Skip to main content

scientists or rational thought need not apply

Conservatism in the United States has hitched its wagon to two things: religious fundamentalism and unbridled free market capitalism; both of which conspire against what science is trying to do in this world.

The first belief hinges on literal creationism spelled out in the Biblical story and hence leaves many things in the hands of a benevolent or vengeful God. Some of these conservatives are evangelicals who believe in things like the rapture.

The second dogma is based on open markets where the realities of climate change will not be allowed to deter the amassing of profits. Hence they will simply block their ears when scientists warn of a warming planet thanks to our addiction to fossil fuels.

The current sitting American president is not only a moron but is also highly volatile and can change political stances like a weather vane. What drives him is profound immaturity coupled with an almost psychopathic zeal to appear competent and powerful; which is precisely the reverse of reality. He got where he is thanks to marketing skills, the lack of knowledge of many voters and because the Democrats ran a disastrous candidate.

So as scientists marched this week to advertise the need for rational policies that try and balance economic health with sustainable development this White House has decimated the support staff that used to advise the president on all matters scientific down to one sole person. But who needs science with this bunch of radicals in charge.

Needless to say, a lot of harm can be done in 4 years.

Meanwhile, as the media focuses on Russian interference in the US election and Trump continues to distract from his incompetence by blaming immigrants and other countries for what ails the US, Noam Chomsky states the obvious. The country to be most concerned about according to the rest of the world is the one currently being run by a lunatic.....


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

prejudice disguised as objective rectitude

So here is Professor Jordan Peterson perhaps justly calling out the excesses of political correctness gone mad. But then he extends it to not indulging transgender people the basic dignity of being addressed in their preferred pronoun. To do so for him would cost nothing and to stand on literal principle seems to serve little use other than to send a message of disdain.

If you have transitioned or even live as the opposite gender is costs me nothing to address you in your preferred pronouns. What difference does it make to me and what am I trying to tell you when I don't?

Peterson wants to stand on his rights to call reality what it is except that in this case the exact objective escapes me. But of course the right wing Federalist is in love with him because he calls a spade a spade.

If I see a rock I can call it that but then the rock doesn’t have any feelings. To address a transgender woman "her" and "she" is not undermining my rights as a person in any way b…

"Oh please its 2016!"

I have mentioned before that I have a lovely young couple living above the unit next to mine. Well the other day as I was getting in the door, she and I overlapped for the first time with me dressed as a woman.

We had a nice conversation and at some point I mentioned the obvious which was that I had told her future husband that they might see me in a different guise from time to time so they wouldn't wonder about who the strange woman was. She just looked at me almost rolling her eyes while smiling from ear to ear and said:

"Oh Please it's 2016!"

For the record she was also very complementary regarding my choice of attire.

I could care less at this point in my life what people think but it is still lovely to see the millennial generation's freedom of spirit and acceptance so lacking in previous generations. Yes they have their own foibles, as does every generation, but this area certainly isn't one of them.

looking past cross gender arousal

Jack’s latest Crossdreamers post got me thinking about cross gender arousal and how it could be avoided; also whether it even matters. This with particular focus on the inability to relate of someone on the outside looking in.

You see, sexuality is a very complicated thing to begin with and when you then add gender identity ambiguity it becomes a recipe to really confuse someone.

So imagine that you are a little boy who identifies as a girl but then along comes puberty and short circuits everything by having the sex you identify with also be the sex you are attracted to. For in essence this is what happens to all all male to female gender dysphoric trans persons who are attracted to women.

So I ask myself: can I imagine a scenario where this inherent contradiction would not produce sexual confusion? The answer is that I cannot.

I am in the unique position, like many of you, to have experienced an early identification with the feminine become sexualized later on. This brought confusion…