It’s time once again for news and views that you can peruse! It’s time once again for another Weekly Reader! Got a hot tip? A story you need to share? A blog post that absolutely rocks? Well, drop a link in the comments section!
Trump To Protect Country Through Genocide Of My Son and His Peers! (from TransParent Expedition via Patheos): “Many of you have probably read or heard about the October 21st New York Times Article in which Trump and the Department of Health and Human Services are spearheading an effort to narrowly define gender as the genitals one is born with. In a Reuters article released on October 22, Trump says he is doing this to “protect the country”. We need to call this what it is. This is an attempt at genocide.”
Lawrence Krauss and the Legacy of Harassment in Science (from the Atlantic): “Sexual-misconduct cases, however, don’t fit neatly into the framework that governs rigorous scientific inquiry. “If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the #MeToo movement, it’s that so much of understanding injustice is experiential and rooted in anecdotal evidence. For hardcore freethinkers, that’s a problem, because personal testimonies can’t be verified or tested in an empirical way,” Ashley Naftule wrote in The Outline after the allegations against Krauss became public. “And if something can’t be measured, calculated, or observed, it may as well not exist—even though studies of sexual harassment in science reveal the opposite to be true.””
What Happens When Humans Fall In Love With An Invasive Species (from FiveThirtyEight): “This isn’t just trivia. Invasive species control is always expensive, and you only get the resources to launch a full-court press against a plant or animal — like the hundreds of millions of dollars spent in the last six decades to get sea lamprey populations under control — on the rare and shining occasion when everyone in power agrees on what “harm” is. And so the definition of invasive species has also created fights within the biological sciences. In 2011, Mark Davis, a biology professor at Minnesota’s Macalester College, published an essay in Nature in which he and 18 co-authors argued that the field of invasion biology had become too weighted toward viewing all non-native species as bad and worthy of eradication. “Harm,” he argued, had come to mean “change.” “And, boy, this world is a bad place to be if any change is viewed as bad,” Davis told me.”
I support affirmative action. But Harvard really is hurting Asian Americans. (from Vox): “Knowing all this makes me want to fight this lawsuit. But, to be honest, the evidence it’s unveiled nonetheless makes me feel uneasy. It’s angering to witness the dismissive, sweeping way that admissions officers discuss Asian-American applicants. The writing-off of these students as nondistinctive, interchangeable kids smacks of racist stereotypes often used against Asians in this country.”
The Fundamentalist Trap (from the New Republic): “IBLP is a case study in how a religious culture can implode when an authoritarian theology allows the most vulnerable to be targeted by predators. But the fall of Bill Gothard also reflects a larger shift in the way many evangelical Christians are engaging in American culture and politics—abandoning the call for moral rectitude in favor of a more purely partisan antipathy, which has found its greatest expression in the Christian right’s support for Donald Trump.”
It’s okay to let your transgender kid transition — even if they might change their mind in the future (from Vox): “The vast majority of transgender kids who begin hormonal treatments do not change their minds about medically transitioning. For the very small percentage who do, like Alex, this isn’t the horrible outcome that conservative media outlets lead people to believe. Sometimes “de-transitioning” is just part of a person’s healthy psychological development.”
Why should the government — or anyone — care what’s between a person’s legs? (from the Washington Post): “I don’t mean for these questions to be rhetorical or even provocative. I am asking this sincerely: What do we hope that permanently and irrevocably assigning a gender, seconds after clipping the umbilical cord, would accomplish? Safety? Certainty? For the baby or the grown-ups?”
People Are Changing Their Views On Race And Gender Issues To Match Their Party (from FiveThirtyEight): “But voters’ views of specific racial issues, rather than their broader feelings about minority groups, were more likely to follow their candidate preferences. A study by Peter Enns at Cornell University found that Trump and Clinton voters changed their views on controversies like the Black Lives Matter movement to match their candidate’s views, rather than choosing their candidate based on their views about this issue.”
And that’s all for this time. Drop by again for even more links to read and bookmark. Until then, happy reading!