No, not Ian McEwan!

BloodTypes

I love his books. But there he goes, getting all naive and narrow:

Novelist Ian McEwan recently summed up the impulse to see two categories: “Call me old-fashioned,” he told an audience, “but I tend to think of people with penises as men.”

I’m 9 years younger than McEwan, which I guess makes me one of those young whippersnappers. I’m still kind of peeved at this tendency to ascribe certain regressive views to entire generations, as if old people get excused from simple humanity, and are all done with learning and growing. I’m not planning on turning into a simple-minded fool in the next few years (not that it can’t happen!).

But right now I can say I don’t think like Ian McEwan.

I tend not to think about people’s penises, or lack thereof.

I’ve met thousands of people, and so far, none of them have introduced themselves by showing me their genitals. I don’t think that would be a particularly helpful revelation, anyway; I’ve found a bit of conversation to be far more revealing.

I tend not to characterize people into one of two groups by the degree of enlargement of their embryonic genital tubercle, either. That seems a kind of crude and useless taxonomy. In general, lumping humanity into men on one side and women on the other seems like a useless distinction that ignores a tremendous amount of nuance.

I’m going to start thinking of people in terms of their blood groups. I really should start hanging out with more type O people, in case there is a tragic accident and I need a transfusion. I’m incompatible with those A and B people, and those ABs, just forget it. But at least I’ve divided humanity into four arbitrary subsets, rather than a mere two.

Call me old-fashioned, but I tend to think of type O people as potential blood donors.

That’s not dehumanizing, is it?

Suppressive Persons

ruthless

The Church of Scientology is to be blessed with interesting times. The father of David Miscavage, head of the church, is publishing a tell-all book next week, titled Ruthless: Scientology, My Son David Miscavige, and Me. Well, they plan to, anyway — David Miscavage is threatening to sue for defamation if they go through with it. That’s the best advertisement ever. It must be really juicy, although I can’t say I look forward to reading about the childhood of a psychopath.

That the religion would tear apart families is no surprise. Like many cults, they have a policy of disconnection: new converts are told to sever all ties with family members who might weaken the influence of the church on them. The church becomes a collection of deeply unhappy people who have no choice but to rely on each other.

Scientology is to be featured on 20/20 this Friday. Man, it’s hard to be a secretive evil organization when people keep shining a spotlight on you.

And they’re shedding celebrities! Lisa Marie Presley has become disaffected and is dishing dirt behind the scenes. Could it be that we’ll see a religion die in our lifetimes? That would be nice.

Skepticon is pranking the wrong person

I just got word that I’m in the lead in Skepticon’s competition to pull a prank on me, Matt Dillahunty, Heina Dadabhoy, or Keith Lowell Johnson. This is just wrong. I told you all to go vote for one of the other people.

I don’t know what’s wrong here. I was quite clear and explicit. Go make donations in the name of Keith, Heina, or Matt. Not me. You are making a dreadful mistake if you click on my name.

OK?

If it’s not crystal clear yet, just send me your paypal username and password and I’ll take care of it for you.

Watcha doin’ on Sunday after church?

godsnotdead2

The Morris Theater is having a special, one-time only, matinee showing of a special movie on Sunday at noon. It’s God’s Not Dead 2! If you saw the first one, you know it’s going to be nauseating experience, and I just can’t miss it. Anyone out there in the Stevens County area want to join me? Even if the movie sucks (and it will), you can at least enjoy the spectacle of watching me turn purple and splutter.

I think afterwards I’ll stroll over to the Old #1 bar and do my best to forget the movie.

No guarantees that we’ll get in, though. This is the only showing in town, so I kind of expect all the worst people in town — you know, the kind who wear homophobic t-shirts — will be packing the joint. If we can’t get in, though, we’ll consider it a shortcut to Old #1.

None of this money portraiture stuff makes any sense

I’m picturing an army of bureaucrats at the Treasury Department, all waiting on the decisions of a smaller collection of old, cranky, conservative banker-types before they can do anything. Kind of like a slimy wad of used condoms clogging up a sewer line.

They say it’ll be 2030 before they can change anything, and they’re making all these weird compromises. Why, I don’t know. I think it’s all because Rich Uncle Pennybags is a colossal douche.

richunclepennybags

Same-sex marriage kills babies

At least that’s what the Heritage Foundation says. It’s going to kill 900,000 babies.

On the surface, abortion and same-sex marriage may seem unrelated. However, as explained in an amicus brief of 100 scholars of marriage, filed in the pending Supreme Court marriage cases and summarized here, the two are closely linked in a short and simple causal chain that the Supreme Court would be wise not to set in motion.

[Read more…]

Sanders is definitely trying to win me over

Have you seen his academic proposals?

The plan Sanders proposed in Congress calls for providing “an assurance that not later than five years after the date of enactment of this act, not less than 75 percent of instruction at public institutions of higher education in the state is provided by tenured or tenure-track faculty.” This use of federal funds to restore tenure represents one of the many policies that one does not find in Clinton’s proposal.

Well, that would staunch the hemorrhaging of qualified faculty into low-paying adjunct positions. I approve, emphatically. There’s also this delightful requirement for where federal money goes.

Sanders also wants to make sure that more money ends up in the classroom: “a state that receives a grant under this section shall use any remaining grant funds and matching funds required under this section to increase the quality of instruction and student support services by carrying out the following: A) Expanding academic course offerings to students. (B) Increasing the number and percentage of full-time instructional faculty. (C) Providing all faculty with professional supports to help students succeed, such as professional development opportunities, office space and shared governance in the institution. (D) Compensating part-time faculty for work done outside of the classroom relating to instruction, such as holding office hours….”

Spend the money on education? Shocking. And then you get the bit where he tells us what you may not spend the money on.

In perhaps his most radical and needed proposal, Sanders pushes these institutions to return to their core missions: “A state that receives a grant under this section may not use grant funds or matching funds required under this section (A) for the construction of nonacademic facilities, such as student centers or stadiums; (B) for merit-based student financial aid; or (C) to pay the salaries or benefits of school administrators.” Sanders’s plan would thus decrease the cost of making public higher education free by decreasing the costs associated with administration, athletics and merit-based aid that goes mostly to the wealthiest students.

Oh, swoon. Make it so, please.

And before you start telling me that Sanders doesn’t stand a chance of getting the nomination, I know. But I will continue to support him in the hope that his policies might be advanced beyond his campaign. I’ll also suggest that Clinton would win me over if she adopted some of these ideas.