Calling Google Scholar...

Google's good, but not perfect. The number of people linking to sites with egregious nonsense about my personal details written by agenda-driven Kooks has boosted their credibility.

No matter.

A bigger problem is that Google Scholar isn't tracking my work very well. Only 60% of my papers are listed. So here's a definitive list that their webcrawlers should understand. With luck.

 Using Meta-Genetic Algorithms to tune parameters of Genetic Algorithms to fi nd lowest energy Molecular Conformers
ZE Brain, MA Addicoat  
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems

Simulation Case Study - ^x_tUML in agile development
A Vincent, AE Brain  
Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific Simulation and Training Conference SIMTECT 2004

Optimization of a genetic algorithm for searching molecular conformer space
ZE Brain, MA Addicoat
The Journal of chemical physics 135 (17), 174106-174106-10

Optimization of a Genetic Algorithm for the Functionalization of Fullerenes
MA Addicoat, AJ Page, ZE Brain, L Flack, K Morokuma, S Irle
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 8 (5), 1841-1851

Using a Meta-GA for parametric optimization of simple GAs in the computational chemistry domain
MA Addicoat, ZE Brain
Proceedings of the 12th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation

Meta-Genetic Algorithms, Molecules, and Supercomputers
MA Addicoat, ZE Brain
Poster, SC10 Conference on High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis

EFFICIENCY OF AN OPTIMIZED EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHM FOR LOCATING MINIMUM ENERGY CONFORMERS
MA Addicoat ZE Brain
Proceedings Ninth Triennial Congress of the WORLD ASSOCIATION OF THEORETICAL AND COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTS WATOC 2011

 Please go fetch, there's a good robot. 

Effect of hormone replacement therapy on cardiovascular events in recently postmenopausal women: randomised trial | BMJ

Effect of hormone replacement therapy on cardiovascular events in recently postmenopausal women: randomised trial Schierbeck et al BMJ 2012;345:e6409

Conclusions After 10 years of randomised treatment, women receiving hormone replacement therapy early after menopause had a significantly reduced risk of mortality, heart failure, or myocardial infarction, without any apparent increase in risk of cancer, venous thromboembolism, or stroke.

They used bio-identicals you see, not cheaper, artificial estrogen-like compounds as with other studies.

"I would rather have a live daughter than a dead son."

Mirrored from:

UnCommon Sense: "I would rather have a live daughter than a dead son."

Cemeteries can be pretty bleak places, but when it is on the outskirts of a faceless Dutch suburb under a grey January sky, it feel about as about as desolate as you can possibly get. When you are visiting the grave of a child who killed herself in her early teens, the feeling of despair, especially when accompanied by her mother, gives way to an urge to weep bitterly. It is an urge which I am unable to resist as I do the maths subtracting the date of death from the day she was born. It is one thing to be told Juliaantje* was only 14, but to see it carved in marble was too much to bear. Holding her photograph her mother sobs uncontrollably as I hug her while she in turn hugs a precious photograph.

The picture is of a sunny, smiling, apparently bubbly teenager, with long hair and a grey T-shirt. There is nothing in the picture to suggest that she was transgender, but that is the reason she took her life.

When she was 12 her mother tried to have her put onto hormone blockers to delay puberty. She didn’t want to develop body hair, a deep voice or have wet dreams. She had already self-harmed when young, trying to slice her penis off with a pair of scissors. However, in what was clearly a borderline decision, the psychologists decided to that she should not be given these drugs. She should be given counselling instead. In despair her mother, a single parent, tried to take her to the United States, but the air fare and the £200 a month cost of these drugs was way beyond her means. Her father had no money either and both sets of grandparents didn’t want to know.

Two years later the talking therapy failed. Juliaantje took a massive overdose and died, having self-harmed, abused alcohol and other substances for more than a year before that.

“She was an intelligent and lively girl.” Her mother tells me through the tears and a large glass of Genever in a nearby café, probably the only thing that can deaden the pain of losing her only child. “She had a great future ahead of her, she could have done anything, been a doctor, a lawyer her teachers said…” Her voice breaks. Her happy nature had disappeared when male puberty really hit. “Her voice broke and she started to get facial hair and hair on her chest. She wore make up and turtle-neck jumpers to hide it all, but she simply couldn’t deal with the way her body was developing…”

Did she blame the psychiatrists? No. Psychiatry is never going to be an exact science, there will always be people who don’t fit into their categories. She does however, feel that they could have given her the benefit of the doubt. “The effects of hormone blockers are easy to reverse, you just stop taking them…” There would have been no risk to her daughter if, at any time she decided that she did not want to be a girl she could simply have stopped, and male puberty would have started.

Hormone Blockers are essentially a way for young trans people and children to leave their options open. They open an extended open window of choice, which gives them time to think about their future, a time during which young people can decide whether they wish to remain the sex they were assigned at birth, whether that be male or female, or whether they need gender reassignment surgery after the age of 18. Talking to mothers of transgender children in the UK who have been prescribed hormone blockers, usually at great cost (£200 a month plus the cost of a consultation in and flight to the United States) one thing comes across loudly and clearly; “I would rather have a live daughter than a dead son.” One of them told me. One mother had remortgaged her house to pay the cost of these drugs knowing what her child was like, she realised that this would probably be the only way to keep her alive.

Another mother talked of how her young child had been prescribed a cocktail of a dozen drugs, including Ritalin, because of behaviour problems at home and at school. Yet when her child was recognised as transgender everything changed. As soon as she was treated as a girl, the tantrums, the bedwetting, the crying, the screaming, the hyperactivity, the violence, just stopped, as did the need for any of the drugs. “She became happy and contented almost overnight, just because we treated her like a girl! The psychologist who spotted this probably saved her life.”

Predictably the accusation of “child abuse” has been levelled at those who advocate prescribing hormone blockers to children between the ages of 12 and 15 (they already are prescribed to those over the age of 16) in the UK. This flies in the face of the evidence in both the United States and Holland, where these drugs have been successfully, and harmlessly prescribed for many years. It also flies in the face of the experience of parents of transgender children, who have lived a day-to-day existence, hoping that their child is still alive and in one piece. Until her daughter was prescribed hormone blockers at age 16 one mother told me of the anguish she and her husband felt when their child had gone missing for a few days when she was 14. “We really thought we would never see her again. Every time the phone rang we thought it would be the police wanting us to identify a body.”

Now that this technology has been developed, not making it available to all those children who need it is child abuse. Three years ago the trans community was shocked by the suicide of a transgender child who was only 10 years old. The allegation of “child abuse” has been levelled at parents who permit their transgender child to express the gender they prefer and who let them have hormone blockers. Yet this is effectively child abuse in reverse. Not to allow trans children to express their gender identities is actually child abuse. Those who throw accusations of child abuse around without knowing the facts are the ones who are child abusers by proxy; putting pressure on parents to force their children to conform to the gender they were assigned at birth no matter what the consequences

Quiz Show (Bible Contradictions)

SpraySpace

We live in a wondrous world, where such talent can be shared planetwide.

A Gentle Reminder

This one's just a tiny meteor, not an asteroid. It's no bigger than a Greyhound bus. Travelling 30 km/sec though....

An Ethical Difference

 Senator Brandis is the Shadow Attorney General. One cannot get into that position without having an IQ greater than your shoe size. Though one might well wonder after his rude interruption of a witness before the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee a fortnight ago.

ParlInfo - Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee : 24/01/2013 : Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012

Senator PRATT: So you would like to see, if religious exemptions were to continue, intersex status specifically taken out of those exemptions?

Gina Wilson : Certainly. To allow anybody to discriminate against intersex people and to allow religious organisations to have an exemption from the law is no different to allowing a religious organisation to discriminate on the basis of colour of skin or a disability that you were born with.

Senator BRANDIS: No, it is not, because there is an ethical difference.

Er... pardon me? An ethical difference?

Gina Wilson : We are born differently.

Senator BRANDIS: The church says, rightly or wrongly, that in its view certain behaviours are sins. You might have said to that—

Gina Wilson : Senator Brandis, this is not about our behaviours.
...

Gina Wilson : It is not a matter of our behaviour; it is a matter of how we are born. We are not behaving like anything. It is not a matter of sexual orientation. We have the same range of sexual orientations as the rest of the community. It is not about our gender identity. We have the same range of gender identities as the rest of the community. It is about how we are physically born. That is like if a person is physically born with black skin. If you give a religious organisation the right to discriminate on the basis that they were born with black skin, that is the same as giving them the right to discriminate about people who were born with anatomical differences of sex. Because my genitals are different or because my hormones are different, they have a right to exclude me from service, exclude me from a school or exclude me from employment, and that just seems bizarre—because of the way I was born, because I was born physically different. It is not a choice. It is not an orientation. It is not an identity. I was born physically different.

But of course, a Christian School would never "dis-invite" a 5 year old to attend pre-school just because he was anatomically unusual. Except they did.

A good thing as it turns out : my son attends a far better school now.

Senator Brandis - this is personal. Letter to follow.

Supersonic Ping Pong Ball Brain Waves

Darth Vader In A Kilt On A Unicycle Playing Bagpipes

They've got form (Part III)

They've got form, but I have a life - so this will be succinct.

Jan 22 Voices from the trans community: 'There will always be prejudice'

Jan 19 Feminism shouldn't be about telling trans women they're not female enough

Jan 18 Why I'm trans … and a feminist

Jan 13 Julie Burchill has ended up bullying the trans community

And the hits keep coming...

They've got form (Part II)

Being in the main a compendium of links about l'Affaire Burchill.

The most helpful one I think is Julie Burchill, transphobia and hostility towards the victims of oppression. Tellingly, it's in the Grauniad's Science section.

The recent media furore over an article by Julie Burchill has brought to light prejudice against transgender individuals among people who should know better. But this tendency to demonise the victims of unfair treatment is a well established phenomenon

It ends thus:

But If I was going to try and explain all possible reasons for this animosity toward trans people, this blogpost would run into the terabytes. There are so many social, psychological and countless other factors in play, it would be like trying to untangle a ball of Christmas tree lights the size of the moon. I just offer the above rationalisations as possible explanations for illogical transphobia. Of course, some people are just bastards, let's not forget that.

I don't have any ideological or personal involvement with the whole debacle that occurred recently, and I'm certainly not making any expert pronouncements on what's happening. I'm a behavioural neuroscientist who works in mental health, and I just saw supposedly intelligent people behaving in ways that seemed illogical, even hypocritical, and I thought I'd offer a possible explanation as to why. But obviously things are a lot more complex.

I'm also a Guardian blogger though, and not even a serious one (I usually write about boobs or moustaches). But given that it was Burchill's article that caused so much offence, and the Guardian's perceived poor track record in this area, I felt it was necessary to have at least one piece published under the Guardian banner that presented transphobia as illogical and irrational, which it definitely is.

It may not be a just world, but that doesn't mean we can't at least make an effort to change that.

As they say, read the whole thing. My comment on it:

And then there is the logic that goes this way. The left is always wrong. The left is championing these people because it sees them as victims of oppression. Therefore they must be deserving of no sympathy.

-- Lloyd Flack

… it's the Left "feminists" who loathe transsexualism with a fierce passion, Lloyd, IMO because it conflicts with the narratives of social constructionism. Men and women are somewhat different psychologically, and it always seemed kind of obvious to me that there were neurological differences underlying that from the first time I seriously considered the issue from that point of view. Men and women don't "think" differently… but they do tend to relate to others in different ways. The irony here is that in terms of my beliefs about "gendered consciousness", I used to be a social constructionist of the Shulamith Firestone variety, and I wish that she had been right.

-- Bonze Anne Rose Blayk From PinkNews:

DJ Sheepiesheep Every transphobic slur creates another transphobic bigot. The more transphobic bigots there are, the greater the chance of an act of violence against a trans person. So yes, I personally think that Moore and Burchill and their ilk are in part responsible for an increase in transphobic violence.

Solent And every misogynistic slur reinforces the bigotry of non bigots

Thia Jones Every transphobic slur IS a misogynistic slur

Tellitlikeitis Every trans abomination is a misogynistic slur. You lot rape women just by existing.

From "The Transsexual Empire: the making of the She-Male" 1979, reprinted 1980,1994,2007 by Professor Janice Raymond, a standard Radical Feminist text used in many universities.

All transsexuals rape women’s bodies by reducing the real female form to an artefact, and appropriating this body for themselves.

Ibid.

I contend that the problem with transsexualism would best be served by morally mandating it out of existence.

You can't understand this irrational hatred without examining the philosophical basis for it.

OK, on to the linky goodness. First the Telegraph, reprinting Burchill's original and utterly unique piece. A paragraph thereform:

She, the other JB and I are part of the tiny minority of women of working-class origin to make it in what used to be called Fleet Street and I think this partly contributes to the stand-off with the trannies. (I know that’s a wrong word, but having recently discovered that their lot describe born women as ‘Cis’ – sounds like syph, cyst, cistern; all nasty stuff – they’re lucky I’m not calling them shemales. Or shims.) We know that everything we have, we got for ourselves. We have no family money, no safety net. And we are damned if we are going to be accused of being privileged by a bunch of bed-wetters in bad wigs.

The Grauniad's Reader's editor, from back in 2004, the last time such foetid wording was used (though alas, not the last time overtly Transphobic articles appeared in that publication)

Dismay at the piece was registered not only by transsexual people but by doctors, therapists, academics and others involved in the field. One therapist wrote: "Transgendered people would like to go about their lives in peace and dignity." This column, which obscured any argument in discriminatory language, would not help them to do that. It abused an already abused minority that the Guardian might have been expected to protect.

Quite. And the language there was mild, in comparison with Burchill's piece.

Now for the non-apology apology that replaced the original.

We have decided to withdraw from publication the Julie Burchill comment piece 'Transsexuals should cut it out'. The piece was an attempt to explore contentious issues within what had become a highly-charged debate. The Observer is a paper which prides itself on ventilating difficult debates and airing challenging views. On this occasion we got it wrong and in light of the hurt and offence caused I apologise and have made the decision to withdraw the piece. The Observer Readers' Editor will report on these issues at greater length.

"Explore contentious issues" my Aunt Fanny. Just read it.

Onwards to the Interim Report from the Observer's Reader's Editor - the Observer is basically "the Guardian on Sunday", though there is independent editorial control.

It was "appalling", "vile", "hateful". It was "incredibly offensive". It was "rude, bigoted and downright insulting". In the 24 hours following the publication of Julie Burchill's Observer piece headlined "Transsexuals should cut it out", more than 1,000 emails arrived in my inbox and 2,952 comments were posted online, most of them highly critical of the decision to publish what one correspondent called "her bullying nonsense". The piece in question was a defence of her friend, the columnist Suzanne Moore, who claims she has been driven off Twitter by a vociferous campaign from transsexual people....

Sure it was.

The ensuing storm was notable both for its vociferous nature and for its individuality. A controversial issue will often bring a blizzard of identikit protest of apparently confected anger but while clearly this lobby was organised most of the emails and letters we received were personal and heartfelt. And they were not only from trans people. Concerned readers with no connection to the trans lobby felt hurt that a minority that could expect to be protected by a liberal publication was being attacked in an extremely insulting manner. "Would you have run the article if it had contained similar slurs regarding people of colour or people with disabilities?" was a typical question.

Exactly.

A collective failure of editing led to this piece appearing in the form that it did. "We will scrutinise further the manner in which this process needs improving," said the editor.

A Collective Failure of Editing. Just a bit, yes. The interior of the Sun is also moderately warm, and the sea not completely dry.

So how does the Observer move on from here? The editor says that discussions with representatives from the trans community will take place over the coming weeks. These discussions will be an opportunity to listen and also to debate the issues raised by this incident. A lesson has been learned.

My comment:

One thing that should be pointed out. The inaccuracy of referring to a "Trans Lobby" being involved here. The initial, very mild, critique on Twitter of Ms Moore came from... a fellow feminist. Not of the trans variety.

I loved your piece on anger - except for the shock transphobia ("a Brazilian transsexual") - why on earth did you include it?

That's it. You can see the record at http://storify.com/leftytgirl/suzanne-moore-timeline-of-trans-misogynistic-twitt

Moore replied with some increasingly nasty tweets.

Transphobia is your term. I have issues with trans anything actually... I dont prioritise this f***ing lopping bits of your body over all else that is happening to women Intersectional enough for you?... I dont even accept the word transphobia any more than Islamaphobia... People can just f*** off really. Cut their dicks off and be more feminist than me. Good for them.

That was the bit that was the insult direct. Transphobia, naked and unadorned. This caused a further Twitter-storm, 99+% of which did not involve Trans people.

The Trans contributions: Julia Serano tweeted on 8th January:

some cis feminists have a gambling problem Yet another cis feminist doubles down on trans misogyny

Suzannah (leftytgirl) tweeted on 11th January after the Burchill piece something more "robust and forthright", though moderate compared to Ms Moore's foul language

Suzanne Moore, trans-misogynist asshole extraordinaire ;)

The winking smiley emoticon rather diluting the effect. That's it. That's the sum and total involvement of this "Trans Lobby", this howling mob of Trans women.

Non-Trans feminists, vastly outnumbering the Trans contributions weighed in more forcefully. For example: F*ck you Suzanne Moore you c*nt as one cis Feminist wrote. Suzanne Moore is not a Feminist. Suzanne Moore is a piss stain on the pants of Fascism wrote another. Again, non-trans feminists here.

The really vile stuff, the threats and so on.... came from professional trolls, and a horde of 4chan anon accounts, "the usual suspects". None of them Trans. The infamous "lop off suzanne moore's spine imo" was by a well known social commentator, nominated for a "shorty" award. No connection to either trans or feminist groups at all.

However, the lede had to be different, so Burchill's unprintable (but alas, not unprinted) distilled hate wasn't self-contradictory.

Journalists - like yourself - are supposed to look behind the scenes, not take the words of anyone, politicians, businessmen, whoever at face value. You've screwed up here, even the editors trying to set things aright. Good luck in communicating with this "powerful trans lobby" Burchill blames. You'd be better off trying to find the Elders of Zion.

Or the International Communist Conspiracy to pollute our precious bodily fluids, for that matter.

A follow-up article will deal with second- and third- order effects. Links to articles in the Grauniad and Observer only though, rather than commentary by third parties. It's confusing enough as it is. The rest can wait. I have a life. I'd also like to blog about something else for a while, to cleanse my intellectual palate. Something humourous, but lingering. I'm not a bit angry at Ms Burchill.

Say... Gilbert and Sullivan's the Mikado.

MIK.: Ha! ha! ha! (To KATISHA) I forget the punishment for compassing the death of the Heir Apparent.

Ko, POOH, and PITTI: Punishment! (They drop down on their knees again.)

MIK.: Yes. Something lingering, with boiling oil in it, I fancy. Something of that sort. I think boiling oil occurs in it, but I'm not sure. I know it's something humorous, but lingering, with either boiling oil or melted lead. Come, come, don't fret, I'm not a bit angry.

Naughty Zoe! BAD Zoe!

They've got form (Part I)

Regarding the recent brouhaha over Julie Burchill's recent article in the Observer, republished (and then taken down) on the Guardian website, and re-re-published at her request in the Telegraph, an article referring to Trans people as "Shims" and "She-males", "Dicks in chick's clothing" etc...
The Guardian said it best, the last time this happened. Or rather, one of the last times - it happened again and again afterwards too.

On January 31 the Guardian's Weekend magazine published the first of two articles by the lesbian feminist Julie Bindel, written in the place recently vacated by Julie Burchill....
Ms Nixon was referred to as "she" in quotation marks....
Further into the piece there was a reference to Kwik-Fit sex changes, and the injunction to "think about a world inhabited just by transsexuals. It would look like the set of Grease." The column concluded: "To go back to my five men and a toilet, I don't have a problem with men disposing of their genitals, but it does not make them women, in the same way that shoving a bit of vacuum hose down your 501s does not make you a man...."
The Guardian was also criticised for the caricature illustration used with the column - a hairy-chested tattooed figure in a dress with a badge reading "I'm a lady."...

Pretty awful stuff, though Burchll's article is even worse. The Guardian goes on to say :

Dismay at the piece was registered not only by transsexual people but by doctors, therapists, academics and others involved in the field. One therapist wrote: "Transgendered people would like to go about their lives in peace and dignity." This column, which obscured any argument in discriminatory language, would not help them to do that. It abused an already abused minority that the Guardian might have been expected to protect.

Meanwhile, Suzanne Moore claims in a follow-up article that it's all about "Freedom of Speech". The same argument as last time. And the many times before.
She might have been more convincing if she wasn't simultaneously using threats of legal action to silence even the mildest, most indirect critique of her own most innocuous article.
From her Twitter account:

suzanne moore @ Read this piece of shit and Pink News will hear from my lawyers in the morning : http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/01/16/reports-brazilian-transwoman-shot-dead/

This "piece of shit" as she puts it reads:

According to the ‘Guerrilla Angel Report’ blog site, it is claimed the victim, named by the site as Cecilia Marahouse, worked as a performer and that the shooting took place near Fortaleza, north-eastern Brazil, on 11 January 2013.

She is described as being a “well known” figure among the area’s LGBT community.

Earlier this week, British journalist Suzanne Moore apologised for suggesting women were expected to look like “Brazilian transsexuals” in an article published first in the New Statesman and then in the Guardian newspaper.

Several prominent LGBT journalists, trans campaigners and commentators, criticised her use of the term and considered it to be insensitive, not least because more than 100 trans people were reported killed in Brazil during 2012.

International statistics compiled by the Trans Respect Monitoring Project identified at least 265 trans people murdered between 2011 – 2012, an increase of 20% on figures from 2010.

85% of reported killings took place in Latin America, with 45% in Brazil alone.

"Freedom of Speech" for me but not for thee, apparently.

The Observer Screws Up

There are things one does not do in a national newspaper. One does not call Blacks "uppity niggers". One does not state as fact that Yids drink the blood of Christian children. And one does not publish articles like this one. Starting with a quote illustrating a complete lack of anything redolent of white feminist privilege

"Sod that, we're having lobster and champagne at Frederick's and I'm paying," I told her. Half a bottle of Bolly later, she looked at me with faraway eyes: "Ooo, I could get to like this…" And so she did.

No privilege there.

I nevertheless felt indignant that a woman of such style and substance should be driven from her chosen mode of time-wasting by a bunch of dicks in chicks' clothing. To my mind – I have given cool-headed consideration to the matter – a gaggle of transsexuals telling Suzanne Moore how to write looks a lot like how I'd imagine the Black and White Minstrels telling Usain Bolt how to run would look. That rude and ridic.

The reaction of the trans lobby reminded me very much of those wretched inner-city kids who shoot another inner-city kid dead in a fast-food shop for not showing them enough "respect".

But they'd rather argue over semantics. To be fair, after having one's nuts taken off (see what I did there?) by endless decades in academia, it's all most of them are fit to do. Educated beyond all common sense and honesty, it was a hoot to see the screaming mimis accuse Suze of white feminist privilege...

She, the other JB and I are part of the minority of women of working-class origin to make it in what used to be called Fleet Street and I think this partly contributes to the stand-off with the trannies. (I know that's a wrong word, but having recently discovered that their lot describe born women as 'Cis' – sounds like syph, cyst, cistern; all nasty stuff – they're lucky I'm not calling them shemales. Or shims.) We know that everything we have we got for ourselves. We have no family money, no safety net. And we are damned if we are going to be accused of being privileged by a bunch of bed-wetters in bad wigs.

Shims, shemales, whatever you're calling yourselves these days – don't threaten or bully us lowly natural-born women, I warn you.

they're lucky I'm not calling them shemales. Or shims.
Mighty White of her to do that. Mighty White. Especially since she ...may not have as many lovely big swinging Phds as you

The Guardian group has certain ethical standards. So does the UK National Union of Journalists. There are also laws in the UK against deliberate and malicious denigration of minorities.

Oopsie.

UPDATE: The original article has been deleted - along with the 2500 comments , mostly eviscerating it. It's now available on numerous mirrors - such as the UK Telegraph http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100198116/here-is-julie-burchills-censored-observer-article/

Ginger

Milton Diamond, The Cambridge Union Society

Bye bye Mummy

In loving memory of my mother, Vera Margaret Brain, who has just died suddenly. The doctor said it must have been instantaneous, probably as she was having an afternoon nap.

It's not quite 12 hours since we found her body.

My thanks to the ACT Police, whose kindness and professionalism made a very real difference.

Too good not to share

A man who had to quest for his masculinity - and the girl he fell in love with, who had endured her own trial by ordeal.

More here.

The Paradoxical Comandments

The Paradoxical Commandments
by Dr. Kent M. Keith

People are illogical, unreasonable, and self-centered.
Love them anyway.

If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish ulterior motives.
Do good anyway.

If you are successful, you will win false friends and true enemies.
Succeed anyway.

The good you do today will be forgotten tomorrow.
Do good anyway.

Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable.
Be honest and frank anyway.

The biggest men and women with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest men and women with the smallest minds.
Think big anyway.

People favor underdogs but follow only top dogs.
Fight for a few underdogs anyway.

What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight.
Build anyway.

People really need help but may attack you if you do help them.
Help people anyway.

Give the world the best you have and you’ll get kicked in the teeth.
Give the world the best you have anyway.

© Copyright Kent M. Keith 1968, renewed 2001

Curtsy to EthicsAlarms


The four Zen vows of the Bodhisattva.

In my own words:

There's too many sins not to commit some - but I'll try not to anyway.

There's too many people to help them all - but I'll try to help them anyway.

There's too many virtues to attain them all - but I'll try to attain them anyway.

Perfection is impossible - But I'll try to perfect everything anyway. 

A Most Unpopular Decision

From the Huffington Post : Michelle Kosilek, Inmate Born As Robert Kosilek, Eligible For Legal Fees Reimbursement In Addition To Sex Change Comments that illustrate the popular mood:

So, isn't MURDER cruel and unusual punishment on the victim? I say cut it off and shove it down his throat! 

just ask someone to shank his ass...problem solved ...

Hopefully someone will before the surgery.

It's a credible threat.

Full text of the judgement:http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/recentops.pl?filename=wolf/pdf/kosilek%20eighth%20amendment%20decision.pdf

 It's as sordid a tale of deliberate inhuman cruelty - "wanton cruelty" as the judge put it, as you'll ever find.

 Commentary at the American Bar Association Blog.

Ruling Tuesday in a seven-year-old civil rights suit in which a transgender prison inmate has been seeking to have the state of Massachusetts pay for sex-change surgery, a federal judge in Boston agreed with Michelle Kosilek and prison doctors that the operation needs to be performed. “This fact that sex reassignment surgery is for some people medically necessary has recently become more widely recognized,” wrote Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf in a 129-page landmark opinion (PDF). He based his ruling on Kosilek's argument that her Eighth Amendment rights were violated by the prison system's refusal to provide her with adequate treatment for her severe gender identity disorder. It may be the first time a federal judge anywhere in the country has ordered such surgery for a prison inmate, according to the Associated Press and the Boston Globe. Convicted of first-degree murder as Robert Kosilek for the 1990 slaying of her wife, Kosilek, who has had hormone treatments, is serving a sentence of life without parole in a men's prison. The state is reportedly reviewing Wolf's opinion and considering its appellate options.

My take : There’s an obvious problem here, that convicted murderers can’t be treated like decent, law-abiding transsexuals outside prison, because that treatment amounts to torture, so is forbidden by the 8th amendment. The only solutions are to either repeal the 8th amendment, or put in place legislation so law-abiding transsexuals aren’t treated worse than convicted murderers, Your choice. Given the general attitude of society towards convicted criminals, I think repeal of the 8th amendment would be far more popular, popular enough to pass. The other alternative is a non-starter unless a lot more education on the issue is provided.

"The right to be free of cruel and unusual punishments, like the other guarantees of the Bill of Rights, may not be submitted to vote; it depends on the outcome of no elections. The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts." -- Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 269 (1972)

"To incarcerate, society takes from prisoners the means to provide for their own needs. Prisoners are dependent on the State for food, clothing, and necessary medical care. A prison’s failure to provide sustenance for inmates “may actually produce physical ‘torture or a lingering death.’” Just as a prisoner may starve if not fed, he or she may suffer or die if not provided adequate medical care. A prison that deprives prisoners of basic sustenance, including adequate medical care, is incompatible with the concept of human dignity and has no place in civilized society. " - SCOTUS

“Denying adequate medical care because of a fear of controversy or criticism from politicians, the press, and the public serves no legitimate penological purpose,” Wolf wrote. “It is precisely the type of conduct the Eight Amendment prohibits.”

Another part of the puzzle

Increased Cortical Thickness in Male-to-Female Transsexualism Luders et al, Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 2011

Abstract:

Background: The degree to which one identifies as male or female has a profound impact on one’s life.
Yet, there is a limited understanding of what contributes to this important characteristic termed gender identity.
In order to reveal factors influencing gender identity, studies have focused on people who report strong feelings of being the opposite sex, such as male-to-female (MTF) transsexuals.

Method: To investigate potential neuroanatomical variations associated with transsexualism, we compared the regional thickness of the cerebral cortex between 24 MTF transsexuals who had not yet been treated with cross-sex hormones and 24 age-matched control males.

Results: Results revealed thicker cortices in MTF transsexuals, both within
regions of the left hemisphere (i.e., frontal and orbito-frontal cortex, central sulcus, perisylvian regions, paracentral gyrus) and right hemisphere (i.e., pre-/post-central gyrus, parietal cortex, temporal cortex, precuneus, fusiform, lingual, and orbito-frontal gyrus).

Conclusion: These findings provide further evidence that brain anatomy is associated with gender identity, where measures in MTF transsexuals appear to be shifted away from gender-congruent men.