From jazz at qnet.com  Fri May 14 22:27:49 2010
From: jazz at qnet.com (Bill Taylor)
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 20:27:49 -0700
Subject: [Goglog] You Tube video
Message-ID: <201005150327.o4F3Rww1017706@mail.zarquon.net>

Quite the anti-Bush polemic, set to a favorite tune

TANKS IN MY MEMORY - Bye, George
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpC3GPlO9_U

Bill Taylor

From Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com  Fri May 14 23:33:48 2010
From: Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com (John G. Lussmyer)
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 21:33:48 -0700
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
Message-ID: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>

I have a friend who's been fighting a court case for quite a while.  He 
just had an "interesting" experience.
Since he has no money, the court assigned him an attorney - who has 
basically refused to do any work on the case.  So he went to court to 
have a different attorney assigned.
Since he is currently doing an appeal, he was told to go to the judge of 
the court he is appealing to, so they can assign a new attorney.
That judge said no, he has to go back to the court he is coming from, as 
they assigned the original one, and they are the ones that have to 
assign the new one.
So he went back to the lower court, and that judge said no, the higher 
court must assign the attorney.
So, he spent all day in court - and got absolutely nowhere.  And that's 
just trying to get the court assigned attorney changed.

Can you file a suit against the court system for incompetence?

Makes you wonder about the competency of the court system.


From SteveG at swhi.net  Sat May 15 18:18:05 2010
From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald)
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 18:18:05 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
In-Reply-To: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
References: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
Message-ID: <8EC2266CF52F4B8C8D27FAD603B741EE@StevePC>

John G. Lussmyer says: 

> Since he has no money, the court assigned him an attorney - who has 
> basically refused to do any work on the case.  So he went to court to 
> have a different attorney assigned.
<etc> 
> Can you file a suit against the court system for incompetence?

Sort of.  If he could be pretty sure which judge was 
wrong, he could file a writ of mandamus in the higher 
court, against that court, for an order that it do its 
job.  

He'd probably need a lawyer to do it right, of course.  
I'm sure he can get one assigned.  

      - Steve G 

PS - And I suspect this isn't even happening in Illinois . . . . 


From rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com  Mon May 17 13:03:36 2010
From: rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com (Rich Rostrom)
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 13:03:36 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
In-Reply-To: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
References: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
Message-ID: <a06240802c8172de8f20f@[192.168.10.102]>

"John G. Lussmyer" <Cougar at casadelgato.com> wrote:

>I have a friend who's been fighting a court case for quite a while.  He
>just had an "interesting" experience.
>Since he has no money, the court assigned him an attorney...

What kind of case is this?

If he is a criminal defendant, he gets a
public defender.

If it is a civil case - is he the plaintiff
or defendant? It seems unlikely that a
plaintiff would be provided a court-assigned
attorney; it seems equally unlikely that
anyone would bother to sue someone who has no
money.

>Since he is currently doing an appeal, he was told to go to the judge of
>the court he is appealing to, so they can assign a new attorney.
>That judge said no, he has to go back to the court he is coming from, as
>they assigned the original one, and they are the ones that have to
>assign the new one.
>So he went back to the lower court, and that judge said no, the higher
>court must assign the attorney.

He should get the two judges to state their rulings in
writing. Then he should go to the chief judge of the
system.

>  Makes you wonder about the competency of the court system.

Not me. I already know that the American judicial system
is riddled with gross incompetence. Judges who don't know
the law, judges who are senile or alcoholic, judges who
who are petty tyrants, judges who are lazy.

The problem is that there is very little "quality control".

Outright corruption is watched for and prosecuted, but mere
incompetence is not dealt with. In Illinois, there is the
judicial retention ballot, which allows the voters to
remove a judge - but hardly any voters know anything about
individual judges.  Most reflexively vote yes for all
judges. No Cook County judges have failed retention in
decades, AFAIK.

For a truly grotesque situation, consider the case of
Tonya Craft, a Georgia kindergarten teacher who was charged
with child molestation (and acquitted on all charges).

The judge in the trial had been _her_ _ex-husband's_
_divorce_ _lawyer_.
-- 
| Rich Rostrom               rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com  |
|                                                          |
| Nous sommes dans un pot de chambre, et nous y serons     |
| emmerdes. -- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan   |

From SteveG at swhi.net  Tue May 18 06:45:41 2010
From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 06:45:41 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
In-Reply-To: <a06240802c8172de8f20f@[192.168.10.102]>
References: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
	<a06240802c8172de8f20f@[192.168.10.102]>
Message-ID: <E873C5F5A1E84918B47ABF114AB6CC33@StevePC>


Rich Rostrom says: 

> If he is a criminal defendant, he gets a
> public defender.

You get a court-appointed lawyer who is often, but not 
everywhere and not always, a member of a public defender's 
organization.  There is not necessarily in any given state 
and county a single publicly funded "law firm" full of 
lawyers just sitting around waiting for cases.  

> For a truly grotesque situation, consider the case of
> Tonya Craft, a Georgia kindergarten teacher who was charged
> with child molestation (and acquitted on all charges).
> 
> The judge in the trial had been _her_ _ex-husband's_
> _divorce_ _lawyer_.

Interesting, but which of your points does this demonstrate?  
That he was incompetent because surely he should have been 
able to get her convicted?  

    - Steve G 


From ignatz at dminet.com  Tue May 18 08:10:46 2010
From: ignatz at dminet.com (Dave Ihnat)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 08:10:46 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
In-Reply-To: <E873C5F5A1E84918B47ABF114AB6CC33@StevePC>
References: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
	<a06240802c8172de8f20f@[192.168.10.102]>
	<E873C5F5A1E84918B47ABF114AB6CC33@StevePC>
Message-ID: <20100518131046.GB1479@dminet.com>

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 06:45:41AM -0500, Steve Gruenwald wrote:
> You get a court-appointed lawyer who is often, but not everywhere
> and not always, a member of a public defender's organization.  There is
> not necessarily in any given state and county a single publicly funded
> "law firm" full of lawyers just sitting around waiting for cases.

And you get a remarkable range of competence--or lack thereof.

About 25 years ago, my brother got sucked into a much larger case in
Texas.  (Details irrelevant here; suffice to say he ran into a guy in an
ice house who wanted to use him in a criminal venture that involved not
just Texas, but drew in the Feds and CID, and he was oblivious to it.)

He got charged, and his public defender told him to "Just plead guilty.
You don't have any priors, so they'll go easy on you."  (He was stupid,
too--the larger issues involved would have put my brother away for a
looong time.)

When my brother wouldn't plead guilty, the public defender wouldn't talk
to him, or do anything on the case.  Literally.  Much hilarity ensued.
(FWIW, my brother eventually convinced everyone that he wasn't involved.)

Cheers,
--
	Dave Ihnat
	ignatz at dminet.com

From sam.paris at gmail.com  Tue May 18 08:27:11 2010
From: sam.paris at gmail.com (Sam Paris)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 08:27:11 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
In-Reply-To: <E873C5F5A1E84918B47ABF114AB6CC33@StevePC>
References: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>
	<a06240802c8172de8f20f@192.168.10.102>
	<E873C5F5A1E84918B47ABF114AB6CC33@StevePC>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimu5vXmQIms3-UsLAYH6TwwklpnLcHfcJ1HhSyu@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Steve Gruenwald <SteveG at swhi.net> wrote:

>
> > For a truly grotesque situation, consider the case of
> > Tonya Craft, a Georgia kindergarten teacher who was charged
> > with child molestation (and acquitted on all charges).
> >
> > The judge in the trial had been _her_ _ex-husband's_
> > _divorce_ _lawyer_.
>
> Interesting, but which of your points does this demonstrate?
> That he was incompetent because surely he should have been
> able to get her convicted?
>

If the bloggers who were following the case, such as this
guy,<http://williamlanderson.blogspot.com/2010/05/open-letter-to-tonya-craft.html>are
to be believed, the judge appears to have tried very hard to get her
convicted. Whether his failure shows incompetence on the part of the judge
and the prosecution, or brilliance and perspicacity on the parts of the
defense and jury, I don't know.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.zarquon.net/pipermail/goglog/attachments/20100518/da09b7b4/attachment.htm 

From Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com  Tue May 18 08:43:35 2010
From: Cougar at CasaDelGato.Com (John G. Lussmyer)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 06:43:35 -0700
Subject: [Goglog] Court fun
In-Reply-To: <20100518131046.GB1479@dminet.com>
References: <4BEE242C.3060601@CasaDelGato.Com>	<a06240802c8172de8f20f@[192.168.10.102]>	<E873C5F5A1E84918B47ABF114AB6CC33@StevePC>
	<20100518131046.GB1479@dminet.com>
Message-ID: <4BF29987.70500@CasaDelGato.Com>

On 5/18/2010 6:10 AM, Dave Ihnat wrote:
> Replies are directed to the list.
> If you wish to respond only to the sender, please edit the To: line!
> ____________________________________________________________
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 06:45:41AM -0500, Steve Gruenwald wrote:
>    
>> You get a court-appointed lawyer who is often, but not everywhere
>> and not always, a member of a public defender's organization.  There is
>> not necessarily in any given state and county a single publicly funded
>> "law firm" full of lawyers just sitting around waiting for cases.
>>      
> And you get a remarkable range of competence--or lack thereof.

My friend has noticed this.  Since he has to beg rides to/from the court 
(1 1/2 hours away from his house), he tends to have lots of extra time 
there.  So he's been sitting in on various cases being heard.
They generally go like this:
     general case info stated.
     Prosecutor calls for an extreme level of punishment.
     "Defense" attorney objects.
     Judge hands down the usual punishment.
This gives the defendant a good feeling about his court assigned defense 
attorney, as he obviously got the punishment reduced.
These "defense" attorneys are paid a flat $200 per case, so they 
generally do as little as possible.  Most of the people being defended 
don't know that they can (supposedly) ask the attorneys to do some work.

My friend (being a curmudgeon and not always a nice guy) didn't like the 
way he got in trouble and started actually researching and reading the 
laws and relevant cases.  He's been doing a LOT of research.  So he now 
has a 20+ page brief for his latest appeal.
$200 doesn't even cover the time it would take a lawyer to read the 
thing, much less understand it.


From rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com  Tue May 18 21:29:55 2010
From: rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com (Rich Rostrom)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 21:29:55 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
Message-ID: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>

In certain cultures, primarily Middle Eastern and northeast
African, infant girls are subjected to various forms of
female genital mutilation (FGM), ranging from removal of the
clitoris to "infibulation", where the vaginal opening is
stitched almost closed. See

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS - Committee on Bioethics
Policy Statement: Ritual Genital Cutting of Female Minors

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/125/5/1088

for the sickening details.

There are efforts to suppress these horrible practices.
US federal law prohibits any nonmedical procedure on the
genitals of a female minor.

But these efforts have encountered substantial resistance.
People from these cultures regard FGM as entirely customary
and desirable, and resent any interference by outsiders.

The above paper takes note of a position advocated by
some physicians. To wit:

   Physicians should not attempt to suppress FGM
   entirely, which provokes resistance and evasion
   (sending girls to the "home country" for FGM).

   Instead physicians should offer to perform a small
   "nick" which should do no harm, while satisfying the
   cultural imperative.

   In the US, this would require relaxing the law cited above.

The reaction to this suggestion has been varied. Some
commentators object that anything which legitimates FGM
will only cause it to persist,  and subverts the effort
to ban it entirely.

Others argue that it would be a major step in the right
direction.

Any thoughts?

-- 
| Rich Rostrom               rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com  |
|                                                          |
| Nous sommes dans un pot de chambre, et nous y serons     |
| emmerdes. -- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan   |

From toad at hauntedfrog.com  Tue May 18 22:38:38 2010
From: toad at hauntedfrog.com (Ann Totusek)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 22:38:38 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
Message-ID: <4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>

Rich Rostrom wrote:
> <snip>
>
> The reaction to this suggestion has been varied. Some
> commentators object that anything which legitimates FGM
> will only cause it to persist,  and subverts the effort
> to ban it entirely.
>
> Others argue that it would be a major step in the right
> direction.
>
> Any thoughts?
>   
My first thought is "Ouch!"

Realistically, if medical providers refuse to do ANYTHING, often the 
parents will take the girls to the third world country for a much more 
intrusive and damaging procedure, often in unsanitary conditions that 
cause far more problems than a tiny ritual nick would cause.  If it's 
possible to satisfy them with something that is not inherently extremely 
dangerous or disfiguring, it's probably worth it.  On the other hand, 
there has also been success with criminalization of the practice, 
resulting in removal of the children from the home.  The practice has 
been greatly lessened in the Somali and Sudanese immigrant communities 
using this tack if I understand the article correctly.

Me, I'm viscous.  I'd be all for forcible sterilization of both parents 
if their minor child was found to be circumcised or infibulated (not 
just "nicked"), plus removal of any children from the home.  
Unfortunately, that's mostly just to make me feel better because the 
practice infuriates me.

Ann Totusek

From mbcrui at gmail.com  Wed May 19 06:24:05 2010
From: mbcrui at gmail.com (Mary Cruickshank-Peed)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 07:24:05 -0400
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
Message-ID: <4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>

Ann Totusek wrote:
> Me, I'm viscous.  I'd be all for forcible sterilization of both parents 
> if their minor child was found to be circumcised 
Someone would have to come and take both my boys, then. 

Mary

-- 
--
Mary Cruickshank Peed


We are bits of stellar matter that got cold by accident, bits of a star gone wrong.
  - Sir Arthur Eddington


From mark at mark.hagerman.name  Wed May 19 06:26:13 2010
From: mark at mark.hagerman.name (Mark Hagerman)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 06:26:13 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
Message-ID: <56E68A1C-FC23-49B7-8EDE-D191BFF5F41C@mark.hagerman.name>

On 2010-May-18, at 10:38 PM, Ann Totusek wrote:

> <snip>
>
> Me, I'm viscous.  I'd be all for forcible sterilization of both  
> parents

How viscous? "Molasses in January", or just SAE 40 motor oil?

> if their minor child was found to be circumcised or infibulated (not
> just "nicked"), plus removal of any children from the home.

I'd make it a capital offense.

Also, remember that one of the major drivers of this behavior is
that brides who haven't had this "procedure" are often treated
badly by their husbands. Some judicious changes to divorce
law might do some good. Or just provide free handguns to
women. (It's amazing how tolerant a man can become, when
his life is at stake.)

Mark "the bloody" Hagerman

From mark at mark.hagerman.name  Wed May 19 06:47:01 2010
From: mark at mark.hagerman.name (Mark Hagerman)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 06:47:01 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com> <4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>

On 2010-May-19, at 6:24 AM, Mary Cruickshank-Peed wrote:

> Someone would have to come and take both my boys, then.

No, I don't think so. True circumcision, as practiced by various
cultures around the world, appears to be harmless. Possibly,
it's even beneficial; there seem to be some diseases which are
associated with NOT being circumcised.

FGM, often called "female circumcision", is a different matter.
It has no discernible benefits; indeed, it often (always?) creates
long term problems for the victim.

Mark H

From toad at hauntedfrog.com  Wed May 19 09:06:15 2010
From: toad at hauntedfrog.com (Ann Totusek)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 09:06:15 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
	<4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4BF3F057.6010007@hauntedfrog.com>

Mary Cruickshank-Peed wrote:
> Replies are directed to the list.
> If you wish to respond only to the sender, please edit the To: line!
> ____________________________________________________________
> Ann Totusek wrote:
>   
>> Me, I'm viscous.  I'd be all for forcible sterilization of both parents 
>> if their minor child was found to be circumcised 
>>     
> Someone would have to come and take both my boys, then. 
>
> Mary
>
>   
Sorry- more specifically, a minor FEMALE child.

Ann Totusek

From mbcrui at gmail.com  Wed May 19 11:05:50 2010
From: mbcrui at gmail.com (Mary Cruickshank-Peed)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 12:05:50 -0400
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision"
In-Reply-To: <02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
	<4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
	<02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>
Message-ID: <4BF40C5E.9090400@gmail.com>

Mark Hagerman wrote:
>> Someone would have to come and take both my boys, then.
>>     
>
> No, I don't think so. True circumcision, as practiced by various
> cultures around the world, appears to be harmless. Possibly,
> it's even beneficial; there seem to be some diseases which are
> associated with NOT being circumcised.
>   
And that's not what Ann said.  She said "
"
> I'd be all for forcible sterilization of both parents
> if their minor child was found to be circumcised or infibulated (not 
> just "nicked"), plus removal of any children from the home.  "

Sorry, Mark, but my boys ARE minor children.  "Political correctness" can go just so far, 
if you mean FGM you should say "girls" or "female".



-- 
--
Mary Cruickshank Peed


We are bits of stellar matter that got cold by accident, bits of a star gone wrong.
  - Sir Arthur Eddington


From mark at mark.hagerman.name  Wed May 19 13:15:14 2010
From: mark at mark.hagerman.name (mark at mark.hagerman.name)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 12:15:14 -0600
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision"
In-Reply-To: <4BF40C5E.9090400@gmail.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com> <4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
	<02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>
	<4BF40C5E.9090400@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3f952b7dee88deed13e2b8fcda1b53cd.squirrel@mark.hagerman.name>

> if you mean FGM you should say "girls" or "female".

I tend to agree, but I'm one of the few who aspire to what E. E. Smith
called "precisionist" use of language.

On the other hand, I knew Ann meant FGM, though she didn't phrase her
comment that way.

Mark "English doesn't use a CFG" Hagerman


From steveg at swhi.net  Wed May 19 14:09:27 2010
From: steveg at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 14:09:27 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
Message-ID: <53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>


I agree with all the responses so far, particularly Ann's
analysis.  Speaking as a lawyer and amateur ethicist it's
tempting to say no compromise with this barbaric (yes,
religious and cultural but also barbaric) procedure is
acceptable; but the real bottom line is what approach will
yield better results for the victims (here and elsewhere),
both short- and long-term.

I would want to see good evidence as to what approach is
*really* likely to work, not based entirely on theorizing,
but if it does appear supportable that the "ritual nick" is
(a) harmless and (b) in fact likely to be accepted by
significant numbers, so as to prevent a significant number
of girls from being subjected to more drastic mutilation,
whether here or overseas, then I'd say go for it - allow
parents who do it to escape prosecution in those
circumstances in which it does seem it was either that or
the more serious offense.

I would definitely treat it strictly as a stop-gap and
temporary measure, however.  At the same time, people who
insist on the traditional procedure, including shipping
their kids overseas, must be subject to prosecution to the
full extent of the law and deprivation of parental rights.
The *hope* would be that at least within this country, and
maybe more broadly, over time these things would happen as
a result:

a.  People recognize that the traditional procedure is
contrary to modern norms of acceptable behavior - not only
"someone else's" norms;

b.  People start to realize that if the symbolic,
ritualistic "nick" is acceptable, maybe the original
procedure was not really a matter of sound theological or
other doctrine;

c.  People start questioning things in general.

It could happen.  It has happened, gradually, in other areas.
Eventually the "ritual nick" would also become unacceptable
and could again be treated as battery and child abuse.

       - Steve G



From steveg at swhi.net  Wed May 19 14:12:26 2010
From: steveg at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 14:12:26 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>
Message-ID: <22676.144.183.224.2.1274296346.squirrel@www.swhi.net>

I wrote:

> but if it does appear supportable that the "ritual nick" is
> (a) harmless

- by which I mean, of course, that it is so limited that it
is *medically* harmless.  I doubt that it would ever be
clearly *psychologically* harmless, or of course socially.

    - Steve G



From mbcrui at gmail.com  Wed May 19 16:03:42 2010
From: mbcrui at gmail.com (Mary Cruickshank-Peed)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 17:03:42 -0400
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision"
In-Reply-To: <3f952b7dee88deed13e2b8fcda1b53cd.squirrel@mark.hagerman.name>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
	<4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>	<02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>	<4BF40C5E.9090400@gmail.com>
	<3f952b7dee88deed13e2b8fcda1b53cd.squirrel@mark.hagerman.name>
Message-ID: <4BF4522E.2040301@gmail.com>

mark at mark.hagerman.name wrote:
>
> I tend to agree, but I'm one of the few who aspire to what E. E. Smith
> called "precisionist" use of language.
>   
It's not totally outside the realm... when we were researching whether 
to have the boys circumcised or not, I found a very passionate minority 
who argued against it-- argued that it reduces sensitivity, is 
unnecessary surgery, is painful and can be a source of infection.  OTOH, 
it also reduces female cervical cancer rates, makes the penis easier to 
clean, etc... we weren't passionately convinced either way, but decided 
to circumcise them, cancer being the winning argument.  (And having 
dealt with a 3 year old uncircumcised male with a poop diaper since 
then, the "easier to clean" bit is also pretty important.)


Mary



-- 
--
Mary Cruickshank Peed


We are bits of stellar matter that got cold by accident, bits of a star gone wrong.
  - Sir Arthur Eddington


From ignatz at dminet.com  Wed May 19 17:05:06 2010
From: ignatz at dminet.com (Dave Ihnat)
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 17:05:06 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision"
In-Reply-To: <4BF4522E.2040301@gmail.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com> <4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>
	<02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>
	<4BF40C5E.9090400@gmail.com>
	<3f952b7dee88deed13e2b8fcda1b53cd.squirrel@mark.hagerman.name>
	<4BF4522E.2040301@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20100519220506.GB19719@dminet.com>

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 05:03:42PM -0400, Mary Cruickshank-Peed wrote:
> It's not totally outside the realm... when we were researching whether 
> to have the boys circumcised or not, I found a very passionate minority 
> who argued against it-- argued that ...

At the risk of embarassing Sean, Pattie and I debated this 20 years ago.
Everything that seemed to argue for it came down to *cleanliness*.
Arguing against it--my lifelong feeling of annoyance-verging-on-outrage
at having been operated on without any input in the matter.

> And having dealt with a 3 year old uncircumcised male with a poop
> diaper since then, the "easier to clean" bit is also pretty important.

We've stressed cleanliness since Sean was a baby.  No matter what else
may happen, I'm pretty darn certain he'll never be one of those guys
that has to be "trained" when it comes to staying clean.  (And, of
course, if he ever feels the need to be circumcised, well, that can be
arranged...)

Cheers,
--
	Dave Ihnat
	ignatz at dminet.com

From mbcrui at gmail.com  Thu May 20 12:48:19 2010
From: mbcrui at gmail.com (Mary Cruickshank-Peed)
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 13:48:19 -0400
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision"
In-Reply-To: <20100519220506.GB19719@dminet.com>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>	<4BF35D3E.5070402@hauntedfrog.com>
	<4BF3CA55.4030202@gmail.com>	<02627EAC-29A8-4A2C-A7D5-7C2CB21890C1@mark.hagerman.name>	<4BF40C5E.9090400@gmail.com>	<3f952b7dee88deed13e2b8fcda1b53cd.squirrel@mark.hagerman.name>	<4BF4522E.2040301@gmail.com>
	<20100519220506.GB19719@dminet.com>
Message-ID: <4BF575E3.8070901@gmail.com>

Dave Ihnat wrote:
>> It's not totally outside the realm... when we were researching whether 
>> to have the boys circumcised or not, I found a very passionate minority 
>> who argued against it-- argued that ...
>>     
>
> At the risk of embarassing Sean, Pattie and I debated this 20 years ago.
> Everything that seemed to argue for it came down to *cleanliness*.
> Arguing against it--my lifelong feeling of annoyance-verging-on-outrage
> at having been operated on without any input in the matter.
>   
Sean's a few years older than Mike.  Right around the time we found out 
we were having a boy, the research on cervical cancer rates and 
circumcision came out, which was probably the strongest argument for 
us.  But, as I said, having dealt with an uncircumcised diaper in the 
little boy I take care of, the cleanliness would have been an issue, 
even tho I didn't realize it then :)

Mary



-- 
--
Mary Cruickshank Peed


We are bits of stellar matter that got cold by accident, bits of a star gone wrong.
  - Sir Arthur Eddington


From rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com  Sat May 29 13:15:34 2010
From: rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com (Rich Rostrom)
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 13:15:34 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>
Message-ID: <a06240801c82703255440@[192.168.10.102]>

Steve G wrote:

>...I would want to see good evidence as to what approach is
>*really* likely to work, not based entirely on theorizing,
>but if it does appear supportable that the "ritual nick" is
>(a) harmless and (b) in fact likely to be accepted by
>significant numbers, so as to prevent a significant number
>of girls from being subjected to more drastic mutilation,
>whether here or overseas, then I'd say go for it - allow
>parents who do it to escape prosecution in those
>circumstances in which it does seem it was either that or
>the more serious offense...

I've done some further research, and
can add some facts.

FGM is not "Islamic" - there is nothing in the Koran
or the Hadiths about it, except one Hadith which urges
female "circumcisers" to be very gentle and moderate
(or something like that). Many Islamic religious schoiars
have spoken out against it. (Or have been induced to do
so by pressure from feminists and western humanitarians.)
Many Moslem countries have even prohibited FGM. However,
there does not appear to be much effort to enforce these
laws, due to the misogyny and male dominance normal in
these countries.

It is primarily found in NE Africa, with outliers in
West Africa (on the southern edge of the Sahara) and
in parts of SW Asia.

It is completely unknown (supposedly) in some Moslem
societies - it depends to a degree on which school of
Islamic law is prevalent. (Unknown in Turkey, and in Iran
except among Kurds. Supposedly unknown in Morocco and
Algeria, in Bangladesh. Minority practice in Yemen, and
probably in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Prohibited
in Lebanon.

Infibulation is east African, especially Somali.

Nicking or pricking is common in SE Asia (i.e. Indonesia,
the most populous Moslem country.

Clitorectomy is very common in Egypt. The idea of
clitorectomy as a purifying act is so strong that many
young women volunteer for it. It is usually performed by
doctors, including female doctors. This "medicalization"
is said to have perpetuated the practice.

That effect is cited against the AAP's suggested
compromise. I think this indicates that "one size does
_not_ fit all" - the same policy could have good results
with one cultural group, and bad results with another.

I ran across a Web site which appeared to claim health
benefits from clitorectomy - apparently by analogy to
male circumcision.

Clitorectomy is/was also practiced among non-Moslems in
east Africa further south. It was suppressed in Kenya in
part by missionary influence. And supposedly revived in the
1950s by Kikuyu nationalists as a defiance of "white
cultural imperialism".
-- 
| Rich Rostrom               rrostrom.21stcentury at rcn.com  |
|                                                          |
| Nous sommes dans un pot de chambre, et nous y serons     |
| emmerdes. -- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan   |

From ben at bl.com  Sat May 29 15:14:32 2010
From: ben at bl.com (Ben Liberman)
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 15:14:32 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] "Crash Course" the movie about economy
In-Reply-To: <a06240801c82703255440@[192.168.10.102]>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]>
	<53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>
	<a06240801c82703255440@[192.168.10.102]>
Message-ID: <p06240801c82725a345aa@[10.19.35.98]>


http://www.chrismartenson.com/

I am enjoying the movie (broken into 20 parts).

Anyone know if this mans work is respected or is he just another 
fear/conspiracy monger?

-- 
------------------------------
  ben at BL.COM      Ben Liberman
------------------------------

From SteveG at swhi.net  Sat May 29 16:27:57 2010
From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald)
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 16:27:57 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] Female "circumcision": what about the "nick"?
In-Reply-To: <a06240801c82703255440@[192.168.10.102]>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]><53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net>
	<a06240801c82703255440@[192.168.10.102]>
Message-ID: <9E08C24D7CC2422BB301E9DEE34FAA97@StevePC>


Rich Rostrom provides various details along the lines of: 

> FGM is not "Islamic" - there is nothing in the Koran
> or the Hadiths about it

> It is primarily found in NE Africa, with outliers in
> West Africa 

Yes; did someone imply that it was a part of Islam?  I have 
long heard of it as an *African* tradition, although AFAIK 
limited to what are now Muslim cultures in that area.  I may 
or may not have specifically heard anything to support this, 
but I always associated it with the Berbers, Tuaregs, and/or 
other ethnic groups native to north-central Africa.  I 
always assumed it was a tradition that grew out of the 
grafting of Muslim ideas of chastity onto pre-Islamic 
African ideas of sexual subjugation of women, plus the 
traditional mistrust of both cultures toward female 
sexuality.  I suspect it was practiced before Islam came in, 
although with less rationalization and possibly less general 
public approval.  

I would be very surprised if the idea that it has health 
benefits is anything but a late rationalization.  The idea 
may have started from the premise that - in a particular 
society - young women who don't enjoy sex, and will only 
engage in it as required by marriage, are likely to lead 
healthier lives.  By the same reasoning, sterilization of 
the unfit (by whatever standard describes "unfit") promotes 
public health.  

        - Steve G 


From SteveG at swhi.net  Sat May 29 16:42:29 2010
From: SteveG at swhi.net (Steve Gruenwald)
Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 16:42:29 -0500
Subject: [Goglog] "Crash Course" the movie about economy
In-Reply-To: <p06240801c82725a345aa@[10.19.35.98]>
References: <a06240804c818f4440155@[192.168.10.102]><53615.144.183.224.2.1274296167.squirrel@www.swhi.net><a06240801c82703255440@[192.168.10.102]>
	<p06240801c82725a345aa@[10.19.35.98]>
Message-ID: <82D3CF344FD54248A76C7B66D5441169@StevePC>


Ben Liberman says: 

> Anyone know if this mans work is respected or is he just another 
> fear/conspiracy monger?

I hadn't heard of him.  I tend to mistrust people who are 
thoroughly trained in hard sciences - in his case 
biochemistry and specifically neurotoxicology -  and then 
decide relatively late in life that they really understand, 
better than most people, complex social structures such as 
the economy; but then again, I tend to distrust those who 
were trained in economics and reach the same conclusion.  

On a quick search I see nothing but positive words about him, 
but FWIW, none of the comments seem to be by economists.  

Wikipedia says he's a neo-malthusian, but I'm not sure what 
specifically is meant by that in any given case.  It may not 
be a bad label to have.  Personally I've long thought the 
core tenets of Malthusian thinking no longer get as much 
serious attention as they still deserve.  

    - Steve G