and individuals without any legal consequence. Effectively, I can be turned down for a job, barred from entering a restaurant, denied admittance to a shelter or hostel, or forced to comply with male dress-codes at public institutions without my having any recourse. If I am harassed, assaulted or murdered on the basis of my being trans, this does nto qualify as a hate crime. I am in the position of having to depend simply on the mercies of a legally empowered majority to choose not to exercise their right to openly discriminate against me.
This is not okay.
Read the rest of the post, then (if you’re Canadian), call your MP and demand an answer. My MP (who I can’t imagine opposes this bill) is being uncharacteristically circumspect, so I’m going to keep pressing her. Right now the biggest opponent of the bill is the fact that nobody’s talking about it. Let’s see if we can’t get some chatter going.
Sign the petition
5 Movie Friday: Why Are You Atheists So Angry?
In moments of extreme self-congratulation, I fancy myself a pretty good writer. When I really put effort into it, I can occasionally produce passages that break through the barrier of the prosaic into the realm of the poetic. I’ve been told by a handful that I have a particular talent for explanation, and that my ability to put things into relatable words makes this a very readable blog. I know my writing has changed over the past 2 years, since I’ve been writing more or less every day. Things come to me more easily, and occasionally I can read my own stuff and even be slightly impressed by it.
I think that if I keep it up for another 10 years or so, I will be in a league with Greta Christina. Greta has been one of my favourite writers for a long time, and her blog is a daily read for me. I’m 100% positive I’ve gushed like this before, so I’ll forestall the fanboy-dom long enough to say that Greta has a new book out called Why Are You Atheists So Angry?: 99 Things That Piss Off the Godless. Here is a fun promo video:
Read this book, then punch a bible. Then… I dunno, do something else.
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
31 I win! Damning video evidence
So I thought we could just ‘agree to disagree‘ (which means that I am right, but you disagree) on this whole “cats vs. dogs” thing. I thought the heat had died down and the FTBorg could just resume quietly hating each other like a normal dysfunctional blogging collective.
Clearly I overestimated the restraint and good sense of my colleagues.
Almost as one (as though they’ve been colluding behind my back), the pro-cat posts have been coming fast and furious:
- I probably should have expected Greta’s treachery – the parasites are strong in that one;
- Jen, for all her otherwise brilliance, did not surprise me with her tag-team feline confederacy;
- Dana has chosen her side, and chosen poorly. So be it – when the otter uprising happens, she will not be spared;
- But Jason… sweet Jason… I thought better of you. I truly did. This fence-sitting bullshit will not stand. Pick a side, man! We’re at war here.
I didn’t want to take ‘the nuclear option’, but apparently with the pro-cat forces of the world stacked against me and few allies to be found, I am left with little recourse. I have been vouchsafed a piece of damning video evidence that shall resolve this issue once and for all. Sure, cats act like cats when nobody’s watching, but if you manage to sneak up on them unawares, you’ll find the story is something else entirely:
You saw it here first, folks. Even cats think dogs are better, and when given the opportunity they will ‘dog it up’. However, upon being caught, they will revert to their cowardly selves. Sure, there are videos out there that show dogs meowing, but they do it in the spirit of open mockery, not in secret.
Dogs are better than cats – even cats think so.
I trust this will be the end of this foolishness and I can go back to dealing with human topics.
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
10 Ethics, wealth, privilege – pulling it all together
Looking back at this morning’s post, it may have seemed a bit atypical for me to highlight a study that has nothing to do with politics, religion, racism, or any of the other usual suspects for this blog. In the early days of the Manifesto I realized that it was important to have a focus – in order to build a ‘brand’ one must be associated with an idea (or even a handful). Over the past couple of years this ‘focus’ has been rather malleable – shifting as my own personal interests do. However, insofar as this blog is an attempt to unify my own thoughts and ideas and provide myself (and you) with some insight into how my thought process works when synthesizing new information.
When I first read the fact that there was a study that demonstrates that rich people are jerks, I was prepared to laugh it off as just one of those interesting, quirky psychological discoveries. But as the days passed, I realized that there was quite a bit more depth to it. Many of you (hopefully) remember my series on System Justification Theory where we explored the theoretical underpinnings of why people who are relatively lower status may embrace behaviours and attitudes that work to the advantage of the outgroup rather than selfishly. Since we are talking about power and status, there is an opportunity to explore the extent to which greed increases someone’s system justifying behaviour. Are low-status people who have positive attitudes about greed approve when high-status people subvert the rules? Are they more motivated to excuse unethical behaviour by those in power? If such a correlation exists, could it possibly explain why someone like Newt Gingrich still has political support among evangelicals despite his rampant infidelity?
Does this overlap between greed and SJT explain perhaps the backlash against the #Occupy movement – why Romney’s characterization of the justifiable anger against the excesses of the financial elite as ‘jealousy’ resonates with voters who are getting screwed by the same elites? How does this potential psychological phenomenon affect the way people interpret news like this:
But many researchers have reached a conclusion that turns conventional wisdom on its head: Americans enjoy less economic mobility than their peers in Canada and much of Western Europe. The mobility gap has been widely discussed in academic circles, but a sour season of mass unemployment and street protests has moved the discussion toward center stage.
(snip)
One reason for the mobility gap may be the depth of American poverty, which leaves poor children starting especially far behind. Another may be the unusually large premiums that American employers pay for college degrees. Since children generally follow their parents’ educational trajectory, that premium increases the importance of family background and stymies people with less schooling.
What implications would understanding a climate of greed and the ethical lassitude that accompanies it have when we add system justifying into the mix? If we can find ways to convince people that greed isn’t good (contra Gordon Gekko), will we see an adjustment in the amount of support for social programs that level the playing field? Will politicians who adopt an ‘investment’ model rather than a ‘free market’ model gain more traction?
Many of you may have read this resignation letter from a (former) Goldman Sachs executive:
Today is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.
(snip)
When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Lloyd C. Blankfein, and the president, Gary D. Cohn, lost hold of the firm’s culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm’s moral fiber represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival.
How does this reaction to corporate greed connect to Goldman’s unethical practices (as detailed in the letter)? Is it always the case that the extremely wealthy will become avariciously unethical, or is it greed that separates a Lloyd Blankfein from a Warren Buffett? Many praised Greg Smith (the letter’s author) for showing a level of morality that one does not commonly see among the very rich. Is that ‘morality’ borne of an organically superior sense of right and wrong, or simply a less favourable view of greed?
System justification produces unfavourable attitudes that fall along racial and gender lines, and operates implicitly (subconsciously). If greed is mixed in to the system justifying process, does that contribute to the atmosphere that results in fewer women and minorities being promoted to executive positions? Do the double standards that make identical actions look ‘assertive’ in men and ‘bitchy’ in women come from a subconscious approval of a culture of greed? Would encouraging people to think of greed unfavourably create a more demographically balanced environment? Can this help to explain why economically ‘left’ groups tend to be more inclusive of minorities than economically ‘right’ ones?
Finally, how do we moderate approval of greed? Does merely exposing greed make people think unfavourably of it, or do we have to focus our attention on the downsides? How can we separate (unhealthy) greed from (healthy) competitiveness? Are they two sides of the same coin, or is there a way to encourage innovation and discovery without having to accept the phenomenon of people pulling each other down rather than pulling themselves up? Do we as skeptics have a role to play in unpacking the subconscious baggage of greed, or is that a job for educators and public figures? Is greed biological or sociological – do we see parallel behaviours in animal species?
These are big questions, and I certainly don’t have answers for them. However, the more I look around, the more I see that things are connected.
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
125 The church of FTB
A thought occurred to me as I was mulling over Natalie’s vivisection of the odious Be Scofield. On my third or fourth time through Be’s interminable swipe at Natalie for having the temerity to point out the harms that religious thinking has on trans people, I managed to ferret out his point. Side note: why do people feel the need to secret their theses in a labyrinthine construction of verbose passages? Why can’t you just say what you mean? Anyway – Be’s inability to write clearly isn’t relevant to this post, I just thought I would express my beef.
Scofield, and those in his camp, think that religious edifices can be cannibalized to appropriate the things that it does well (social organization, community building, humanitarian aid) from the dangerous nonsense that props it up (i.e., everything else it does). One step beyond that argument is to state that those religions that do the good stuff with a minimum of the other stuff are a net positive and should be exempted from the blanket criticisms of religion that Gnus should rightfully be directing only at the worst offenders. After all, how can we make the assertion that all religion is bad if we haven’t seen them all? Shouldn’t we save our ire for groups that have demonstrated their harmful tendencies and let the ‘nicer’ religions skate?
As long as we ignore the fact that their argument is stupid, we can see the superficial appeal of using the scaffolding of religion for a secular purpose. Indeed, I myself have taken a very similar stance before – there’s no sense in throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and church seems to address a need that secular institutions have not found a way to replace. Why not use religious institutions as a model? Are we rejecting it simply because religious faith is destructive, or is it out of spite and a vainglorious insistence that ‘we don’t need no steenking churches’? I have yet to receive a coherent answer to that question. … Continue Reading
5 Kiva Project Update: Our third loan
Hey Cromrades,
I didn’t hear much from you with regard to our Kiva project, so I donated all the money to Invisible Children.
Joking.
But I didn’t have time to go through the Kiva.org website and really closely scrutinize the projects, so I just picked a couple at semi-random. This is why I need y’all to help me out here – to make sure our money goes to the best source.
At any rate, here’s where it went this month:
Unyenyekevu Group – DR Congo
Kavira is an entrepreneur and head of the Unyenyekevu business group. She is 55 years old, married and the mother of 10 children, who are all in school. Her husband is a mechanic. Kavira sells second hand handbags. She has been involved in small-scale business of this type for four years. This is her 11th loan from Hekima, and will enable her to buy one sack of bags, among other things.
Kavira would like to see her children grow up in comfort, expand her business and buy another plot of land to leave to her children. She would like to thank Hekima for its work helping poor women who are excluded from traditional banking.
Ayen Thon – South Sudan
Ayen lives in Bor. She sells charcoal and has been in business for three years. She is 30 years old, married, and has no children. Ayen heard about BRAC South Sudan from a credit officer and this is her third loan from BRAC.
She has requested a loan of 1,500 SDG in order to purchase charcoal. She will use her extra income from this loan to build a house in future.
$25 has gone to each of these projects. I picked them because a) African, b) women, c) business. My selection criteria, I’m afraid, are not much fancier than that.
Because of the tendency for these loans to get funded fairly quickly, I’d suggest that if you’re interested in providing input into these loans, wait until I announce the next round (i.e., in a month’s time). I do hope you will chime in with where these funds are going, because I am bound to overlook something, and I consider this our money – at least until we have enough to spend on something I really want then I’m leaving you suckers in the dust from my G4.
For the month of October (the first month this site went live), we made $46.38, and loaned $50.
For the month of November, we made $65.81, and loaned $50.
For the month of December, we made $44.76, and loaned $50Total amount loaned so far: $150
Total loan funds repaid: $2.50
Fund balance: $5.57
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
0 Today’s post will be late
Apologies, but last night’s Skeptics in the Pub went later than I planned, so you’ll have to wait for today’s post. To tide you over until then, here’s a CROWN video (haven’t put one of those up in a while):
7 Kiva Project: Update, and third donation
Hey Cromrades, I was slacking a bit last month and did not make any contributions to our Kiva project. I’ve since taken the liberty and the initiative, and picked two loans for us to support:
John, 39 years old, is a mixed crop farmer. He is married to Susan, also a farmer, and they are blessed with two children. He has farmed for the past ten years, earning 7,000 KES a month, and uses his income to support his family. John is applying for a third loan after repaying his previous two loans successfully. He will use the 43,000 KES to buy fertilizer and seedlings for his farm. With the anticipated profits from his farm he will educate his children. His hopes and dreams are to buy a piece of land and build rental houses.
The Communal Bank “Flor de Quinua” (Quinoa Flower) is starting its second loan cycle with Pro Mujer as part of the Juan Pablo II Community Center. This group consists of eight members and is led by a Board of Directors headed by Sra. Pascuala. The members of this Communal Bank engage in various businesses in order to get ahead such as selling shoes, knitting sweaters, selling toasted foods, washing cars, making crafts from plaster, selling woven articles, and knitting blankets.
Sra. Pascuala says that she started working Pro Mujer one year ago and joined the organization upon receiving an invitation from a member. She currently has a business producing crafts out of plaster (stucco) where she has worked for some time. Pascuala learned this trade from her son-in-law. The loan she is receiving now will be used to increase her capital for purchasing stucco that she acquires from the distribution shops. She will later sell the products she makes in her community. Working in this manner enables her to generate income to support her family. Pascuala is separated from her spouse and has three children.
Both of these projects were loaned $25.
Also, pay for December came in, so it’s time once again for you to help me spend our money. You’ll notice that $2.50 from the first loan was paid back, so that’s back in the pot. Please take some time and poke around the Kiva.org website, and make a recommendation. I’ll make a decision for 2 loans and announce it on Friday.
For the month of October (the first month this site went live), we made $46.38, and loaned $50.
For the month of November, we made $65.81, and loaned $50.
For the month of December, we made $44.76Total amount loaned so far: $100
Total loan funds repaid: $2.50
Fund balance: $55.57
Let’s keep it rolling, folks!
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
Crommunist 