View original post
View original post1. Should FDA be more like Efsa or vice versa?
View original postThat's really kind of tricky in the context you put it because you phrased it as more pro-industry or more scientific. Neither is a shining example of science or capitalism. The EU is a new gov't that lacks patriotic approval so it has to cultivate an image of rational consensus based decisions as do its departments if they want to continue to exist or expand. That doesn't make that image very true. There are whole websites devoted to showing bad science or industry influence on the EFSA and FDA alike. Both need more science, and should never be pro or anti industry.
Sure, the people at Efsa have been criticised over their interpretations of science. GMO comes to mind, at the very least. Writing this, I was thinking only about the NDA panel that deals with health claims (one of my professors is a member, coincidentally..)
View original post
View original post2. Why are women terrorists viewed as more abominable than the male ones?
View original postI'm not sure they are. If so then its probably just the surprise value, we can all rationally acknowledge that women can be as violent and cruel as men but for the most part men, and even most women I think, are taken by surprise when this is proven thus making it seem especially horrible. Alternatively it could be that it's just a bell curve and cut off, women are so discouraged from violence that only the real crazies break the prohibition and thus we only see the real psychos.
I read that, historically, women revolutionaries have more readily turned to violent tactics - since they've always been undervalued by society, alienating themselves further is not such a big deal. Don't know about that.
View original post
View original post3. Will the queer culture wither out and die as some sort of an interphase between homophobia and society's full acceptance?
View original postNo clue. We're essentially talking about sexual preference as ternary when we say gay/bi/straight but that's just made up nonsense. There's a whole spectrum of sexual preferences, some genetic, some background, some a mix. Some healthy, some not unhealthy, and some undeniably unhealthy. The problem lies in that our culture expects one not hide one's partner and that it should be singular, that they should be a major and public part of your life. That makes same-sex or interracial relationships very visible and why they had to be the first ones dealt with, they couldn't be kept secret without having your whole life disrupted whereas a fetish for fecalphelia or BDSM is something someone can keep out of their public life. Most people preferences, perversions, YMMV are between them, their partner, an all-knowing all-loving God, and the NSA of course.
View original postI would speculate that gay culture is probably on its way into dull normality and thus likely to be as noteworthy as 'golf culture' or 'wine culture' both form acceptance and from simply being eclipsed by various other sexual sub-cultures popping up more publicly. Twenty years ago it was still a fairly big deal from someone to marry/date/breed with someone of a difference race, now it gets as much note as marrying someone of a different hair color. There is no 'interracial culture', so its quite probable in a generation or two the same will apply to gay culture and we'll all be talking about how whether or not one day we'll be accepting of polygamy or BDSM, "Will people ever learn to just accept Johnny Smith and his need to wear a leather mask and not wear a shirt to work? Why must people stare at Johnny's nipple piercings and why must they make a big deal when his wife comes in every day at 2:30 to administer his spanking and frown. Mr. and Mistress Smith are perfectly good people and every bit as good of parents as Todd and Bruce are to their son!" I've no idea if that's funny or prophetic or both.
I agree with you about the dull normality. In the end, that's probably what everybody wants. Although there is a certain allure to the hidden subculture. I once read that during Paris air raids in WW II when people hid in dark metro tunnels for safety, it was a golden opportunity for gay men, you could "accidentally" bump into someone, if they got mad you could just say it was dark, you couldn't see.. but perhaps they didn't get mad. That story makes me smile.
Three questions that have nothing to do with each other
- 14/10/2013 01:41:12 AM
409 Views
3 unrelated answers
- 14/10/2013 05:20:04 AM
260 Views
Re: 3 unrelated answers
- 14/10/2013 11:45:28 AM
249 Views