[My main Tumblr can be found over at myasphyxiatedmind]
If you want your ask replied to privately, just put '****' before you start typing.
My name is: Michelle, but most people call me Dark online.
My gender-pronouns are: They/them/their.
I am: 26 years old, a feminist, liberal, an atheist, an omnivore, and an ISFJ.
The Feminist: Intersectional, body positive, pro-choice, and sex positive.
My privileged identities include: Female assigned at birth (trans* privilege), white, able-bodied, allistic (?), dyadic, monogamous.
My non-privileged/oppressed identities include: Gender-fluid, fat, gray-a, neuroatypical, and gay.
I have: Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder.
I like: Pets & animals, animal welfare, pet care & pet care education, ~*SCIENCE!*~, anatomy & physiology, roleplaying, anime/manga, computer & video games, rock & metal music.
Catching Elephant is a theme by Andy Taylor
This was forwarded to me, so I’m passing it on. There is more info that was in the email but should be available via the people doing the study if you’re curious for more details:
We are doing a research study about transgender men’s’ experiences with pregnancy. We are surveying people who identify as transgender men (assigned female at birth with a transmasculine/ transmale/ female-to-male gender identity) who have been pregnant and delivered a baby. If you self-identify with this population, then we would like to invite you to participate in this study.
If you choose to be in the study, you will complete an online survey. It will take about 20 minutes to complete. The questions will relate to your experience with fertility, conception, pregnancy, and birth. To be eligible for the study you must be over 18 years old and have completed a pregnancy within the past 10 years.
You can skip questions that you do not want to answer or stop the survey at any time. The survey is anonymous, and no one will be able to link your answers back to you. Please do not include your name or other information that could be used to identify you in the survey responses.
Questions? Please contact the study coordinator Lexi Light (415-206-6453, LightA@obgyn.ucsf.edu) or the principal investigator Dr. Jennifer Kerns (415-206-3157, KernsJL@obgyn.ucsf.edu). If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant, you can call the UCSF Committee on Human Research at 415-476-1814.
Being in this study is optional. If you want to participate, click this link to start the survey: https://redcap.ucsfopenresearch.org/surveys/?s=c4SXLP.
This looks incredibly interesting. It’s good that research on this sort of topic is being done, since a lot of medical research completely ignores the existence of trans* people, especially those that use their reproductive systems.
(Source: trbs)
The Fat Grackle: An Adoption Study of Human Obesity from the New England Journal of Medicine
AbstractWe examined the contributions of genetic factors and the family environment to human fatness in a sample of 540 adult Danish adoptees who were selected from a population of 3580 and divided into four weight classes: thin, median weight, overweight, and obese. There was a strong relation between the weight class of the adoptees and the body-mass index of their biologic parents — for the mothers, P<0.0001; for the fathers, P<0.02. There was no relation between the weight class of the adoptees and the body-mass index of their adoptive parents. Cumulative distributions of the body-mass index of parents showed similar results; there was a strong relation between the body-mass index of biologic parents and adoptee weight class and no relation between the index of adoptive parents and adoptee weight class. Furthermore, the relation between biologic parents and adoptees was not confined to the obesity weight class, but was present across the whole range of body fatness — from very thin to very fat. We conclude that genetic influences have an important role in determining human fatness in adults, whereas the family environment alone has no apparent effect. (N Engl J Med 1986; 314:193–8.)
N Engl J Med 1986; 314:193-198January 23, 1986DOI: 10.1056/NEJM198601233140401
[Trigger Warning: Eugenics] Why all this autism research is so much crap.
(This will probably be tangential, but I promise it will all tie together at the end. I just ranted at my husband about it for a good ten minutes and thought I’d try to write it down.)
There is currently a cure for autism that has been approved for trials by the FDA in the US. Cord blood will be administered to 30 autistic toddlers. There are a bunch of reasons why this probably won’t work, and you can read about that over here. (Link courtesy of sherlocksflataffect.)
Current autism research is looking at cure and cause. It should be looking at support - ways to help autistic people live the lives they want to live, the way they want to live them. You know, like how a lot of non-autistic people do.
Here’s the thing: researching cure and cause is going to result in eugenics.
Researching cure and cause is going to result in eugenics.
Researching cure and cause is going to result in eugenics.
We’ve seen it happen before; it is happening now.
From Wikipedia:
A 2002 literature review of elective abortion rates found that 91–93% of pregnancies in the United Kingdom and Europe with a diagnosis of Down syndrome were terminated.[73] Data from theNational Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register in the United Kingdom indicates that from 1989 to 2006 the proportion of women choosing to terminate a pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome has remained constant at around 92%.[74][75]
In the United States a number of studies have examined the abortion rate of fetuses with Down syndrome. Three studies estimated the termination rates at 95%, 98%, and 87% respectively.[73]
This is eugenics, people.
Eugenics is the attempt to make the human race better by eliminating undesirable elements of the population. Apparently people who have Down syndrome are undesirable. We already know that autistic people are undesirable; why on earth would you think that this is not the direction we are heading?
In the 1920’s in Canada, eugenics was applied to people who had disabilities. They were sterilized against their will. The thought process was that people who had mental illness or developmental disabilities would give birth to more people who had mental illnesses or developmental disabilities, so they should be stopped from reproducing. This was done until the 1970’s.
To be clear: as recently as 40 years ago, Canadians sterilized people who had disabilities against their will, in order to keep them from producing more people who had disabilities.
This is recent history. This didn’t happen hundreds of years ago.
But humanity has a really selective memory.
I was shocked and appalled to learn, last year, that Canada had operating residential schools (you know, the ones that First Nations children were sent to against their parents’ wishes, so they could be forced to fit into white people’s society) as recently as the 1980’s.
Thanks to how poorly our history is taught, I had thought that residential schools were all done away with something like 100 years ago. But no, when I was in public elementary school, there were children being abused and denied their cultural heritage, taken away from their families by force. In my country.
This is selective memory, people. This is trying to pretend that this sort of thing doesn’t happen anymore, that it was all really long ago.
It happens now. It is real.
And that is why you should care about this research for cures and cause. This is why you should reject it. This is why you should advocate for a focus on appropriate and wanted supports.
I’m turning 36 in a little over a week, and sometime in the next little while my husband and I are going to start trying to get pregnant. If my amniocentesis comes back positive for trisomy 21, I will be pressured (in not so many words) to have an abortion. I won’t do it, of course. But the fact that this happens is a sign that eugenics is just a part of our lives. Eugenics is ableism (and racism, and probably a whole bunch of other -isms) in its purest form.
Please, don’t support eugenics. Don’t support the eradication of diversity from the human race.
(Told you it would all tie in together. I should go to bed now, but I’ll stay up for a little while longer.)
Racism, by the very dictionary definition, is racial discrimination, yes. However, the word is changing and evolving. Language evolves and changes, all the time. I’ve only recently begun to accept and understand this new definition of racism, so I’m not going to fault you for not understanding. However, as a liberal, you should have an open mind and respect it. I know it’s tough to do so, as many liberals only pretend to accept change. But bare with us.
Racism, to PoC (People of Color) has become to be defined as discrimination or bigotry accompanied with power. Individuals like LadyAtheist understand and don’t deny that PoC can discriminate. She doesn’t hate white people, otherwise she wouldn’t reblog things that I say, even if I agreed with her. She’s an open minded individual, and you should see that as someone that claims to be a liberal.
Cracker, as well, is a term that was created by white people to insult other white people. If you get bent out of shape because someone calls you a cracker, then you’re a crybaby. Grow up and get over it. Our ancestors did worse and said worse to them. Yes, we can’t be to blame for our ancestors, that’s silly. However, we also shouldn’t ignore their crimes.
I have documented proof that my direct ancestors owned slaves. I know that I had family that fought in the Confederacy. I don’t live my life with a weighted conscience for what they did, but I don’t ignore their crimes either. It’s why I fight to educate and defeat racism. It’s why when people complain that Blacks or Latinos may one day outnumber whites, I say, “oh the fuck well. Let them.”
If you spend your time lambasting PoC for using the word cracker, it shows more about you than it does them for using the word. It shows you’d rather focus on a petty insult created by white people hundreds of years ago, than the vast amounts of discrimination against PoC that still exist here today across the Western world. It shows that you ignore the very things you should stand for as a self-proclaimed liberal.
Susan’s latest Takedown inspired us to make this infographic. As Susan says, “Power comes in many forms; the fact that men have the upper hand physically, politically, and economically, among others, makes it impossible to compare women’s actions and their responses to men’s actions and their responses. They are not the same.
Let’s take a look at some facts and statistics, shall we?”
Women face some discrimination in all lines of work. On average, women are paid less than men with equal qualifications for the same jobs. In the fields of science and math, women face particularly difficult struggles to overcome these inequalities in these male-dominated realms.
-
Some young girls think they are not “able” pursue studies in the fields of science and math because they are girls. It is up to us to tell them otherwise. We should be encouraging our kids—both boys and girls—to pursue careers in science and math. But we should strive in particular to find strong women mentors in science for our girls.
The Big Business moneytrail behind fat shaming and anti-obesity
This is a very good article. An excerpt:
But weight loss products and schemes have an added bonus. When faced with the obvious indications that the products and services DO NOT WORK, the consumer blames him or her self. Yep the consumer, not the product, is blamed.
This is why weight loss schemes are a capitalism wet dream. Theshame and stigma sells. Allergan just succeeded in expanding its market 173.33% because the fear of fat is so pervasive and the blame of fat people for their fatness is just as pervasive.
The money shows us that weight loss is big business and that when money is involved, media and government tread lightly in attacking or restricting that big business.
Allergan uses the stigma, shame and fear of being fat and/or relies upon the unrealistic expectations of “normality” to promote the surgery that uses their device. The money also shows us that stigma pays. The more the message that fat is bad gets out, the more likely people will continue to seek remedy through the surgery.
But the surgery doesn’t solve either the health problems or the stigma and there is no financial incentive to do so. The system profits from the fact that the system doesn’t work and the consumer is blamed for the defects. Again stigma pays.
Finally, the financial, governmental or media support for scientific research that doesn’t fit the stigma or the system is withheld.
Only a savvy consumer who breaks free of the stigmatized understanding of the data can hear what the money is saying. It is time to tell the truth and not just let moneyed interest set the agenda.
(Source: metermouse)
Consider a list of traits associated with fatness – lazy, stupid, undisciplined, unattractive, unsuccessful – against a list of traits associated with thinness – active, smart, disciplined, attractive, successful.
Now replace the words fat and thin with poor and rich – or with black and white.
People of all body sizes laugh at fatness, including fat people because many believe their fatness to be a temporary state due to a lack of such variables as time, energy, willpower, or even illness. In fact, fat people are just as likely to hold anti-fat attitudes as slim people because they internalise the attitude they’re surrounded with their entire lives.
BIG FAT FIASCO
“‘Fat Head’ producer Tom Naughton on how the misguided fear of saturated fat created a nation of obese diabetics.”
This is part one of five parts. Watch it all the way through. I find this stuff very fascinating.
