Category: Uncategorized

A little outrage

Sometimes I worry that I’m assimilating too much, caving in to the man, as it were. So, I took heart at my outraged reaction to the article in the NYT on sex assignment surgery for new borns. Some fraction of a percent of kids are born intersex. But rather than risk them feeling a little weird, or letting them figure themselves out, or, you know, fucking being honest with them as adults, the standard plan is to surgerize their genitalia to ‘make it look right’ and forget that there was ever anything unusual about this. It used to be things like removing their phalus (by which I mean an ambiguous clitoris/penis). This totally screws up their sex life later. Nowadays, they supposedly have less drastic interventions, though they still involve slicing and dicing. And the tiny amount of scientific evidence that can be gathered on the subject suggests that maybe the kids who don’t get cut grow up happier. But the new improved standard does discourage them from rushing to surgery. Doesn’t say “don’t do it” just sit down and think first.

Okay, now here’s the kicker. Most parents seem to think carving their kids privates into a more socially accepted shape is the best solution to this ‘disastrous’ outcome. I have no words for how much this idea pisses me off.

An idea for legislation and other thoughts on driving

In a focus on issues of emissions, California has mandated that automobiles emit no more than a certain quantity of CO2 per mile traveled (at the tailpipe. I think electric cars still count as ‘zero emission’ vehicles, regardless of how the electricity is generated). The federal government has some not-so-successful legislation, the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standard. This means that no state is allowed to regulate fuel efficiency. There is an argument that the CO2 standard is a backdoor means of regulating fuel economy. And there is a very convincing argument to be made on that point. Particularly if CA isn’t regulating CO2 from other sources.

But, as often happens when I’m behind the wheel, it occurred to me yesterday, as I was driving a very heavy, fuel inefficient vehicle, that this only addresses one of the problems with excessive driving. Maybe two. Fuel consumption and vehicle emissions in particular. And it’s kinda iffy on those two. See, if fuel efficiency rises, it costs less to drive a mile, so people may drive more miles (in aggregate), counterbalancing gains in those two categories.

But there are several other problems with excessive driving. Congestion related delays, accidents, and scarcity of parking rank high among the problems.

In addressing the accident problem, half the popularity of SUVs is their purported safety for families. They never say what happens in case of a collision between a massive vehicle and a less massive vehicle, but “squish” says it pretty succintly. Now, a major part of this is an arms race. If I get a more massive hummer, then you want a hummer that weighs more than mine so that if I’m driving drunk on the wrong side of the road (oh-so-likely scenario here, if we change the identity of the actors), you and yours aren’t wiped out in one fell swoop.

So, to kill the arms race, a state could try to regulate car mass. No more than 1 ton or whatever. This might be considered a backdoor to fuel efficiency, but it is far less direct. Obviously this would only apply to non-commercial vehicles. This could kill the Minivan and SUV while resurrecting the station wagon. One could only hope. Even so, this would not address congestion or parking. A massive fuel tax would go a long way in all categories by getting people to mode switch and travel less. And no one’s saying that states couldn’t do that.

I also had a driving related thought at work. I work on the 7th floor of my building. We have two banks of elevators, one serving floors 1-14 and another serving the first floor and floors 15 and up. There are 6 elevators in our bank. To understand the problem with single commuters, do a little thought experiment. Pretend that the elevators would each take only one person at a time. imagine what a disaster it would be. Think about the relationship here.

Today

I didn’t play WoW at all today. Instead, I rented a Uhaul, went out to the burbs, grabbed my stuff, and moved it all into my tiny room. I am unpacking. I need to get my billies set up for the books. This means purchasing some hardware tomorrow morning. Mad props (and a copy of WoW) to for his assistance. Also, great brunch with and . Mmmm, pumpkin pancakes, mmm. I think I’m going to be okay.

But now, bed time. see all you party people another day.

I read an article about the leader of a religious cult in Uganda who had led an army into raping, killing, and torturing other Ugandans, not to mention kidnapping to recruit new members. The international criminal court has charged him with war crimes and issued a warrant for his arrest. He claims he’s finished with what he’s doing, and he’ll surrender peacefully if he’s left alone, and apparently at least some of his victims are fine by that deal. It echoes an observation from Collapse, where natives of Rwanda accepted war as a population control measure.

Let me tie this into the situation in Thailand. Bloodless coup. Corrupt government ousted. Minor protests, but no Tianamen square. Broad condemnation from the West. In terms of outcome, it’s still too early to say whether something good will emerge from it. The coup leader has the backing of their king, and has promised from square one to turn things over to a civilian government.

My point here is maybe we don’t always know best. Sometimes I think imposing our values is fine. Stopping honor killings of women, say. Other times, I suspect not.