No circumcision for you!

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Generally, and admiringly, I find San Francisco to be one of the most progressive places in America (not that that's really saying much, but still).

Take same-sex marriage, for example: Harvey Milk's city is well out in front of most of the rest of the country, which lingers still in vicious bigotry.

But sometimes it can go too far, and not even in a progressive way. Sometimes it's just nuts:

A group opposed to male circumcision said on Tuesday they have collected more than enough signatures to qualify a proposal to ban the practice in San Francisco as a ballot measure for November elections.

But legal experts said that even if it were approved by a majority of the city's voters, such a measure would almost certainly face a legal challenge as an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of religion.

Circumcision is a ritual obligation for infant Jewish boys, and is also a common rite among Muslims, who account for the largest share of circumcised men worldwide.

The leading proponent of a ban, Lloyd Schofield, 59, acknowledged circumcision is widely socially accepted but he said it should still be outlawed.

"It's excruciatingly painful and permanently damaging surgery that's forced on men when they're at their weakest and most vulnerable," he told Reuters.

Oh please. A ban may or may not be unconstitutional -- I suspect the current Supreme Court would rule it as such -- but it would certainly be stupid. Male circumcision isn't female circumcision, after all, and it's hardly -- sorry, Kramer -- the "damaging surgery" its opponents make it out to be.

The spread of disease may not be much of an issue anymore, given our penchant for hyper-hygiene, and so, if it isn't religion, it may just be parental preference. But what's wrong with that? This hardly rises to the level of a choice that needs to be taken away from parents.

Thankfully, not all of San Francisco is this crazy. A vote would likely fail.

Elephant Dung #7: Huckabee calls out Palin over FLOTUS food flap

Tracking the GOP Civil War

By R.K. Barry

(For an explanation of this ongoing series, see here. For previous entries, see here.) 

You may have noticed that former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee took a little shot at Sarah Palin for her bogus claim that Michelle Obama doesn't want Americans to eat dessert – or some such nonsense. All of this was in the context of the First Lady talking about combating childhood obesity in America and the need to encourage children to consider healthier eating choices.

This is what Huckabee had to say:

With all due respect to my colleague and friend Sarah Palin, I think she's misunderstood what Michelle Obama is trying to do. Michelle Obama's not trying to tell people what to eat or force government's desires on people. She's stating the obvious: that we have an obesity crisis in this country. 

Palin was doing what she always does, which is to fire up her base by pointing to what she would consider an instance of government telling people what to do. In contrast, Huckabee was presenting himself as the voice of reason in defending Ms. Obama who was only suggesting the obvious point that public education about healthier food choices for our children is a good idea.

Okay. But what I found interesting is that this little flare-up, such as it was, comes only a few weeks after new polling indicated that Huckabee would give Palin a run for her money for the Republican presidential nomination and would appeal potentially to much of the same constituency, but also perhaps to much-needed voters beyond the base.

A Quinnipac poll on November 22 showed Huckabee in a statistical dead heat with Obama and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. In a Marist College poll on November 24, Huckabee and Palin were virtually tied in popularity among Republicans who were not college graduates. But Huckabee pulled ahead significantly -- 18 percent to Palin's nine percent -- among respondents with college degrees. Huckabee came in second to Romney, who registered 25 percent among college-educated Republicans.

According to Janine Parry, director of the Arkansas Poll at the University of Arkansas, Huckabee is in a good position to separate himself from the rest of the pack.

His unfavorable numbers are significantly lower, he's penetrated the mainstream culture without becoming clownish, and he's demonstrated a willingness – even eagerness – to be a practical, truly bipartisan leader. In this environment and in a general election at least, those seem like substantial assets. 

Maybe this dessert flap is nothing. But it could be an early attempt by Huckabee to stake out some territory that takes in not only the conservative base but also independent voters, while Palin continues to say and do stupid things that appeal only to the same narrow constituency. 

I noticed a particularly idiotic comment on the Fox Nation website by an unnamed poster in response to Huckabee's statement, which said it all for me. It read: 

Governor, with your inability to see through to the real motives of the Obama's agenda to destroy freedom and America, you have lost my vote. 

There you have it. Taking away our freedom one double-chocolate raspberry cheesecake at a time.

The smarter types in the Republican Party understand full well that the road to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue does not go through Crazy Town.

Mike Huckabee seems to get this. Sarah Palin, and those who hang on her every word, not so much.

What is Sarah Palin hiding in her medical records?

By Michael J.W. Stickings

At long last, and after much dithering, Palin has released her medical records!

Wait... no, she didn't.

All her campaign released -- late last night, right before the election -- was a rather Panglossian two-page letter from her doctor, one Cathy Baldwin-Johnson of the Providence Health and Services Alaska clinic in Anchorage. "Governor Palin is in excellent health and has no known health problems," the letter declares.

Andrew Sullivan, who has been all over this story, is suitably unimpressed: "The timing of the release should... surely be interpreted as a giant finger to the press. Releasing this letter one hour before polling day begins and refusing to provide any actual documentation is not an answer.

What is Palin hiding?

Life after Ted

By Carl

It seems weird to think of Ted Kennedy as mortal, and yet, he is:

BOSTON, Massachusetts (CNN) -- U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor, was released from the hospital Wednesday morning, earlier than expected.

When doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital announced Tuesday that the 76-year-old Democrat was suffering from a brain tumor, the news was met with expressions of sadness and support from his Senate colleagues.

Kennedy's physicians said they would consult with him to determine the best course of treatment.

Kennedy is one of only six senators in U.S. history to serve more than 40 years. He is an iconic liberal champion of social issues such as health care, family leave and the minimum wage.

Ironically, he's probably done more for the poor and disenfranchised in this country than any other Kennedy, certainly more in his forty year Senate career than he would have had he won an election for President.

Fate, as Al Gore can tell you, sometimes forces your hand.

The subtext to today's story, that EMK has been released from Mass General Hospital earlier than expected, along with little clues dropped in the news coverage from other sources (Nancy Snyderman, the medical consultant to The Today Show, this morning all but declared Kennedy as dying), leads me to suspect the tumor is a lot further along than we'd be led to believe. Malignant gliomae are cells that reproduce quickly and are very aggressive.

And brain cancer doesn't necessarily have to be the origination of the cancer infestation. One can develop, say, prostate cancer and have it spread along the spinal cord to the brain, triggering this kind of tumor.

It is always fatal. They speak in terms of two to five years horizons. Arlen Specter, who also had this form of cancer, has managed to survive past the five period, but that might be the exception to the rule.

The last liberal in Congress, unless you want to talk about Bernie Sanders, who will replace this lion as the face of progressive politics?

It seems a damned shame now that Barack Obama is running for President, since clearly he could have the kind of impact Kennedy has had, over a far longer term, rather than hit-and-run some policies that will have zero effect once the next President after him is seated. He coulda been a contendah.

There's a pitifully short list of liberals in Congress. Even the people we believed could hold that lamp high, the Barbara Boxers, the Dianne Feinsteins, the Hillary Clintons, the Barack Obamas, have all demonstrated that power means more to them than principle.

Too, it says a lot about the make up of the American electorate that there is no real progressive liberal movement, especially when you contemplate what the liberal movement has meant to the average American (read the top of my blog: "Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act."

Something to keep in mind for this year's election, one that *should* be a slam dunk for Democrats, but one that we simply cannot take for granted.

I think about the names of the Senators in Congress now...obviously my bias is for the Northeast...like Schumer and Menendez, Dodd and Lautenberg, Clinton and Collins...and I'm not seeing anyone who can replace Ted, at least not in the precious short time it appears we have him around.

This might be the death of liberalism for the foreseeable future. We should mourn.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Fighting against breast cancer... and also against breast cancer campaigns

By LindaBeth

I don't remember exactly what brought this issue to my attention-- it may have been this blog post I read, which prompted me to do some additional research. But I'm pretty irritated. And frustrated.

It's the Breast Cancer awareness campaigns and anti-breast cancer t-shirts that are being manufactured, bought and worn. Disclaimer: I am 100% in favor of fund-raising, awareness, education, what have you, about breast cancer.* That's not what this is about. However, the way advocacy is framed is just as important as the advocacy, for the "way you say it" speaks just as much as "what you say."

Why am I annoyed? The message of recent campaigns, advertising, and t-shirts are centered around the idea that we need to catch breast cancer early and research for a cure in order to save breasts. Silly me, I thought we fight against cancer to save lives. And if that weren't bad enough, the reason "the breasts" must be saved will make you puke a little in your mouth. Because men love 'em. Or in the sexuality-neutral terms of some of the tees, your sex partner enjoys them, or needs them to attain a sexual conquest status:

This tee is also interesting in how it appropriates a "sport" theme, used as a metaphor for sex that is wholly centered on what the male "gets" the female to do, especially considering the objectification of women in sport. Compare to this tee, also on a sport theme:

So, to recap, not only are saving the breast not the woman, the focus of the campaigns, but the reason for doing to isn't even about preserving the sexual pleasure that the woman's breasts give her, but is instead about their benefit to others, predominately to men -- not only your (presumed male) partner, but to the community of men at large. "We men" love "boobies," so we'll work real hard so you don't have to have them surgically removed. And we women should be "responsible" and look after them because the dudez love 'em. And we all know women should do things about their body because it's what men love. Not because, well, women might die!



I prefer this one:

Of course, the end message "look after your body" is correct, but the reason to do so is 100% absolutely wrong. It is an unfortunately and troubling result of how women's bodies are seen: as first and foremost for someone else's pleasure, as something to be looked at and not something that works, that does things, that has a functional purpose, and that gives the woman herself pleasure.

Rethink's "Booby Wall" starts off saying about it's call to upload images of your breasts: "this isn't Maxim... this is beautiful" only to be followed by "this is worth living for." Excuse me? Um, no, my breasts are not worth living for, my life is worth living for! Yeah, let's display all sort of breasts as examples of the beauty in the variety of breasts to prove that your breasts are important, valuable and worth living for. Gee, that sure sounds like an awesome initiative!

And no, this is not a case of Aw, just lighten up! -- Whatever will get people to fight breast cancer -- What's the Big Deal? No, sorry. This is the message women get ev-ry-where. And now when the issue is supposed to be about women's lives, we're appealing to save women's bodies?! Women's bodies are valuable regardless of what they mean to men and the male gaze, and women's lives are important regardless of their bodies. End of story.

Reasons we fight breast cancer?
Because it kills women.
Because it takes a chunk of your life away.
Because a woman losing her breasts can make her lose out on sexual pleasure.

The "because a woman's partner may lose our on sexual pleasure" is at the bottom of the list.

That "men like looking at as many breasts as possible and anything that makes them go away should be fought against" is not on the list.

In addition to my disclaimer above, an ending disclaimer. I am not criticizing men that are involved in breast cancer organizations whatsoever. Please keep it up! I am criticizing the way that action against breast cancer is framed, and I am not saying men involved are doing so with the motivations presumed by the campaigns. Instead, I think this tee better describes these men:


These campaigns rely on a sexist framework regarding the female body and what/who it is for, and they perpetuate such sexism in the design of their campaigns.


*Even though the way breast cancer has been produced in medicalization has a very gendered element to it, in the way that the comparative silence around prostate cancer and prevention is also quite gendered. I'll likely write on this in the future. But for now, ponder on why it might be that we encourage women to do self-breast examinations monthly -- and this is a common-knowledge thing--and we don't advocate men doing self-testicle exams. Even though considering the various tissue obstructions in the breast, it would be much easier to discover lumps in the testicles than in the breast.

(Cross-posted to Smart Like Me.)

FRANCHISE ALERT: New health spa craze sweeps the nation

Guest post by Swampcracker

John McCain's latest switcheroo on the Intelligence Authorization Bill leads me to believe that "enhanced interrogation techniques" have gained a new air of respectability. The way I figure, if the most tormented candidate in presidential politics endorses it, then maybe it is time to jump on the bandwagon and get in on a ground floor opportunity.

That is why I have started investigating the latest health spa craze called "water-boarding." I have not seen it firsthand, but I understand it has something to do with taking a "dunk." I am told it improves respiration, or at least the ability to hold one's breath under water.

Aromatherapy bath oils improve the experience. Not the traditional kind of fragrances found in those super-posh spas like the Hanoi Hilton, but a new line of designer scents called Choke, Heave, Swallow, and Spirit of Sanson.

I rate this franchise opportunity a "no-brainer" and plan to be the first in my neighborhood to start one. Of course, Laura Bush, Lynne Cheney, and Cindy McCain will each receive a free introductory gift certificate to try water-boarding for themselves. To build your customer base, it helps to have testimonials from influential people.

HUMAN BODY FUN FACTS ! ! !

glumbert - Did you know? The Human Body

WHAT'S IN A TWINKIE ???

(CBS) NEW YORK America is well-known across the globe as a country with an obesity problem, a problem that's become so bad, our snacking habits have turned us into a so-called "Twinkie nation."

Over 500 million of the popular golden cakes are sold each year, but what exactly are they made of? CBS 2's Dr. Holly Phillips decided to dissect the anatomy of a Twinkie, worshiped today on sites across the Web and even on the big screen.

Dr. Phillips says there are 39 ingredients packed into the dessert, and all but one are processed.

The ingredients cellulose gum, calcium sulfate, and polysorbate 60 are also used in sheetrock, shampoo, laundry detergent, and even rocket fuel. Author Steve Ettlinger spent five years tracking down the source of every ingredient found in a Twinkie.

"I was surprised that so many not only came from petroleum, but at least five came from rocks," Ettlinger says.

The vitamins, artificial flavors, and colorings all come from petroleum. Phosphates from limestone make Twinkies light and airy.

"Sorbic acid is made from natural gas. That really blew my mind," Ettlinger says.

And the creamy middle?

"There is no cream in the cream, as they say. It's mostly Crisco," Ettlinger says.

Processed foods have been indicted as the main contributor to our childhood obesity epidemic. The 290 calories and nine grams of fat are less-than-friendly to our coronary arteries.

Hostess, the maker of Twinkies, issued a statement about the Twinkie's anatomy:

"Deconstructing the Twinkie is like trying to deconstruct the universe. We think the millions of people would agree that Twinkies just taste great."

Ettlinger says there is no denying a Twinkie is far from a health food. "It is what it is. If you want healthy, if you want something good for you, eat your broccoli," he says.

And while snacking can help boost energy throughout the day, research shows that processed, high-sugar snacks give quick jolts followed by even more fatigue. When it comes to those guilty pleasures, moderation is key.

TRAINING FOR SEXUAL EXCELLENCE ! ! !

NOW DROP DOWN AND GIVE ME 20 !

STARING AT BREASTS IMPROVES MENS HEALTH

I HOPE THIS IS FOR REAL !!!

WHY DO WE HAVE SEX ???

By KATHARINE STOEL GAMMON
ABC News Medical Unit
July 31, 2007

Have you ever had sex to feel closer to God?

How about to change the topic of conversation? Or because you wanted to get rid of a headache or break up a rival's relationship?

Perhaps you just wanted to debase yourself.

A new study, published today in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, suggests that the reasons we have sex may be much more varied than previously thought.

"In the scientific literature, they've really only been talking about the most obvious reasons why people have sex -- because they're in love, because it feels good and because they want to have a baby," says study author Cindy Meston, associate professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin.

"But after 17 years of doing research into women's sexuality, it was apparent to me that people are having sex for all sorts of reasons that weren't being discussed in the literature," she said.

The researchers first sampled 203 men and 241 women, ranging in age from 17 to 52. They asked them to list all the reasons why they ever had sex.

Some of what they found surprised the researchers.

They received answers from "The person smelled nice" to "I wanted to burn calories" to "I wanted to get out of doing something."

"Some of the negative motivators -- the ones that had to do with revenge, or manipulation, or competition -- really surprised us," says Meston. "One of the darkest answers was 'to give someone else an STD,' and that really surprised us."

Some of the other answers they found had nothing to do with pleasure, emotional attachment or procreation -- what many would consider the usual reasons for sex.

"There were lots of things about enhancing psychological or physical well-being, like getting rid of a headache, cramps or stress," says Meston.

The researchers then took their compiled list -- 237 motivations for making love in all -- and gave it to undergraduate students at the University of Texas. The students indicated on a questionnaire how frequently each of the reasons led them to have sex in the past.

TOP 50 REASONS PEOPLE HAVE SEX



Women/Men

1. I was attracted to the person/I was attracted to the person
2. I wanted to experience the physical pleasure/It feels good
3. It feels good/I wanted to experience the physical pleasure
4. I wanted to show my affection to the person/It's fun
5. I wanted to express my love for the person/I wanted to show my affection to the person
6. I was sexually aroused and wanted the release/I was sexually aroused and wanted the release
7. I was "horny"/I was "horny"
8. It's fun/ I wanted to express my love for the person
9. I realized I was in love/I wanted to achieve an orgasm
10. I was "in the heat of the moment"/I wanted to please my partner

11. I wanted to please my partner/The person's physical appearance turned me on
12. I desired emotional closeness (i.e., intimacy)/I wanted the pure pleasure
13. I wanted the pure pleasure/I was "in the heat of the moment"
14. I wanted to achieve an orgasm/I desired emotional closeness (i.e., intimacy)
15. It's exciting, adventurous/It's exciting, adventurous
16. I wanted to feel connected to the person/The person had a desirable body
17. The person's physical appearance turned me on /I realized I was in love
18. It was a romantic setting/The person had an attractive face
19. The person really desired me/The person really desired me
20. The person made me feel sexy/I wanted the adventure/excitement

21. The person caressed me/I wanted to feel connected to the person
22. It seemed like the natural next step in my relationship/I wanted the experience
23. I wanted to become one with another person/It was a romantic setting
24. It just happened/The person caressed me
25. I wanted to increase the emotional bond by having sex/The person made me feel sexy
26. I wanted the experience/It seemed like the natural next step in my relationship
27. I wanted the adventure-excitement/ I wanted to increase the emotional bond by having sex
28. The person had an attractive face/I wanted to keep my partner satisfied
29. The person was a good kisser/The opportunity presented itself
30. I wanted to intensify my relationship/It just happened

31. My hormones were out of control/I wanted to intensify my relationship
32. I wanted to try out new sexual techniques or positions/I wanted to try out new sexual techniques or positions
33. I wanted to feel loved/My hormones were out of control
34. The person had a desirable body/The person was too "hot" to resist
35. I wanted to celebrate a birthday or anniversary or special occasion/I was curious about my sexual abilities
36. I wanted to communicate at a "deeper" level/I wanted to improve my sexual skills
37. I was curious about sex/I wanted to become one with another person
38. It was a special occasion/I saw the person naked and could not resist
39. The person was intelligent/The person was a good kisser
40. I wanted to say "I've missed you"/I wanted to feel loved

41. I wanted to keep my partner satisfied/I wanted to celebrate a birthday or anniversary or special occasion
42. I got "carried away"/The person was too physically attractive to resist
43. The opportunity presented itself/It was a special occasion
44. The person had a great sense of humour/I hadn't had sex for a while
45. I wanted to improve my sexual skills/The person had beautiful eyes
46. I was curious about my sexual abilities/I wanted to communicate at a "deeper" level 47. The person seemed self-confident/I wanted to experiment with new experiences
48. I wanted to make up after a fight/The person was intelligent
49. I was drunk/I wanted to keep my partner happy
50. I was turned on by the sexual conversation/I was curious about what the person was like in bed

BOTTOM 50 REASONS PEOPLE HAVE SEX

Women/Men

1. I wanted to give someone else a sexually transmitted disease/The person offered to give me drugs for doing it
2. Someone offered me money to do it/I wanted to give someone else a sexually transmitted disease
3. I wanted to get a raise/I wanted to punish myself
4. It was an initiation rite to a club or organization/I wanted to breakup my relationship
5. I wanted to get a job/I wanted to get a job
6. I wanted to get a promotion /It was an initiation rite to a club or organization
7. The person offered to give me drugs for doing it/Someone offered me money to do it
8. I wanted to punish myself/ I was afraid to say "no" due to the possibility of physical
harm
9. I wanted to hurt-humiliate the person/I wanted to make money
10. I wanted to feel closer to God/I wanted to feel closer to God

11. I wanted to breakup my relationship/I wanted to get a raise
12. I wanted to breakup another's relationship/I wanted to hurt/humiliate the person
13. I wanted to be used or degraded/Because of a bet
14. I wanted to gain access to that person's friend/I wanted to breakup another's relationship
15. I wanted to get a favor from someone/I wanted to get a promotion
16. I wanted to enhance my reputation/I wanted to hurt an enemy
17. It would get me gifts/It would get me gifts
18. I wanted to make money/The person had a lot of money
19. I wanted to hurt an enemy/I wanted to be used or degraded
20. Because of a bet/I wanted to break up a rival's relationship by having sex with his/her partner
21. It was a favor to someone/I wanted to get rid of a headache
22. I wanted to end the relationship/It would damage my reputation if I said "no"
23. I wanted to break up a rival's relationship by having sex with his-her partner/I wanted to get back at my partner for having cheated on me
24. It would damage my reputation if I said "no"/ I felt sorry for the person
25. The person had a lot of money/I wanted to gain access to that person's friend
26. Someone dared me/I wanted to be popular
27. I wanted to have more sex than my friends/I was physically forced to
28. I wanted to even the score with a cheating partner/I felt jealous
29. I thought it would boost my social status/The person bought me jewelry
30. I wanted to be popular/I wanted to end the relationship

31. I wanted to get a special favor from someone/My friends pressured me into it
32. I was afraid to say "no" due to the possibility of physical harm/It was a favor to someone
33. I wanted to relieve menstrual cramps/I wanted to get a favor from someone
34. My friends pressured me into it/Someone dared me
35. I felt sorry for the person/I wanted to avoid hurting someone's feelings
36. I felt jealous/My regular partner is boring, so I had sex with someone else
37. My regular partner is boring, so I had sex with someone else/I wanted to be popular
38. I wanted to get rid of a headache/I felt guilty
39. I wanted to change the topic of conversation/I wanted to enhance my reputation
40. The person had too much to drink and I was able to take advantage of them/I wanted to gain acceptance from friends

41. I wanted to impress friends/I thought it would boost my social status
42. The person was famous and I wanted to be able to say I had sex with him-her/I thought it would help "trap" a new partner
43. I wanted to get out of doing something/I was mad at my partner, so I had sex with someone else
44. I wanted to get even with someone/I wanted to get out of doing something
45. I wanted to make someone else jealous/I wanted to have a child
46. I was competing with someone else to "get the person"/I wanted to make someone else jealous
47. I thought it would help "trap" a new partner/I wanted to change the topic of conversation
48. I was slumming/I wanted to defy my parents
49. I wanted to brag to friends about my conquests/I wanted to stop my partner's nagging
50. The person demanded that I have sex with him-her/I wanted to manipulate him/her into doing something for me

KELLY OSBOURNE - MAJOR MAKE OVER ???

Kelly Osbourne's dramatic 'weight loss' for Chicago role
by RICHARD SIMPSON - More by this author » Last updated at 21:29pm on 30th July 2007

Before you ask, No. Kelly Osbourne hasn't been on the most drastic of diets.

She hasn't had plastic surgery either. And while corsets can be slimming, they're never that slimming.

What Miss Osbourne has had, in this publicity shot for her stage role as Mama Morton in Chicago, is a serious swipe of the airbrush.

Those who spotted the 22-year-old daughter of Sharon and Ozzy Osbourne in New York recently would find it hard to reconcile the pleasantly plump party girl with the svelte siren in the picture.

FULL STORY HERE

THE HEART ATTACK GRILL ???

WHATEVER I'M STILL HUNGRY !!!