We read an article about ambiguity in sexual consent. This is not about sex.
I went to the ER. My body, nonconsensually, decided that it wanted to throw up. A lot. About 6 times, before I tried to sleep, then awoke to throw up again. I wanted to make class, that wasnt happening.
The Health Center decided that I was dehydrated, and due to my gastrectomy, it would be very hard for me to rehydrate myself. IV Rehydration was the suggestion.
I was apparently very dehydrated, because it took SIX IV sticks for them to decide that they couldnt get it. They would have stopped earlier, but I asked them to try again so I wouldnt have to face the ER. Still didnt work. (Two of the catheters kinked, one blew, the other two didnt go into the vein.
Off to the ER. IV stick the first time, two liters of saline, blood tests (normal!), and im out the door. with an estimate from the Hospital for 1750. Not including the labs (which I know are expensive) and the doctor (who saw me for 5 minutes).
Im back at home, attempting to eat something. Ive kept down fluids, so I should be fine.
And, ya know how messed up my mind is? I got out of the Health center, and debated going to class before the ER. Im sure my classmates thank me that I didnt arrive.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Mariology
So, yes, its from a while back, but I am procrastinating on my thesis.
One often forgets how culture impacts their beliefs. The Virgin de Guadalupe is so prevalent in Texas that it seems common place. A visit to the Basilica in Mexico City was amazing. but, apparations have appeared elsewhere.
Since my procrastination method tonight involved a Wikipedia Search, here are some links for you.
Our Lady of Međugorje Vision and 10 secrets given to individuals.
Our Lady of Akita Cured a nun of her deafness.
Our Lady of Zeitoun As a student of technology, this one fascinates me because there is photographic evidence, as seen Here.
One often forgets how culture impacts their beliefs. The Virgin de Guadalupe is so prevalent in Texas that it seems common place. A visit to the Basilica in Mexico City was amazing. but, apparations have appeared elsewhere.
Since my procrastination method tonight involved a Wikipedia Search, here are some links for you.
Our Lady of Međugorje Vision and 10 secrets given to individuals.
Our Lady of Akita Cured a nun of her deafness.
Our Lady of Zeitoun As a student of technology, this one fascinates me because there is photographic evidence, as seen Here.
Transgender
Two posts in a day. Procrastination much?
He’s Pregnant. You’re Speechless.
I hate it.
I really hate the majority of articles that I read about transgender and transsexual individuals. Perhaps I am overly sensitive. Perhaps I listen to the rants of my transgender and genderqueer friends.
but, WHO THE HELL F-ING CARES?
Seriously! the state of one's body is really only important to that person, and whomever that person chooses to share that information with. Just because someone is a "man who is pregnant" doesnt mean that the "public" should comment on their body. Im sick of reading "oh, thats really a woman." NO, it is not.
Gender is such a socially constructed concept. and, the vast majority of us have been socially developed into a gender that happens to match the squishy bits that we have. It doesnt have to be like that. Someone is no less of a man because he has a vagina, and someone is not less of a woman because she happens to have a penis. Gender is social, gender is how someone appears.
*you* as the general public do not get to comment on the state of someone elses body. You can comment on your own (though, see the previous Fat Talk Post about how we talk to our bodies.) You might even be able to comment on a partners. But, the random stranger on the street, no matter how "weird" or "off the wall" or "whatever non stereotypical thing they have," you dont get to comment.
Accept people as they are, let individuals self identify, stretch your imagination, and let it go.
He’s Pregnant. You’re Speechless.
I hate it.
I really hate the majority of articles that I read about transgender and transsexual individuals. Perhaps I am overly sensitive. Perhaps I listen to the rants of my transgender and genderqueer friends.
but, WHO THE HELL F-ING CARES?
Seriously! the state of one's body is really only important to that person, and whomever that person chooses to share that information with. Just because someone is a "man who is pregnant" doesnt mean that the "public" should comment on their body. Im sick of reading "oh, thats really a woman." NO, it is not.
Gender is such a socially constructed concept. and, the vast majority of us have been socially developed into a gender that happens to match the squishy bits that we have. It doesnt have to be like that. Someone is no less of a man because he has a vagina, and someone is not less of a woman because she happens to have a penis. Gender is social, gender is how someone appears.
*you* as the general public do not get to comment on the state of someone elses body. You can comment on your own (though, see the previous Fat Talk Post about how we talk to our bodies.) You might even be able to comment on a partners. But, the random stranger on the street, no matter how "weird" or "off the wall" or "whatever non stereotypical thing they have," you dont get to comment.
Accept people as they are, let individuals self identify, stretch your imagination, and let it go.
Pre-Consent
The comments in my Consent post were interesting, thank you for sharing.
I agree with Issa, and I think this is more of my mode of consent. She used the concept of "pre-consent," in that there is a discussion in advance, with the parties giving advanced permission for whatever they want to do. I think this is an excellent compromise between the models of consent. It combined elements of the Antioch model, in which explicit permission is given, while not really discussing everything as it happens. There is the body language model, because good sex is about reading one's partner(s) during the act. and, there is verbal confirmation, that everything will be fine.
I would add that any person is able to say no or stop or change during the act(s).
As a critique of the Antioch model, sex puts many people into an altered state of reality. Things that would seem absurd and distasteful might seem exciting and tantalizing during the act. The "swept away in the moment" mentality may come into play. By requiring conformation during the act, rather than before the act, one may be able to actually do more than the person initially wanted.
I also enjoy the freedom of the pre-consent model. Items are discussed in advanced, rules are laid out to ensure safety, expectations can be discussed, and the encounter can be more enjoyable.
I agree with Issa, and I think this is more of my mode of consent. She used the concept of "pre-consent," in that there is a discussion in advance, with the parties giving advanced permission for whatever they want to do. I think this is an excellent compromise between the models of consent. It combined elements of the Antioch model, in which explicit permission is given, while not really discussing everything as it happens. There is the body language model, because good sex is about reading one's partner(s) during the act. and, there is verbal confirmation, that everything will be fine.
I would add that any person is able to say no or stop or change during the act(s).
As a critique of the Antioch model, sex puts many people into an altered state of reality. Things that would seem absurd and distasteful might seem exciting and tantalizing during the act. The "swept away in the moment" mentality may come into play. By requiring conformation during the act, rather than before the act, one may be able to actually do more than the person initially wanted.
I also enjoy the freedom of the pre-consent model. Items are discussed in advanced, rules are laid out to ensure safety, expectations can be discussed, and the encounter can be more enjoyable.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Consent
Wow, a blog about class! :-)
Last week, my professor asked us to answer how we knew the other person was consenting to sex. And ive been pondering this now ever since.
Ive realized that 1) I am a very self centered person, most of the thoughts that go through my head are about me, and how others interaction with me. And 2) I know when I am consenting, thus other should know when they are consenting, and say something if it is not going as they planned.
But, I also tend to place a lot of responsibility onto other people. If you dont like something? Say something. Dont like your food at a restaurant? Send it back! Want your partner to do something for you? Ask! Dont like how the sexual encounter is going? Say something. People are not mind readers!
We seem to have this unspoken expectation that "others" should know what we want. The Usual Error is that we think other people should think like us. (Actually, my mom pointed out that Ive always had this viewpoint, even as a very small child.) The issue is that some take the idea that because our partners *do not* read our minds, that something is doomed in that relationship or sexual encounter.
To get back to consent, I think its an internal process, rather than one that everyone has to buy into equally and all times. Instead of accepting the idea of ambiguity, one decides what they are willing to do, and/or what is needed for one to enjoy that act. For example, I feel perfectly comfortable saying "While I wouldnt ask for it, X, Y and Z are things that I would be okay with if my partner asked for them." But, ive done enough thinking about my self to know that. I also trust that my partner has gone though a similar thought process, and would not be going along with however the encounter is going if they were not comfortable with the situation.
Sex is about communicating with the people involved for a mutually agreeable encounter. If one partner doesnt want it, its not any fun, however, I do think that it is up to the partner that does not want it to make it clear.
(This does not apply in the instance of coercion, in any of its many forms.)
Last week, my professor asked us to answer how we knew the other person was consenting to sex. And ive been pondering this now ever since.
Ive realized that 1) I am a very self centered person, most of the thoughts that go through my head are about me, and how others interaction with me. And 2) I know when I am consenting, thus other should know when they are consenting, and say something if it is not going as they planned.
But, I also tend to place a lot of responsibility onto other people. If you dont like something? Say something. Dont like your food at a restaurant? Send it back! Want your partner to do something for you? Ask! Dont like how the sexual encounter is going? Say something. People are not mind readers!
We seem to have this unspoken expectation that "others" should know what we want. The Usual Error is that we think other people should think like us. (Actually, my mom pointed out that Ive always had this viewpoint, even as a very small child.) The issue is that some take the idea that because our partners *do not* read our minds, that something is doomed in that relationship or sexual encounter.
To get back to consent, I think its an internal process, rather than one that everyone has to buy into equally and all times. Instead of accepting the idea of ambiguity, one decides what they are willing to do, and/or what is needed for one to enjoy that act. For example, I feel perfectly comfortable saying "While I wouldnt ask for it, X, Y and Z are things that I would be okay with if my partner asked for them." But, ive done enough thinking about my self to know that. I also trust that my partner has gone though a similar thought process, and would not be going along with however the encounter is going if they were not comfortable with the situation.
Sex is about communicating with the people involved for a mutually agreeable encounter. If one partner doesnt want it, its not any fun, however, I do think that it is up to the partner that does not want it to make it clear.
(This does not apply in the instance of coercion, in any of its many forms.)
Monday, October 13, 2008
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Comic
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2008/10/07/fat-monologue/
BTW, if you dont read amptoons, it is an awesome comic and blog.
BTW, if you dont read amptoons, it is an awesome comic and blog.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Quotes
WTF? We had this information in 1968! Its been 40 years, and the stigma against obese people, and fat phobia, and fat hysteria has all gotten progressively worse! What else do we need to do?
(Paragraph from a draft of my thesis).
The obesity stigma combins these assumptions, and places the blame of the stigma solely on the obese person. “As tracing indigence to poverty, for all its tautology, implies the moral responsibility of the poor for their own misfortune, so does tracing obesity to indulgence imply the depravity of the overweight person” (Cahnman 1968:287). This “depravity” leads to the moral outrage against obesity, in that obese individual are stigmatized by the society, which leads to the internalization of the obese label, and the behavior accordingly changes. As Cahnman states later in his paper, “The obese [individual] is thus doubly and trebly disadvantaged: (1) because he is discriminated against, (2) because he is made to understand that he deserves it, and (3) because he comes to accept his treatment as just” (294).
“The interpersonal factor, which is the truly sociogenic factor and which in its extreme manifestation stamps obesity with the stigma of moral turpitude, would seem to be of considerable, perhaps decisive, impact…The stigma cannot be removed except by moral treatment whose primary objective is to consider the patient as a potentially normal human being who is as capable of the healthy exercise of all his faculties as anybody else” (Cahnman 1968:298).
(Quote Citation: Cahnman, Werner J. 1968. “The Stigma of Obesity.” The Sociological Quarterly 9(3):283-299.)
(Paragraph from a draft of my thesis).
The obesity stigma combins these assumptions, and places the blame of the stigma solely on the obese person. “As tracing indigence to poverty, for all its tautology, implies the moral responsibility of the poor for their own misfortune, so does tracing obesity to indulgence imply the depravity of the overweight person” (Cahnman 1968:287). This “depravity” leads to the moral outrage against obesity, in that obese individual are stigmatized by the society, which leads to the internalization of the obese label, and the behavior accordingly changes. As Cahnman states later in his paper, “The obese [individual] is thus doubly and trebly disadvantaged: (1) because he is discriminated against, (2) because he is made to understand that he deserves it, and (3) because he comes to accept his treatment as just” (294).
“The interpersonal factor, which is the truly sociogenic factor and which in its extreme manifestation stamps obesity with the stigma of moral turpitude, would seem to be of considerable, perhaps decisive, impact…The stigma cannot be removed except by moral treatment whose primary objective is to consider the patient as a potentially normal human being who is as capable of the healthy exercise of all his faculties as anybody else” (Cahnman 1968:298).
(Quote Citation: Cahnman, Werner J. 1968. “The Stigma of Obesity.” The Sociological Quarterly 9(3):283-299.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
