Categories
Booty Politics Politics Science Sex

Morning After!!

At last! A judge ordered the FDA to allow the morning after pill, Plan B, to be available over the counter!

Hurrah!

Plan B is not my favorite pill to take, because it can be crampy and make you cranky, but seriously, the drug is as safe as anything and it’s important to have access to it.

Yay for sensibility taking over. No need to have be legislating sexual morality.

plan-b

Categories
Politics Religion Science Sex

Right Wing Homophobes, Really Just Afraid Of Themselves?

My favorite kind of science is the “duh” science. Usually people make fun of it, because the published findings have titles like “Water makes you wet.” or “Hungry people like food.” Sure you can laugh, but without someone going out and doing this basic science, its impossible to move on to more complicated and advanced things. So when I read this recent studies headline “Is Some Homophobia Self-Phobia?” all I could say to myself was “duh!”

Homophobia is more pronounced in individuals with an unacknowledged attraction to the same sex and who grew up with authoritarian parents who forbade such desires, a series of psychology studies demonstrates.

The study is the first to document the role that both parenting and sexual orientation play in the formation of intense and visceral fear of homosexuals, including self-reported homophobic attitudes, discriminatory bias, implicit hostility towards gays, and endorsement of anti-gay policies. Conducted by a team from the University of Rochester, the University of Essex, England, and the University of California in Santa Barbara, the research will be published the April issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

“Individuals who identify as straight but in psychological tests show a strong attraction to the same sex may be threatened by gays and lesbians because homosexuals remind them of similar tendencies within themselves,” explains Netta Weinstein, a lecturer at the University of Essex and the study’s lead author.

“In many cases these are people who are at war with themselves and they are turning this internal conflict outward,” adds co-author Richard Ryan, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester who helped direct the research.

The paper includes four separate experiments, conducted in the United States and Germany, with each study involving an average of 160 college students. The findings provide new empirical evidence to support the psychoanalytic theory that the fear, anxiety, and aversion that some seemingly heterosexual people hold toward gays and lesbians can grow out of their own repressed same-sex desires, Ryan says. The results also support the more modern self-determination theory, developed by Ryan and Edward Deci at the University of Rochester, which links controlling parenting to poorer self-acceptance and difficulty valuing oneself unconditionally.

The findings may help to explain the personal dynamics behind some bullying and hate crimes directed at gays and lesbians, the authors argue. Media coverage of gay-related hate crimes suggests that attackers often perceive some level of threat from homosexuals. People in denial about their sexual orientation may lash out because gay targets threaten and bring this internal conflict to the forefront, the authors write.

The research also sheds light on high profile cases in which anti-gay public figures are caught engaging in same-sex sexual acts. The authors write that this dynamic of inner conflict may be reflected in such examples as Ted Haggard, the evangelical preacher who opposed gay marriage but was exposed in a gay sex scandal in 2006, and Glenn Murphy, Jr., former chairman of the Young Republican National Federation and vocal opponent of gay marriage, who was accused of sexually assaulting a 22-year-old man in 2007.

“We laugh at or make fun of such blatant hypocrisy, but in a real way, these people may often themselves be victims of repression and experience exaggerated feelings of threat,” says Ryan. “Homophobia is not a laughing matter. It can sometimes have tragic consequences,” Ryan says, pointing to cases such as the 1998 murder of Matthew Shepard or the 2011 shooting of Larry King.

To explore participants’ explicit and implicit sexual attraction, the researchers measured the discrepancies between what people say about their sexual orientation and how they react during a split-second timed task. Students were shown words and pictures on a computer screen and asked to put these in “gay” or “straight” categories. Before each of the 50 trials, participants were subliminally primed with either the word “me” or “others” flashed on the screen for 35 milliseconds. They were then shown the words “gay,” “straight,” “homosexual,” and “heterosexual” as well as pictures of straight and gay couples, and the computer tracked precisely their response times. A faster association of “me” with “gay” and a slower association of “me” with “straight” indicated an implicit gay orientation.

A second experiment, in which subjects were free to browse same-sex or opposite-sex photos, provided an additional measure of implicit sexual attraction.

Through a series of questionnaires, participants also reported on the type of parenting they experienced growing up, from authoritarian to democratic. Students were asked to agree or disagree with statements like: “I felt controlled and pressured in certain ways,” and “I felt free to be who I am.” For gauging the level of homophobia in a household, subjects responded to items like: “It would be upsetting for my mom to find out she was alone with a lesbian” or “My dad avoids gay men whenever possible.”

Finally, the researcher measured participants’ level of homophobia – both overt, as expressed in questionnaires on social policy and beliefs, and implicit, as revealed in word-completion tasks. In the latter, students wrote down the first three words that came to mind, for example for the prompt “k i _ _”. The study tracked the increase in the amount of aggressive words elicited after subliminally priming subjects with the word “gay” for 35 milliseconds.

Across all the studies, participants with supportive and accepting parents were more in touch with their implicit sexual orientation, while participants from authoritarian homes revealed the most discrepancy between explicit and implicit attraction.

“In a predominately heterosexual society, ‘know thyself’ can be a challenge for many gay individuals. But in controlling and homophobic homes, embracing a minority sexual orientation can be terrifying,” explains Weinstein. These individuals risk losing the love and approval of their parents if they admit to same sex attractions, so many people deny or repress that part of themselves, she said.

In addition, participants who reported themselves to be more heterosexual than their performance on the reaction time task indicated were most likely to react with hostility to gay others, the studies showed. That incongruence between implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation predicted a variety of homophobic behaviors, including self-reported anti-gay attitudes, implicit hostility towards gays, endorsement of anti-gay policies, and discriminatory bias such as the assignment of harsher punishments for homosexuals, the authors conclude.

“This study shows that if you are feeling that kind of visceral reaction to an out-group, ask yourself, ‘Why?'” says Ryan. “Those intense emotions should serve as a call to self-reflection.”

The study had several limitations, the authors write. All participants were college students, so it may be helpful in future research to test these effects in younger adolescents still living at home and in older adults who have had more time to establish lives independent of their parents and to look at attitudes as they change over time.

Other contributors to the paper include Cody DeHaan and Nicole Legate from the University of Rochester, Andrew Przybylski from the University of Essex, and William Ryan from the University of California in Santa Barbara. (via)

Categories
Science

The Science Of Love

The Love Competition from Brent Hoff on Vimeo.

There are some who claim that science ruins the mystical excitement of this world. They claim that once you reduce everything down to atoms, and physics, and math that you have lost some essential wonder or glory or excitement. I fully reject this notion, I feel like an piece of art is even more enjoyable if you understand the chemical process of the paint, of the molecular structure of the stone. I feel that knowing more about emotions, like love, allows you to more fully appreciate the awesome grandeur of the human experience.

This video is a perfect example of that. These people are taking the ultimate in human emotion, love, and having it “reduced” to a number. Having it “diminished” to a series of electrical impulses in the brain. And far from being reduced by the process they are uplifted and enriched. Knowing that love is a series of chemical reactions in their brain, that can be reduced to a “score” did nothing to limit the joy these people felt.

In fact I would make the argument that now these people know that love is not something ephemeral, never to be understood. They know that love is real, that they can have it, and that it can exist, that is can even be measured. I think each person left that office with a sense of hope and wonder and awe. They are marveling at their own minds, and I am sure upon reflection marveling at the process that created their minds.

I love this video.

Categories
Politics Religion Science

Breast Cancer Doesn’t Care About Your Religion

I have been increasingly frustrated by the right wing “pro-life” religious forces in this country. I understand their imaginary friend wrote a book and that book tells them a bunch of nonsense. I am a firm supporter of their right to think any crazy idea they want. In fact our country was founded on their right to believe that nonsense. Heck, I would even go so far as to fight for their right to believe that foolishness. I think its the American thing to do, fight for everyone’s right to believe anything they want.

However when your imaginary friend tells you to spend your life trying to deny funding to organizations who provide abortions, you are not being American. This country was founded on the freedom FROM religion as much as the freedom of religion. That means you are free to NOT get abortions, you are free NOT to give your money to cancer research, but when you actively work to de-fund these things for others you are imposing your religious views on people who may not share them. Its no different than a Catholic telling you that you are legally prohibited from eating meat on Fridays. It’s not how this country is supposed to work.

Cancer kills roughly half a million men and women every year in this country. There have been roughly 50 million abortions provided legally in this country since 1973, which works out to roughly 1.2 million per year. Roughly 5%-20% of that number were because of risk of health to the fetus or the mother.

Fighting against groups like Planned Parenthood isn’t “pro-life.” If you are really “pro-life” You would also care about the 1 in 2 people who will be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetime, and the 500,000+ of them that die from it every year. I would hope that the “promotion of life” doesn’t end once the baby is born. As such pro-lifers have just as much responsibility to fund cancer diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and research as you do fight abortion providers. All of which are done at places like Planned Parenthood.

It’s a pity that people are unable to understand complex and nuanced issues. They think Planned Parenthood = abortion. Their imaginary friend told them abortion is bad, so they hate Planned Parenthood. The reality of the situation is much more complex. Planned Parenthood also provides birth control (can’t have an abortion if you don’t get pregnant), breast cancer screening, STD tests (HPV causes cervical cancer), and a whole host of other treatments that save lives.

I am not sure one bolsters their “pro-life” credentials by keeping much needed and life saving treatments out of the hands of men and women. It boggles my mind that the major political party in this country that is linked to the pro-life movement, is also the one against HPV vaccines, universal health care, public funding of birth control, and sex education.

What further boggles my mind is that the inspiration for this stance is based on the ramblings of bronze age goat herders that was translated over and over again before undergoing 2000 years of politically based revision, translated a couple more times, and finally spoon fed by the powerful to the weak. We are talking about people who think that human beings can rise from the dead and that virgins can give birth, these are not the kind of people who we should be taking advice from!

The “pro-life” religious right should be regulated to the fringe of this discussion, instead they seem to be at its center. We have a group with a tenuous grip on reality, the constitution, and science trying to dictate what women should do with their own bodies. Any way you slice it they don’t appear to be up to the task of making that decision.