Links Ahoy

Linky link.

  1. Still seems like mental illness to me. The dysphoria <->BIID comparison seems to make that clear. It might be that the best available treatment is to live with it, but that doesn’t make it not a mental illness.
  2. Not unrelated, Mark Daniels on addiction.
  3. Toyz.
  4. Nutt’n better to do I guess than pretend to know about that which you don’t.
  5. “Digitally faked”. Now that’s just wrong (and embarrassing to own up to I’d think).
  6. An animal with a backpack.
  7. A use for old hard drives.
  8. “Everywoman” … isn’t.
  9. Extra-terrestrial taking a leak.

26 days to (Western) Lent. 31 Days for the Eastern Church (for which there are 10 days to the Triodion … this Sunday is Zacchaeus Sunday).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 comments

  1. Boonton says:

    Regarding #1.

    might be that the best available treatment is to live with it,

    How exactly is this judged? I mean let’s consider a woman with a breast cancer tumor. One possible treatment might be to do chemotherapy first, then remove the tumor (hopefully much reduced) if it is still there. Another treatment might be to remove it first then do chemotherapy. Other treatments might be simply watching it or chemotherapy only or surgery only.

    Which treatment is ‘best’ sounds like it would have a very objective answer. If you check in 5 years later and notice women who had treatment A had a much higher survival rate than treatment B, you’d say A is a better treatment.

    But in terms above, upon what do you base the ‘best’ assertion? Do you propose that if we check in 5 years later with those who had surgery versus those who tried to ‘live with it’ we’d find lower rates of suicide/depression among one group rather than the other? If it turns out the surgerical group scores better on that metric, would you change your opinion? If not it sounds like your opinion is based on some underlying philosophical assumptions that are trying to dress up as science.

    As for mental illness. What I find interesting is that most of the people who write about this on First Things seem to be talking past what actual transgender people say. First Things writers seem to be trying to say that gender is absolute and unchangeable. Well the transgender people say the same thing….hence the need for physical intervention despite how messy and imperfect it is.

    I’m not getting a clear response here from the FT crew. Let’s accept that gender is absolutely integral to our identity as opposed to other things that are contingent (our hair color, our profession, the language we speak, etc.). That doesn’t address what determines gender. If it is anatomy then surgery seems to assert it isn’t absolute.

    On the other hand what if it is anatomy but not external anatomy but, say, laid down in our deep brain structure.? In that case it doesn’t seem like you could classify it as a mental illness anymore than you could say a man who develops female breasts and wants them removed is suffering from a mental illness because women are fine with having breasts.

  2. Boonton says:

    #4 I think the game should be tossed out and replayed IMO. We aren’t talking about one ball but almost all of them and it seems the ‘mistake’ was only applied to the balls the Patriots used. That’s pretty suspect. Even though the score was lopsided morale is a major part of the game. If the Patriots played very well at the start that could have impacted morale for the rest of the game. That plus the fact that accident or not the Patriots had the responsibility for providing the footballs. Replaying the game and putting them at risk of losing their Superbowl slot makes it clear that there are consquences to failing to live up to your responsibilities.

  3. Boonton says:

    Re #8 I’m not quite following it. The woman’s husband hit hard times, she worked extra jobs, they got thru it, now things are a better for them. Because she worked (probably part time) as a ‘field organizer’ for Pat Murray’s relection campaign how does that disprove her as an example of an ‘everywoman’ story?

    Speaking of which, it wasn’t that long ago that you were giving us as an example of the horrors of Obama’s proposal to close tax loopholes a poor grandmother who wants to just give her only possession, a Monet worth millions of dollars, to her poor family. Might we ask for a real life example of that? I’ll forgive you if the woman also stuff some envelops at the Paul Ryan campaign headquarters.

  4. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    Do you think this is a matter for the Senate to address? I don’t. It’s a freaking game.

    (a) I don’t think slightly deflated balls matter very much
    (b) every player who touched the ball (according to a very recently ex-Bear radio guy) would notice, expecially punters, kickers, snappers, and quarterbacks.

    Last time, the Patriots with the “signal stealing” kerfuffle were fined and lost a 1st round draft pick. That’s the extent that this might come to here.

  5. Boonton says:

    From what I understand the Patriots were responsible for providing two sets of balls. one for themselves and one for the visiting team. Only their balls were deflated. Since they would have only been handled by the Patriots, only an interception might have alerted the other team (and then would defensive players have noticed a ball that was marginally below regulation?)

  6. Boonton says:

    Re #2,

    This is just false. People who are on opiads for long periods of time have to tamper down or else they will go into withdrawal. Also there are addicts whose introduction comes from an accident or illness that is addressed with pain pills and then they continue using drugs (legally or not) after the underlying condition has been resolved.

  7. Mark says:

    Boonton,

    This is just false. People who are on opiads for long periods of time have to tamper down or else they will go into withdrawal.

    Actually it probably isn’t false. You have surgery. Long recovery requiring painkillers. During rehab, pain gets more maneagable and dosages release. After 6 months on pain killers you are done with re-hab. And oddly enough. Not addicted. Addiction as noted, requires not just opiates but other conditions which make you vulnerable.

    This is akin the discussion prompt I open with sometimes, in which I say, “I don’t believe in the germ theory of disease.” And it’s true. I believe that germs are a necessary but not sufficient condition for disease. I think germs for a lot of the illnesses we get are almost always present. It’s not the germs that make you sick. It’s the breakdown of your immune system which makes you sick. It’s like fighting fire by removing all the oxygen from the house. That would work, but oxygen is not the cause of the fire. Pretending that “germs cause disease” is like saying oxygen causes fires. Actually fires require, ignition (heat), an oxidant, and fuel. Three things. Disease requires germs, and some conditions which we probably don’t understand very well involving your immune system.

  8. Mark says:

    Boonton,
    The explanation given is plausible. Prior to inflating to “regulation pressure”, they treated the surface (roughed the surface) of their balls. This almost certainly heated the balls. Then they inflated the balls. If minimum pressure was desired, they’d inflate the opponents balls to max legal, theirs to min legal. This was done at room temperature. Then the balls were taken out to a 40 degree (F) ball field. Both sets of balls lost a pound of pressure. The “hot” balls had been inflated (hot) to min legal, and lost almost 2 pounds.

    Oddly enough, apparently, Aaron Rodgers (the Green Bay QB) prefers his ball at max (or above max) pressure.

    This seems like ordinary run of the mill grounds crew style fudging done all the time in all the major sports.

  9. Boonton says:

    Whether or not deflated balls give an advantage isn’t really important. If you copy from someone else in class it is cheating. If you copy from someone who doesn’t know the material as well as you do, it is still cheating even though it will not benefit you.

    The rules say balls have to be between 12.5-13.5 pounds per square inch and the referee is the sole judge of whether a ball complies. So if we are going to be real literal, then I think it’s within bounds to give the away team 13.5 balls and the home team 12.5 balls, but that’s not very sporting. If you are going to be an ‘engineer’ and inflate both balls the same but make your own a bit warmer then it’s on you to get it right and not fall below the 12.5 level.

    I suppose replaying the entire game is extreme, but why allow one team to provide all the balls? How about letting each team provide their own OR require that the balls be pulled from blindly so there’s no opportunity to knowingly give one side ‘better’ ones.

  10. Mark says:

    Boonton,

    Whether or not deflated balls give an advantage isn’t really important. If you copy from someone else in class it is cheating. If you copy from someone who doesn’t know the material as well as you do, it is still cheating even though it will not benefit you.

    The rules state the balls at testing must be inflated to said pressure. They were verified. If they weren’t tampered with no rules were broken.

    Do you follow NASCAR? Do you realize how teams do everything within the rules to gain advantage. This is done in all sports. Your contention playing finely within the rules as written is to misunderstand sport I think.

    So if we are going to be real literal, then I think it’s within bounds to give the away team 13.5 balls and the home team 12.5 balls, but that’s not very sporting.

    Uhm. Spend a few minutes googling the various hijinks home fields do to give their team an edge.