SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"An eighth-grade language arts teacher from Maryland has been placed on administrative leave after school officials learned he allegedly authored two books containing questionable content under a pseudonym.
Local network WBOC News reports that the investigation concerns two books published by McLaw under the nom de plume “Dr. K.S. Voltaer,” and one is about a fictional, futuristic school shooting that goes down in history as being the largest ever in the United States.
http://rt.com/usa/182964-teacher-leave-shooting-book/"
This is lunacy. School administrators are terrified there will be another Columbine or Sandy Hook and are overreacting, or are they. What could they do to prevent one. Nothing, nil, zero. No need to ask yourself 'why', say thank you to the traitorous NRA , the propaganda arm of the small arms manufacturing industry, for blocking any form of gun control. They have successfully infected the country with The American Disease™ almost unfettered access to weapons of war that kill with brutal efficiency. Sadly there appears to be no cure.
[EDITOR'S NOTE: The preceding paragraph was not up to our standards. The comments to this story are spot on. You expect better than this and we let you down. There are so many comments referring to this paragraph, we cannot just delete it, hence the strike-through. More to follow.]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @11:09AM
I'm pro-autonomy and that includes being pro-gun. Banning "assault" rifles or handguns does very little to stop disaffected youth from going on murderous rampages. The one thing that will help is inclusivity. Specifically, the people going postal aren't getting laid.
As an example, Charles Whitman, the 1966 clocktower shooter, was a military trained sharpshooter with an IQ of 139 who was court martialled, demoted then discharged from the Marines. He began by killing his wife and mother before killing another 14 and wounding 32.
The 1999 Columbine massacre was conducted by two goths who had received homosexual slurs.
In the 1987 Hungerford massacre in the UK, the unemployed assailant shot primarily at women, including his mother.
In the 1996 Dunblane massacre in the UK, the assailant only shot female teachers and, curiously, female toilets.
Moving beyond young men, the assailant of the 2001 Osaka massacre in Japan was discharged from the Japanese Air Force due to paedophilia, got imprisoned for rape, lived with his mother and got married four times before killing mostly girls at an elite school with a sword.
Moving beyond school massacres and young men, the 2010 Raoul Moat case in the UK began when an ex-prisoner was provoked by female social workers and an ex-girlfriend who falsely told him that she was in a relationship with a police officer. Raoul Moat, the ex-girlfriend and the new partner all died.
And then we have Karl Halverson Pierson and Elliot Rodger who were quite obviously not getting laid. A curious anomaly was that Elliot Rodger killed more males. However, I attribute this to getting cock-blocked.
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @11:18AM
I suspect it's mostly not about "not getting laid", but about having been messed around, screwed over, lied to, and deceived by, particularly narcissistic women and girls.
The absolute worst kind of bullies tend to be female, because they tend to more often fuck you over psychologically, than physically.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @12:44PM
Oh really. As if men don't ever do anything to mess with women. I'd be laughing, if your thoughts weren't so sick.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @01:38PM
You appear to have that backwards. More Like: Failure for these 'special' guys to find a female codependent to lavish them with the narcissistic supply to which they feel entitled.
Statistical anecdote to the contrary: I've come up against more male than female psychopaths. I guess everyone gets caught off guard at least once in their life. This is how those of us capable of experiencing empathy for others learn how intolerable abusive behaviour is and how totally pathetic perpetrators really are.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Saturday August 30 2014, @04:43PM
Wish you would post with your name. That was spot on.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday August 30 2014, @04:48PM
Why?
And BTW, "tibman" is your real name? I didn't think so.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Saturday August 30 2014, @06:18PM
I liked the comment and if i saw that posters name again i would pay more attention to what they said. IRL name is not required, just a unique identifier : )
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @01:13PM
By your own post, Charles had a wife, no reason to think he wasn't getting laid.
The two Columbine goths had girlfriends.
The Hungerford guy shot at both men and women, whoever came into contact with him.
The Dunblane guy shot women, because he went to a primary school where most of the teachers are usually women. It's not clear he was looking only for women. He also shot children, not just girls. He was upset because he wanted to be a Scout leader and his motives toward boys were being questioned. So this doesn't look like he was angry with women, more like he was frustrated he wasn't allowed to get near boys.
The Osaka guy was married 4 times, apparently able to get laid at least 4 times.
The Raoul Moat guy had a girlfriend, but couldn't keep her.
Karl Halverson Pierson was after his teacher and debate coach, a man, the girl he shot was just in the wrong place. No one knows if he ever got laid, but he was only 18.
Elliot Rodger appears to have been a self entitled asshole, who would want to screw him?
Are you perhaps projecting?
You apparently think every guy, no matter his age, or personality is entitled to get laid. News flash, some women also have trouble getting some, it's not just men.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @01:51PM
The guy who was married and killed his wives obviously wasn't happy with the relationship. The Osaka guy and Raoul Moat had previously formed sexual relationships but hadn't been in one for years. And, apparently, I should research the over cases in more detail.
Regardless, after reading the first half of Elliot Rodger's 100,0000 word life story (which he obviously recalled with great clarity), he was neurotic to the point that he had great difficulty speaking to women. This was not helped by his stature, or his relationship with his mother, his step-mother, his younger half-sister or his only female friend. And it was further complicated by international ties and high-profile success of the people around him. For example, his father worked with Jennifer Lawrence and he'd been invited to two Star Wars premieres.
If there is any projecting in this matter, it is because I know someone who committed suicide in similar circumstances.
1702845791×2
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tathra on Saturday August 30 2014, @05:40PM
so in other words, "not getting laid" was more of a symptom of larger problems, like a lack of social skills and social support and in some cases unrealistic expectations of others, and not really the problem at all.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @06:05PM
From Elliot Rodger's own words:-
So, it was most definitely because he couldn't get laid. But what compounded the problem was his height (which led to him being bullied repeatedly and gave him anxiety about his attractiveness), negative experiences with almost all females younger than his grandmothers and the world-class success of the people around him. For example, before his parents got divorced, one of their neighbors commercialized barcodes and was worth US$40 million. After his parents got divorced, he was acutely embarrassed that he was living in a Hollywood apartment without a swimming pool. At school, that made him one of the poor kids on two counts.
1702845791×2
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tathra on Saturday August 30 2014, @06:31PM
i stand by my point, its a symptom of larger problems. this is a case of tunnel vision, being too focused on one thing to see the broader picture and real problem, and you can't fix a problem if you don't know what it is. if his only problem was wanting to get laid he could've gotten hookers, but since he didn't (or if he did, it obviously didnt address his real needs) it shows that the real problem was the isolation and lack of social support. if he had friends, he could've gotten them to act as wingmen and help get him hooked up, but he lacked the social skills and the confidence to use them (from his own words, due to being bullied - abused - as a child). thinking he could get a woman beyond just a hooker without the proper social skills and effort is an example of unrealistic expectations of others.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @07:12PM
Any of these killers could have found a prostitute, used a date rape drug or become a gunpoint/knifepoint rapist but they wanted to have an ongoing relationship with a woman and raise a family. When to honorable path became astronomically remote, they weren't defeated. They didn't commit suicide. They came to the public's attention in a spectacular fashion. To ask the question "Why did this case happen?" is misguided. We should be asking "Why are such cases rare?" and "How can we improve the MTBF?"
1702845791×2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @09:08PM
Oh, puhleeze! Sop right now! You are breaking my heart! Maybe we should start a charity for for these poor Hollywood youth? The script for the TV commercial charity pitch practically writes itself:
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @10:54PM
He was bullied repeatedly because of his size which adversely affected his esteem and ability to form relationships with girls. Then he was bullied due to the reduced status which accompanied divorce which adversely affected his esteem and ability to form relationships with girls. Then, after requesting to enrol at a private boys school (specifically to avoid girls) he was further bullied until he dropped out. Despite being able to write 100,000 words coherently, he barely graduated.
1702845791×2
(Score: 4, Insightful) by kaszz on Saturday August 30 2014, @02:27PM
Like someone else said, it's more like the persons in questions got messed around, screwed over, lied to and deceived by particularly abusive people. Some are pathologically abusive without meaning to, others are just normal scumbags that got the chance opportunity to express on their bad qualities without any checks and bounds.
Be nice to people unless they are abusive. Give people real help ie not just chatting. Get in touch with reality and deal with it. There's usually a history of forced exclusion, neglect and abuse during a long time before things like this happen. And easy access to weapons. Administrators are also usually a particular incompetent to detect and defuse bad settings. In fact they may be a part of it. So they can't be a part of the solution in many cases.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @06:07PM
This guy is spot on. I've had to deal with this shit my whole life - forced exclusion, constant psychological abuse from "friends", and a refusal from everyone to even acknowledge there's a problem, much less any help explaining how I "bring it on [my]self." I don't plan on going on a homicidal rampage, but I can understand why people do.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by BasilBrush on Saturday August 30 2014, @08:03PM
the 1966 clocktower shooter
The 1999 Columbine massacre
the 1987 Hungerford massacre in the UK
the 1996 Dunblane massacre in the UK,
the 2001 Osaka massacre.
You're cherry picking.
There's a big long list of US school massaceres, most of which you don't mention. And yet you do go on to massacres of other kinds and other countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting [wikipedia.org]
Basically you're choosing ones which you believe support your theory, and ignoring the vast majority, which mostly don't support it. Your theory is therefore nothing more than what you would like to be true.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @09:03PM
I was not attempting to cherry-pick. That was the list of incidences I could recall without reference. If I used a more comprehensive list, I would have been side-tracked and unlikely to report on the issue. As an example, I am reading page 82 of 141 of Elliot Rodger's life story. The list you provided has about 100 cases with references to more and excludes incidences such as Raoul Moat and Anders Breivik (who did not come to mind but has similarities with Elliot Rodger).
1702845791×2
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @08:51PM
So what are you offering as a solution? Free lap dances for all disaffected men in our society? I've been feeling pretty disaffected myself lately. Where should I sign up? More seriously, you might want to consider that getting laid is not a fundamental right of every horny male. Women do not have any obligation to put out for men. (I only wish it were so.) Perhaps the solution is for men to grow up and realize that the Universe does not revolve around their dick.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 30 2014, @10:36PM
I only see this problem being resolved when it is eclipsed by more significant events. Specifically, evolutionary pressures, such as war, have ensured that women outnumbered the surviving men. The pressures on women (opportunities, finances, property rights, voting rights) compelled a woman to accept any man or face spinsterhood and childlessness.
If I may detour into biology, male sperm is lighter the female sperm and, even taking into account genetic problem specific to XY, I believe there are 107 male births for every 100 female births. The males grow bigger, are more energetic and require more protein. However, in our current situation, they are not getting killed by predators/hunting accidents/hostile neighbors at historical rates. In addition, the most populous countries (India, China) are practising selective abortion in which 50 million were never born. In some cases, men are marrying international brides but this only diffuses the problem rather than solving it.
In addition to this huge male imbalance, women have a vast market of potential suitors. Historically, when the majority of people lived in rural locations, a woman would have less than a dozen men within her social status. Nowadays, a woman in a large metropolis may have more than 10,000 and it may be possible to dismiss candidates with a swipe on a smartphone or, conceivably, a glance or facial expression [soylentnews.org]. In aggregate, women are attracted to men with a very limited range of physical attributes. The 2% of men with these attributes are getting sexually exhausted. (Quite a few are limiting themselves to sex with five women per week because they're not getting anything else done.) However, the remainder are being ignored even if they are sane, healthy, educated, financially solvent and quite desirable by historical standards.
Many of the men being ignored believe in equality but an increasing proportion of them have dissonant experience of equality. It isn't sufficient to tell these men that they should hone a marketable skill for 20 years, achieve true financial independence and maybe wait for a suitable woman to come along. They've seen one guy in their class work is way through 1/2 the girls in the class and they want it too. And this is where we come to your point: Women are not obliged to spread their affections equally.
If social circumstances don't resolve this situation (war, employment rights, financial retreat) then technology may overtake. Unfortunately, stem cell technology may make the situation far worse before it makes it better [soylentnews.org]. This is because Female To Male transsexuals are likely to get functioning reproductive organs before Male To Female transsexuals. Furthermore, this will be from an operation which is less invasive and with lesser consequences for the individual. This may add to the sex imbalance but not necessarily in a manner which finds equilibrium because these XX males will only be able to have male children with an XY female. In the general case, the unknown number of procreating transsexuals will create a disproportionate of children in opposition to their acquired sex. And all of this has unpredictable consequences on sex-selective abortion.
We may also find that gay relationships without procreation become universally accepted for environmental reasons.
In summary, depending on your circumstances and preferences, finding a man or a woman may be become ridiculously easy, ridiculously hard or swing between to two. No-one knows.
1702845791×2
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Magic Oddball on Saturday August 30 2014, @11:46PM
I only see this problem being resolved when it is eclipsed by more significant events. Specifically, evolutionary pressures, such as war, have ensured that women outnumbered the surviving men. The pressures on women (opportunities, finances, property rights, voting rights) compelled a woman to accept any man or face spinsterhood and childlessness.
That's not only a creepy fantasy, it's unrealistic. Even if women outnumbered men by a large margin in our society, we *still* wouldn't pick the kind of sociopathically unstable guys that shoot up schools -- we'd opt either to be single (which isn't all that big a deal, trust me), share the good men, or pair up together (platonically or otherwise). Women that had an overwhelming desire to become mothers would use technology or ask a close male friend to get them pregnant, just as they have in the past.
As for the rest of what you wrote, I can't tell if you were only describing your fantasy, or if it's (as it sounds in parts) describing your perception of real-life people/society. I can say that most XY women don't have a big smorgasbord of men to choose from in real life, any more than most men do, and that the traits in a man that drive women away will also drive men away from a woman.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Sunday August 31 2014, @01:33AM
What you describe as a "creepy fantasy" is historical fact. Furthermore, while I hope that technology (and easy access to technology) continues to progress, allowing everyone to overcome accident of birth, I cannot guarantee it. We're also in a situation where peace and prosperity in North America and Western Europe plus the interaction between Eastern cultural practices and medical technology has created tens of millions of men for which there are no corresponding women. This is contrary to the historical situation where males would be disproportionately killed by predators or hostile tribes.
Many of these "surplus" men are working in agricultural jobs while a disproportionate number of women migrate to cities and have a more substantial sex life. In some cases, women have completely deserted villages and, in the case of China's one child families, it is unclear where the next generation of farmers will come from.
Regarding the rest of my "fantasy", perhaps some figures would help? Take the population of China where selective abortion accurs. According to the CIA World Factbook, China has 704,828,835 males and 654,757,003 females - a surplus of 50,071,832 males. Assume that Female To Male transsexuals will be able to procreate first. Assume that 0.01% of China's females take this option. There are now 65,000 less females. A proportion of these former females may also want a female partner. This creates additional pressure.
The sex imbalance is eased if there are more Male To Female transsexuals but this advance is not likely to be developed first, may not be equally affordable and may not be equally popular.
I don't know enough to knowledgeably comment on your experiences as/with XY women but if it involves any intimacy, you have the advantage over many of today's young men.
Regarding attractive traits, an attractive personality is fairly universal. However, men are attracted to a more diverse range of physical traits. Exceptions are numerous.
1702845791×2
(Score: 3, Insightful) by velex on Monday September 01 2014, @05:35PM
Oh, wow. Interesting thread. Let me interject a few things:
The reason it isn't sufficient is because when this 40-something who's financially secure starts dating 20-year old girls, then we call him a cradle-robber and a pedophile. On the other hand, we don't much care about 20-something girls who date 40-something guys; we just make sure to demonize the guy.
I watched my friend who was dating someone 10 years younger wind up completely ostracised because of this factor. Well, it didn't help that she lied about being raped, and one of the local white knights ran with it.
I'm not sure I entirely understand what you're talking about, and I think you're making a number of assumptions that might not pan out. Stem cell technology may be able to create functional male genitalia out of cells with an XX makeup, but I thinking it'll be more likely in those cases that one of those Xes will need to be swapped out for a Y from a close relative. Afaik, it's all still pure speculation. However, I could see the case where you end up with a man who only produces X sperm.
You touched on the possibility of growing a fully functional female reproductive system from XY cells. My gut tells me this is less likely, and a trans woman desiring this operation would need to obtain a different copy of X from a close relative if it's not possible to clone her X (maybe it would cause complications if one of the Xes were a clone of the other).
The are also a lot of unknowns in my mind if we want to talk about gender ratio when bringing in trans folks. Last I looked for numbers about a decade ago, nobody really knew but common estimates I heard were that it's a 3:1 ratio. There are 3 trans women for every 1 trans man, meaning 3 men become women and 1 woman becomes a man. There have been no studies that I know of as to why.
Then there's the question of access to such procedures. We all lose our shit when it comes to trans folks. The idea that a trans prerson might get any form of assistance for the medical aspect of transition makes blood boil. The thing is, though, that's in a culture that tells men they are sexual objects and servants of women, and if they can't find a woman to own them, they're nothing. Then the other half of the culture says it's true in reverse! What a mess. This is also a culture that does not have the technology to accommodate gender change without losing reproductive ability, which is apparently all that matters to this species.
Oh, and they worry too much about what makes them "gay" or not. (This is a conversation that seems inevitable when a trans woman dates a man. I think it's one part worry about being a homosexual and thus being less than a man and another part worry about being seen by others as a homosexual.)
Let's assume these miracle stem-cell gender change technologies exist. Under the current capitalist medical system combined with a healthy dose of screwball feminism, that leaves one essentially two options for having children if one wasn't lucky enough to be born with a womb. The first is to make enough money early on so that it becomes a better financial option for a woman to marry one and have children than not. Opportunity cost, etc. If one isn't able to provide a woman with better than she could do on her own, why would she marry? The idea of a "househusband" is too unworkable for this species, life isn't fair, etc, although I was glad to see an example in Madoka Magica. The other option is growing a new reproductive system and having it implanted is some radical surgical procedure that won't be cheap.
However, the existence of such a radical gender change procedure takes the wind straight out of the sails of the arguments for transphobia. On the part of the feminists, they're going to have a difficult time when the only way to tell the difference between an agent of the patriarchy and a "womyn-born-womyn" is by doing a genetic test. A genetic test would need to be a prerequisite of registering of the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival! On the part of the other bigots, they're going to have a hard time calling someone who looks, acts, and sounds "like a woman" and is 7 month pregnant that they're really a man. (Then again, I can imagine how that would go. A: "You're a man, aren't you?" B: "Of course not! Can't you see I'm pregnant?!" A: "Ok, you have breasts, a womb, are pregnant, smell like a woman, have sex with men, have a female name, and will resume your period after delivering the baby, but you're still a man!")
Then we would need to revise our attitudes. If one knew the only way they'd get grandchildren were by financing their son or daughter's gender change, that'd be a very different world!
Eh, who am I kidding. Technology for that would only be accessible to folks like Harisoo or Jennifer Boylan. I doubt it would ever be a significant factor. Add in that the estimate that may 1 in every 10,000 or 30,000 people assigned the male gender at birth transition. So the factor you're talking about, if I understand, as concerns the proportions of men and women in a given society, may be present but insignificant.
Young men these days face an overwhelming amount of sexism. If we ignore how school from elementary through college is a hostile environment where they experience discrimination on a daily basis—and sexual harassment that's built into sexist policy—, ignore the profusion of male-bashing in mainstream entertainment (I wonder if the feminists ever considered that the misogyny on multiplayer video games is retaliation and venting after having to hear the same jokes that just aren't funny over and over again), ignore how gay men have their identities violated every time they are presumed to be attracted to women and continually bashed about the issue of rape (why should I focus on gay men when every man who has not committed rape experiences institutional discrimination), we're really ignoring the elephant in the room.
And I'm not just looking at feminism or "all women" when I write that. I'm also looking at men—regular men who are a-ok with it because, hey, after all, guys can handle it! (Again, sexism.) I'm looking at that white knight who inevitably responds to me and tells me I'm only angry with feminism because I can't get laid. (Sexism and implicit homophobia.) Then if I feed the troll, the homophobia becomes explicit with the inevitable response that I'm mentally ill. I'm looking at the men's rights movement who send the signal to men that if they're not straight as an arrow, then they're an evil communist socialist.
Circumcision probably doesn't help, either. If circumcision worked out just fine for any particular individual, then great for them. If they like being circumcised, great. Except, for the 1 out of 500 men that circumcision goes wrong for, it can be a living hell, especially not knowing that one was even circumcised at all. Just that we don't even consider the idea that, if the "science" supporting the practice is good, then it should still be an individual man's choice, speaks volumes. What happened to "my body, my choice?" (Ok, so I am partially looking at the feminist movement here, except more in disappointment that they were so provincial and chauvinistic in that statement that they didn't even consider that it needs a much larger scope than they meant it to have, and I don't think they understand that for some victims of the circumcision gone wrong, it's a tough pill to swallow to be asked to support "my body, my choice" when the victim of circumcision doesn't even have any voices decrying what happened to him (/her?).)
In short, we have a big problem with misandry, and we are hopelessly slipshod in the ethics department when it comes to men.
(Score: 2) by cafebabe on Tuesday September 02 2014, @12:52AM
I'm glad this gained your interest.
Regarding age differences, this is part of the equality dissonance. Males and females grow to different sizes over different timespans, mature at different rates, gain verbal fluency at different rates and have different reproductive lifespans. Historically, a man would obtain one or more women after an extended period which allowed selective pressure. This model is akin to a silverback gorilla who gains access to a harem. More recently, a man would have established himself as a craftsman before seeking a wife. Nowadays, a man is shamed if he dates a younger woman while cougars are borderline acceptable.
Regarding genetics, my scenario makes many assumptions but I'm not aware of any limitation which prevents XX or XY cells splitting to X or Y gametes at the final step. Assuming this process works, hypothetical Y eggs would only be viable with X sperm. Therefore, XY women would have reduced fertility with XY men and the sex of children would be skewed to approximately 2/3 male and 1/3 female. Taking into account weight of Y sperm, this would be further skewed by a small factor. Overall, we would have situation where XY women are more likely to have XY children and XX men are more likely to have XX children. So, any swing in the male/female demographic due to fertile transsexuals would have a mild opposing effect in the following generation.
Ignoring genetics, the adage in transsexual urological surgery of "It's easier to dig a hole than build a pole" is going to be broken. Cell culturing and 3D printing will make it easy to produce a penis of any size. (Expect future pornstars to have two or more because, well, why chance having the old ones removed?) However, grafting a 3D printed uterus will be significantly more awkward than grafting a 3D printed penis.
To add further assumptions, the general level of homophobia and transphobia may relax if they weren't regarded as an evolutionary dead-end. This means people who come out of the closet may be less likely to be forced out of their homes, dis-inherited or killed. Likewise, I would hope that people would be less homophobic and transphobic about sexual relations if anyone could procreate with anyone else. (To add a further assumption of political, financial, environmental and social pressure to have two children or less, dis-inheritance may be counter-productive if a homosexual or transsexual child is your only surviving offspring.) Well, that's the rational view. However, you note that it is one of those hot-button issues in which a subset of people lose rational thought. However, I see militant feminists and regressive religious people being fragmented by these advances.
Most feminists accept transgendered women due to their common experiences of sexual assault, attempted rape, rape, sexual objectification and economic opportunities. This acceptance will progress as the next generation of feminists mix with openly transgendered children. Germaine Greer's definition of female (XX, functional uterus) will become a fringe concept or functionally irrelevant. Oh, and the womyn-born-womyn festivals have already been invaded by the clandestine agents of the patriarchy. (Actually, I find this amusing because it riles almost everyone but for different reasons. In an age of equality, many people find womyn-born-womyn festivals to be gratuitous offensive discrimination. My opinion on this is fairly moderate. After reading blog posts about a woman who wanted some space at a gay festival and sex-segregated gymnasiums [soylentnews.org], discussing matters with rape victims and other experiences, I am convinced that sex-segregated activities are healthy for many people. However, it shouldn't be done in a discriminatory manner with no alternative. This is especially true if it involves the public sector. For example, a female-only space at a festival is acceptable if there are other restricted spaces and no-one gets to access all areas. The womyn-born-womyn festivals don't do this. Indeed, their policies for Female To Male transsexuals is mixed. Also, their existence is divisive to Male To Female transsexuals because some would never be able to slip in, many wouldn't want to be involved and others wouldn't be able to bring their friends. And then there's the people who don't self-identify as male or female.)
Regarding figures, approximately 1:3000 is the lower bound for self-identifying transsexuals and, yes, the ratio of 3:1 has been found between Male To Female transsexuals and Female To Male transsexuals. However, many transsexuals self-identify as gay or lesbian. In countries like Thailand, they don't make a big distinction between homosexual, transvestite, transsexual or other. Worldwide, it may be that more than 10% of males have transvestite tendencies and more than 1% of "males" are transsexual. The corresponding level of transvestism in women is unknown. However, I know from the experience of a Female To Male acquaintance that attempting to dress in a masculine manner can be maddening when all masculine fashions are socially accepted.
The common assumption is that Male To Female transsexuals are more common but this may be due to transvestism being more obvious and feminization of masculine features being less successful while Female To Male transsexuals have more limited surgical options, more relief (or not) via accepted fashion and/or self-identify as lesbians. If we consider the developmental effects of hormones in other animals [wikipedia.org], it may be the case that Female To Male transsexuals may be very common. Although self-identity and mate attraction are distinct, disputed figures for PCO [PolyCystic Ovaries] and PCOS [PolyCystic Ovary Syndrome] in lesbians may emphasize the significance of hormones. From http://lezgetreal.com/2008/10/lesbians-and-pcos/ [lezgetreal.com], http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15533359 [nih.gov] and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycystic_ovary_syndrome#Epidemiology [wikipedia.org], 80% of lesbians may have PCO. The 80% incidence of PCO appears to be widely cited by lesbians but the corresponding figure for heterosexual women from one source is 8-25% and 32% from another. Reports of PCOS cite 38% for lesbians and 3.4%, 14% or 18% for heterosexual women. It is noted that some of the ambiguity derives from vague diagnostic criteria. Regardless, it could be an evolutionary advantage. If a woman has reproductive problems, it may be advantageous for such a woman to adopt masculine behaviors, such as attraction to women, for the benefit of a group.
Regarding access to healthcare, Cuba demonstrates that poor countries can provide good access to healthcare if there is political will. Even without this, the advance of stem cell biology, material science, 3D printing, robots and niche gadgets will make advanced surgery cheaper. I liken the current 3D printers to Johannes Gutenberg's first printing press. They will advance but their full potential may takes hundreds of years. Fortunately, we won't have to wait for their full potential to arrive. It is likely that limbs and organs will be widely available to patients within 20 years. This will be for essential surgery and cosmetic surgery. Perhaps you'd like smaller hands, catgirl ears or a tail? This is all possible. In the longer term, I believe that Iain Banks [wikipedia.org] suggested that people could transform themselves into a really outlandish form, such as a cloud.
Anyhow, if transsexualism became almost universally accepted and there was surgery which retained fertility, the number of Female To Male transsexuals may exceed the number of Male To Female transsexuals.
More to follow.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Saturday August 30 2014, @09:13PM
I don't think the problem is so much not getting laid, as it is the social stigma often encountered by men who do not get laid on a regular basis. The problem, which you elude to, is social exclusion/alienation, and the solution is inclusivity. In fact, if you want to be more general and all-inclusive, the true common point in all of the examples you cite (and indeed, in most crimes) are that the people feel driven into a corner, whether socially, emotionally, financially, or otherwise. Even the most cowardly animal, when left with no other option, will fight back.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Sunday August 31 2014, @12:19AM
There is a book entitled "Going Postal" by Mark Ames which goes into the history of mass shootings, mostly the workplace variety but also school shootings. In most cases the shooters had been treated unfairly in some way, were being mocked by their peers, and when they tried to get help by going through official channels they were ignored at best.
A few other interesting points I recall from the book:
19th century slave rebellions (which were not as common as you might expect) received a similar kind of "OMG Why Did This Happen!?!?" reactions in the press as do mass shootings today.
The frequency of mass shootings begins to climb in the Reagan era.
In many cases a particular person (eg. the shooter's hated boss at work) seemed to be the target, but by dumb luck and circumstance were not around when the rampage happened.
(Score: 1) by Murdoc on Monday September 01 2014, @12:57AM
The columbine killers weren't goths. A lot of goths have received grief over this misconception.