So much to read, so little time. Here are some of the things that I not only clicked on but read and thought about this week.
Harvard Researchers Develop Cream That Could Stop Genital Herpes (BBC News)
[They haven't done human tests yet, but they think it will work even if applied a week before your exposed].
Canadian Polygamists Use “Gay Defense”(Yahoo News)
[The polygamists in question like to marry many people, and like some of them to be underage. Somehow they have a hard time separating the concept of sexual orientation from the concept of natural numbers].
One Reason Why STDs Increase HIV Risk (Eureka Alerts)
[I've always known this was the case based on research numbers, but never fully understood why. New research explains one reason].
BoingBoing’s Fetish Post of the Week: Superman (BoingBoing) [A new book features the recently discovered erotic illustrations of Superman's co-creator Joe Shuster].
COPA Dies a Quiet Death (law.com)
[The Child Online Protection Act would never have protected children and would have resulted in sweeping censorship of the web. The death may have been quiet, but the celebration should be raucous].
Obama Puts the Nice Back in Science (New York Times)
[He hasn't done anything yet, but it's great to hear him talking about returning scientific inquiry and data to its rightful place].
10 Facts of Life for the New Surgeon General (Sexual Intelligence)
[In my dream world, the new surgeon general would read this, and believe it].
“Somehow they have a hard time separating the concept of sexual orientation from the concept of natural numbers”
Not to be picky, but people also seem to have a hard time separating the idea of marrying many people from patriarchy and sex with underage people. They are no more intrinsically connected than being gay and lack of commitment (i.e. not at all).
It sucks that some high profile wackos do regularly combine them, but the rest of us in adult egalitarian multiple-adult relationships are tired of being the horrible thing that it would be bad if gay marriage led to.
Hey Miriam,
By “natural numbers” I didn’t mean specifically the number 2, I meant to point out that there isn’t a logical connection between an argument based on orientation (e.g. people of the same sex or gender can marry) and one based on numbers (any number of people should marry). I do think there are many valid arguments for why more than two people should be able to marry, I just don’t think pointing to gay marriage is a useful one.
thanks for pointing out my lack of clarity!
Cory