I am old enough to have heard the ‘aspirin as bc’ thing when I was a kid, when the pill wasn’t easy to get (especially for young adult women). I’d forgotten all about it until this week. My younger coworkers are all agape at the message; this is a new bit of slut-shaming for their cohort. Everything old is new again, I guess.

I can’t even imagine how stupid this all looks to outsiders. I guess there’s a segment of the population that thinks it unjust that the US was created after the Middle Ages, and are adamant in seeing that we have our rightful medieval period now.

The economy must be doing better since the wingnuts have started to focus on ‘social issues.’ Which could be good because I can’t understand how any woman could vote for a candidate who has no respect for them.

“The gals put aspirin between their knees”??? That is the most convoluted way of saying “keep your legs shut”, it sounds like some kind of old-timey folk healing, like passing a mandrake root under a horse’s belly during a full moon or some shit. I love the reporter’s “wtf?” pause after he says that. I thought I would enjoy watching the wingnut express crash and burn, but it’s mostly pissing me off.

Exactly.

The so-called Greatest Generation, those teenagers and adults in the ‘40s and ‘50s, the parents of the baby boomers, were forced to live by a different set of rules, sexually, in the main.

At least in public.

No coincidence that there are majority conservatives in that generation, where men (white men, especially) benefited from the Patriarchy—except in sexual freedom (although they had more sexual freedom than the women, of course.)

Their resentment was obvious in the ‘60s and ‘70s, in small and large ways. The conservative men of the next generations also had to play by those rules—at least in public—or at least, give it mouth service.

It’s “Dog in the manager” syndrome, writ large.

@benvolio: Quite stupid, and very entertaining. Until you remember that these clowns actually hold real power and that this shit is affecting real people, that is.

What really drove me into a sputtering rage was this self-satisfied grin plastered on his face. What a fuckwad.

That phrase has been attributed to advice columnist Ann Landers (“The only reliable birth control is to put an aspirin between your knees”) but that may be apocryphal.

When I heard that joke, it was about the (capital-P, birth-control) Pill itself: the way to avoid pregnancy is to take the pill from its blister pack and hold it between your knees. Which really highlights the way that the anti-sex contingent is about perpetuating shame and condemnation of women’s sexuality even when the real-world danger of pregnancy, single motherhood, etc. is no longer a factor.

I’m not that old but I grew up in a very backward, repressed environment. It didn’t keep me from having sex but it did keep me from standing up for myself in certain ways.  And yeah, I’m a little jealous that the generation coming up behind mine is so much freer and takes for granted certain ideas (like that women have a perfect right to pursue sexual pleasure) that were pretty daring where I grew up. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to keep the bad old ways alive just so they can suffer the way I did.

@1 - This was a common saying at one time? I shouldn’t have a hard time believing that, but it’s still a little mind boggling to me. Honestly when he first said that I thought it was some kind of oral sex reference before I let the gears in my head click a little bit more.

Har har har. What a knee-slapper that Foster Friess is. That joke was probably hilarious back when the damn earth was still cooling

ITA that a lot of the desire of old conservative dudes to punish sex has to do with jealousy, but this guy just comes off as so embarrassingly out of touch with modernity. He’s exactly the type of tone deaf loser that keeps the series of James Bond movies (another one is coming out soon) and other sexist cultural artifacts from an era long dead on life support. How else would Hugh Hefner be considered anything other than a woefully out of touch dinosaur without douchebags like this guy?

And I’m tired of the meme that conservatives in general oppose abortion and birth control, or Catholics oppose abortion and birth control. No, REPUBLICAN MEN oppose abortion and birth control. Republican men are the only group that opposes both by a majority.

Between this douche and the hearing on Obama’s BC mandate yesterday that ONLY CONSERVATIVE MEN were allowed to say anything at I don’t feel particularly bad saying that I wish these conservative asshole men would all die off already - even the ones who haven’t reached age 35 yet.

Indeed it was a common saying at one time - the point being only sluts used “the Pill”, women of any value just kept their legs shut.

In the rigid hierarchy of conservative society one must always suck up to those above you, and punch down on those beneath you.  Fortunately for men, women are always considered “less” than an otherwise equivalent male, so merely owning a vagina immediately sets your relative worth lower than most around you.

Once you’ve separated humanity into men=normal and women=abnormal, women get turned into an incredibly rich target environment for every asshole who never got the nookie he felt entitled to.  Men get horny and engage in hatred leading to violence.  But women have hormones and fluids and all sorts of secrets between their legs and between their ears, which to an immature man can never really be understood and will be a constant irritation.

Hence you have the Issa committee spectacle of a panel of exclusively male and (mostly or entirely)-celibate men discussing birth-control as if it was a religious question only, and not one of the single most important needs in a fertile woman’s life.  Awesome!

Let’s face it.  If women didn’t exist as the ultimate lesser form of humanity and readily-available punching bags (literally or figuratively), “conservatives” would have to invent them…

Ugh, ugh, ugh. Honestly, though any sort of sane media would have responded to this whole mess with outrage and scorn. By which I mean The War on Women, not just this week’s horrifying out-loud spectacles of it. Slackajawea @9, if only the reporters and tv casters and opinion column writers would be replaced by better people - not necessarily liberal, just not the fundamentalist/psycho that passes for conservative today, just people who, like, reported and shit, then events like this week would actually be political suicide. Because of reasonable reporting. “Group of Celibate Men Think No Women Should Have Medicine”. “Old Rich Guy Trying to Buy President: Also Hates Women”. “Virginian Legislators Legalize Compulsory Rape”. Generally editors write my headlines, so I’m sure someone else could come up with something better, but generally reasonable responses instead of this reasonable-people-disagree bullshit would make our world much better.

Also, how come nobody’s really talking about how Friesse is The Gross One’s only real backer? Buying a presidency -totally normal! Not newsworthy!

I suspected I knew what the “joke” was going to be, but I am glad I watched the video anyway because it did my heart good to see the interviewer’s gobsmacked reaction.
People should let their gobsmackedness hang out more often, when some clod says something like this, instead of ignoring it or worse, laughing along.

MikeEss @11 re “if women didn’t exist…”, maybe that’s why in the old days, in all-male environments (prisons, Army camps, &c.), men often designated the lowest-status men as “honorary” women to do the drudge work and be the butt of jokes (and sometimes, the sexual outlet).

It might have been generational once, but now I think it’s much more cultural. Even Friess was in his 20s during the 1960s, so if he wasn’t having as much sex as he wanted, it’s likely that he was either conflicted or too busy becoming a billionaire or both. And of course when you’re rich and conservative, getting plenty of sex doesn’t stop you from being completely contemptuous of the women you have it with, and enjoying making jokes at their expense.

I’m glad this stuff is finally out in the open. The fight against abortion is actually about punishing women for having unauthorized sex. I believe that restricting birth control has always been an unmentioned item on the anti-abortion agenda. People do not fully appreciate what Margaret Sanger and Katharine McCormick actually accomplished, in their quest for the Pill. Sarah Robinson at Alternet has an excellent article exploring this line of reasoning, Why Patriarchal Men Are Utterly Petrified of Birth Control—And Why We’ll Still Be Fighting About it 100 Years From Now.

http://www.alternet.org/story/154144/why_patriarchal_men_are_utterly_petrified_of_birth_control_—_and_why_we’ll_still_be_fighting_about_it_100_years_from_now?akid=8270.34521.aRSTza&rd=1&t=8

@14 My parents both turned 20 during the 1960’s. They were just on the trailing edge of their generation in terms of sexual freedom and general social/political enlightenment. I’ve seen lots of people younger than they are who are a lot more backward. Ever heard of the FLDS?

Thanks for the link to the Alternet piece. The article is excellent. Unfortunately the comments section is swarming with comments from supposedly progressive men expressing their butt-hurtness over “forcing” employers or “forcing” insurance companies to pay for birth control. Completely absent from the discussion? Any mention of the first amendment rights of the women who without the mandate would have to purchase worthless insurance coverage and conform to the religious practices of their employers. Also noticeably absent is any mention of the fact that insurance companies aren’t complaining about the mandate. So much for my belief that progressive men are any better than their conservative brethren.

@Slackajawea
Also absent: the fact that women are “forced” to pay for mens’ healthcare, too (prostate exams, Viagra, testicular cancer, etc.)

As I said above, the change in sexual attitude was both generational and cultural.

Definitely generational with so-called Greatest Generation, but their sexual mores still clung to desperately (if hypocritically) by the conservatives of the following generations.

A remarkable amount of this nonsense is driven by people who didn’t get a chance to engage in the fun sexy playtimes they think everyone else is getting. Lots of older men who lived in an era where women were more likely to be reluctant to have sex for fear of getting pregnant or ruining their reputation, and now they look at the younger generations who aren’t so encumbered and they are kicking and screaming and saying, “Not fair! If I didn’t get any, neither should they!”

This is an interesting theory, but I don’t buy it because everything I know about the era before the sexual revolution (even if we place Friess within it) indicates that unmarried people and teenagers had plenty of sex. There were just a ton of shotgun weddings and concealed pregnancies and abortions. We don’t have hard statistics on this because there weren’t very many sex surveys back then (though the ones that did exist, such as Kinsey’s surveys and Masters and Johnson’s early work, tend to confirm this). Further, in those days, a much larger percentage of men served in the military and soldiers and sailors specifically were having a ton of casual sex. I suspect that Mr. Friess had a similar probability of getting laid as a teenager and young adult as people do now.

What the sexual revolution did wasn’t increase the amount of sex that much, but rather make it a proper subject of public discussion and separate it from pregnancy so that sexually active women didn’t have the sword of Damocles hanging over them when they had it.

Having said that, am I the only one who thinks of ice cream every time I hear Foster Friess’ name?

I kind of feel that we need to do some sort of helmet law gambit to get douchey men who think birth control shouldn’t be covered. Basically, the reason so many states have helmet and seat belt laws is because insurance companies were like “fine, you don’t have to wear a helmet, and we can charge you $1500/year to have insurance. Or you could wear a fucking helmet and we’ll only charge you a couple of hundred to be insured.”

I kind of feel like if a company tries to weasel out of its obligation to provide birth control, the insurance companies should put a painful premium on the employer side of the coverage that is expressly line-itemed for pre-natal, neo-natal, and longterm medical care for special-needs children that high-risk couples might have tried to avoid if they’d had reliable birth control. Make it bright and painful, then come back and ask the employers if they’d prefer to cover contraception instead.

My pediatrician said this to me circa 1992.  He was probably of the same generation as this guy, but still- 1992! and to believe we’re having this conversation in 2012 just boggles the mind.

Brilliant second paragraph, Amanda, on who’s obsessed. 

I don’t think it’s generational or jealousy.  It’s just some people think sex is a disgusting necessity and a drive that needs to be repressed wherever possible. Some men see women’s only purpose as sex, so they need to be controlled as much as modern politics will allow.  Conservatives on my college campus are much more visible and outspoken, and therefore seemingly more plentiful, than they were in the late 60’s, early 70’s.

Yessss, Dilan, people (but more so for men) were having sex before hormonal birth control became the norm.

But look up the statistics: they did change.

Yessss, Dilan, people (but more so for men) were having sex before hormonal birth control became the norm.

But look up the statistics: they did change.

Well, a lot of women may not have admitted what they were doing to researchers, so the reported rates may have been lower due to slut shaming. But the men presumably were having sex with somebody!

As I mentioned, we really don’t have great data on this. There weren’t that many surveys anyway. On the other hand, we have a ton of anecdotes and personal histories about shotgun weddings, people’s memories of their own sex lives, illegal abortions, girls who disappeared for nine months, etc. If you look at the films my grandfather made in the 1930’s, they are filled with all sorts of anecdotes and data about teenage and unmarried promiscuity.

There’s no way to know for certain to what extent the sexual revolution affected rates of sexual intercourse among the young. But there’s no reason to assume, as Amanda did, that any larger number of men back then who wanted to get laid were not getting laid. That’s buying into the conservative narrative about the 1950’s.

Of course, when an age group first has premarital sex is only one indication in a change of sexual mores, but it’s a telling one:

Median age of first premarital sex, by age group

Turned 15 in:  Age in 2002-03 Median age of first premarital sex
1954-63     55-64           20.4
1964-73     45-54           18.6
1974-83     35-44           18.0
1984-93     25-34           17.3
1994-2003     15-24           17.6
Source: Public Health Reports

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-12-19-premarital-sex_x.htm

Recent studies indicate that 45-55% of married women and 50-60% of married men engage in extramarital sex at some time or another during their relationship (Atwood & Schwartz, 2002 - Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy)

Kinsey estimated that approximately 50% of all married males had some extramarital experience at some time during their married lives.[23] Among the sample, 26% of females had extramarital sex by their forties. Between 1 in 6 and 1 in 10 females from age 26 to 50 were engaged in extramarital sex.[24] However, Kinsey classified couples who have lived together for at least a year as “married”, inflating the statistics for extra-marital sex.[25][26]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports

Note: even with Kinsey’s “inflated” figures, nearly fifty years later twice as married women engage in extramarital affairs.

Those are just two statistical samples illustrating the sea change in sexual mores (and practice), a quick Google should find you many more: from Kinsey on, sex in this country has been studied, statistically.

Yes, Dilan there have been multiple studies of sexual practice in the U.S. for half a century, but as usual you reject any evidence out of hand for your simplistic suppositions.

Back in Kinsey’s day, the discrepancy (men must have been having sex with someone) was accounted for, if memory serves, by the small subset of women with multiple partners (including prostitutes, of course.)

But I’ve done my Googling for the day, since no amount of evidence ever convinces Dilan out of his stubbornly held suppositions.

Nor, will he ever bother to supply evidence to support his wrong-headed personal theories (unless it’s something inconsequential and/or out-of-context.)

“but still- 1992” Oy I know that was 20 years ago but is it really considered the distant past now?

On a more serious note I think social attitudes have gone backwards from then in some ways.

I mean the Christian Right was generally agreed to be a bunch of nutcases back then I think they’re actually more mainstream now.

The petty meanness of the current GOP is sickening, their isn’t even the excuse of callous cynical calculations courting crazy right wingers, they are the crazy right wingers. It is going to be interesting when someone informs them that half the electorate are woman, and the most of the rest like having regular safe sex. Good luck walking back this message.

Those are just two statistical samples illustrating the sea change in sexual mores (and practice), a quick Google should find you many more: from Kinsey on, sex in this country has been studied, statistically.

In Kinsey’s day, many men overstated and many women understated their sexual activity. Slut shaming and all the rest.

Kinsey did the world a great service, but don’t confuse what he did with good data. Studying sex in those days was like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The data was influence by the very fact that there was a survey.

Yes, Dilan there have been multiple studies of sexual practice in the U.S. for half a century, but as usual you reject any evidence out of hand for your simplistic suppositions.

Back in Kinsey’s day, the discrepancy (men must have been having sex with someone) was accounted for, if memory serves, by the small subset of women with multiple partners (including prostitutes, of course.)

But I’ve done my Googling for the day, since no amount of evidence ever convinces Dilan out of his stubbornly held suppositions.

Oh stop it. As I said, sex survey data is INHERENTLY unreliable from that period. I love what Kinsey did but his surveys also gave the world the “10 percent are homosexual” statistic—the real number is between 2 and 5 percent, depending on whom you ask.

It isn’t my suppositions here—AMANDA was engaging in supposition, speculating that men way back when had less sex and that’s why they end up being conservatives on contraception.

That’s the conservative narrative about sex. That nobody was having it until the DFH’s came along in the 1960’s and got everyone on the pill. There’s no reason to believe it—and certainly sex surveys from the era prove nothing.

I read the “aspirin between the knees” joke in an old book years ago as something like “Girls can avoid getting ‘in trouble’ with a dime. Keep it between your knees, and if it hits the floor, use it to call your parents.”

This gives a clue to just how old that joke is—pay phones cost 10 cents between the early 1950s and the mid-1970s. My first guess is that the joke dates to the introduction of the first birth control pill, 1959 I think. But it could be even older than that; could’ve been told with a nickel instead of a dime anytime after pay phones became widespread, which was in the 1920s—another time when women’s sexual behavior was a source of much handwringing.

I just keep thinking “Good thing he didn’t tell the dime version. The concept of using a coin to make a phone call really doesn’t work anymore.”

Oh, and Judi, since you want data, pregnancy rates are going to be more reliable than sex surveys (because they are taken from hospital data rather than relying on the truthfulness of survey respondents). And according to the Guttmacher Institute, teen pregnancy rates peaked at 97 per 1000 teenagers aged 15-19 (almost 10 percent!) in 1957-58. Nowadays, the rate is in the 40’s.

And since most sexually active teens DO NOT get pregnant, even prior to the introduction of the pill, that suggests a pretty high rate of sexually active teens.

(Also, the 97 per 1000 will not include any teenagers who got abortions, and there were presumably quite a few who did.)

Well, I have a better pregnancy-prevention method for Friess. Wingnut asshole men like him don’t get to take their dicks out of their pants any more; they’re only allowed to go down on women. Voila! The women get satisfied without risking pregnancy. I can’t imagine why he’d object to this plan.

Someone on Twitter, I wish I remember who, hilariously commented that if you can’t figure out how to still have sex while holding an aspirin between your knees, then you’re just not that clever.

Much like the Alternet comments, a (childfree, comfortably employed, married, white) man was soapboxing on my Facebook feed last night that employers shouldn’t be “forced” to pay for contraception. I believe his exact words were “If you have a uterus, you’re free to do whatever you want with it, but don’t expect anyone else to pay for it.”

Here’s my problem with this “pay” argument: benefits are part of your compensation, right? Employers offer things like healthcare and stock options to you in lieu of higher pay, correct? (I’ve never had a job with benefits, so my understanding may be off.) They save money by giving you a service instead of cash—since I’m sure they get a discount on buying so many policies—and you get cheaper/better healthcare than you otherwise might be able to afford. But if those services don’t cover your needs and you pay out-of-pocket, your employer certainly isn’t going to let you “opt out” and raise your pay accordingly. How is that right? And how is that forcing THEM to pay? They essentially dock your pay to provide a service you can’t use, forcing YOU pay again to get what you need. The logic doesn’t work!

Instead of healthcare, let’s play this scenario with groceries. Say an employer has an in with a discount club, an imaginary one that delivers, and can get $100 worth of groceries for $50. So instead of paying employees $1500 every two weeks, the boss pays them $1400 and has groceries delivered. Boss saves $50 per employee, the employees don’t have to buy food, everyone’s happy! Except that the boss’ universal order includes pork chops and wheat pasta, and one employee keeps kosher and another has celiac. These employees ask if they can change out the foods they can’t eat, and the boss says “No, I provide the same food for everyone. If you don’t want it, go buy something else, but I’m not paying you more to make up the difference. It’s not my fault you won’t eat it.”

I’m fairly certain that boss would lose the court case. Why are the bishops any different? Because Jesus and babies? Bullshit.

Ah Dilan, what part of a survey taken in 2002-3 was done by the Kinsey who died in 1956?

I knew—personally—teenagers who got pregnant in the 1950s and early ‘60s, but that still doesn’t change the sea change in mores and sexual practice that has been thoroughly studied for over a half century since Kinsey, by innumerable scientists and academics. Because I know anecdote doesn’t equal evidence.

As per usual, your arguments, as well as your suppositions, don’t hold water. One study, taken out of context, again.

But, as usual also, it’s a waste of time to have a discussion with you.

Dilan Esper, playing his usual schtick of I Am The Expert On Everything, where his inference from teen pregnancy rates to “a pretty high rate of sexually-active teens” is precise comparative data from which to draw the conclusion that there has been no real change in sexual mores or teenage sexual activity from the time when Friess and his like were young. The real experts contend, with data and stuff, that Dilan Esper is wrong, and there have been changes, but they are not Dilan Esper, so what the fuck do they know? Nothing, that’s what.

The study, examining how sexual behavior before marriage has changed over time, was based on interviews conducted with more than 38,000 people—about 33,000 of them women—in 1982, 1988, 1995 and 2002 for the federal National Survey of Family Growth. According to Finer’s analysis, 99 percent of the respondents had had sex by age 44, and 95 percent had done so before marriage.

Even among a subgroup of those who abstained from sex until at least age 20, four-fifths had had premarital sex by age 44, the study found.

Finer said the likelihood of Americans having sex before marriage has remained stable since the 1950s, though people now wait longer to get married and thus are sexually active as singles for extensive periods.

The study found women virtually as likely as men to engage in premarital sex, even those born decades ago. Among women born between 1950 and 1978, at least 91 percent had had premarital sex by age 30, he said, while among those born in the 1940s, 88 percent had done so by age 44.
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20061219_95_of_americans_have_had_premarital_sex/

Unpacking that study shows that, yes, the majority of Americans over a half century have had premarital sex—but from the Boomers on, women especially at an earlier age.

That sea change came about because of the availability of more and more reliable forms of birth control.

The dude’s name is Foster Freeze?!?!?!

http://pics3.city-data.com/businesses/p/0/1/7/9/4430179.JPG

This article unpacks the sexual revolution, which was tied—no surprise—to the availability of birth control:

How the Sexual Revolution Changed America Forever
With a little pharmaceutical ingenuity, the double standard relaxed its clawing grip on female humanity.

http://www.alternet.org/story/153969/how_the_sexual_revolution_changed_america_forever

The first wave in the earlier decades of the 20th century coincided with the wider availability of barrier methods.

It started in the 1920s, as middle-class Americans converted from Victorianism to Freudianism and began to accept that a desirous woman was perhaps not so depraved after all. There- after doctors and psychologists counseled America’s women that a happy marriage was sustained by mutual sexual satisfaction. Experts encouraged women to explore their natural desires, but to start the journey in the marital bed. Women accepted the prescription and ignored the fine print. At the high noon of fifties traditionalism, 40 percent of women had sex before they married—compared to just 10 percent who did in the reputedly Roaring Twenties.

And then the hormonal revolution:

In the 1950s, six in ten women were virgins at marriage and 87 percent of American women believed that it was wrong for a woman to engage in premarital sex, even with “a man she is going to marry.” By the time girls born during the sexual revolution came of age, the double standard— in practice, if not exactly in the minds of teenage boys—had been obliterated. Only two in ten of them would be virgins at marriage. Teenagers, in particular, shed the old ways. In 1960, half of unmarried 19-year-old women had not yet had sex. In the late 1980s, half of all American girls engaged in sexual intercourse by the age of 17, two-thirds by the age of 18, and the difference between teenage male and female sexual experience had narrowed from 50 points to single digits.

  I hate it when they apologize. Just don’t fucking apologize, assholes,  nobody’s fooled. It’s better when they’re honest like this.  Besides, they don’t mean it.

Jimmy, you’re not alone. When I first read this quote, I thought it was some weird old wives’ tale about using aspirin as BC. Then when I realized he meant “don’t have sex”, I thought he meant “pretend to have a headache to get rid of your husband”. Only when I read Flora’s comment did I realize he literally means keep your legs together.

Oh, totally jealousy. Absolutely. It doesn’t matter if he was young in the 60’s. Most people don’t have access to all the sex they want, or with the women they really want, and there will always be people who lack of social capital severely limits their options. I know conservatives only in their 30’s who can work themselves into a rage over their belief that adolescence today is nonstop blowjobs and sexting. It’s like this huge party of fun and beautiful people that they’ll never get invited to and so they try to get the cops to shut it down.

Friess only had four children.  He obviously has been abusing aspirin.

Nice veiled threats, Wainrider.

Or not so veiled.

So, the idea of old creeps being called out as old creeps drives you to violent thoughts?

Says more about you—and your need of medication and therapy—than those calling out the creeps.

No matter the trigger—or lack of it—it’s obvious you still need medication.

And it might be better for the generations to come if you, in particular, didn’t reproduce.

I just keep thinking “Good thing he didn’t tell the dime version. The concept of using a coin to make a phone call really doesn’t work anymore.”

“Just keep one quarter and a dime between your legs, and if it hits the ground hope that you’re within 5 miles of a working payphone, or alternately use your credit card, with which you’ve already established a cellular phone plan.”

See?  A little updating and the joke is relevant once more. Comedy gold!  Or maybe he’s in the future - I was thinking Hermes on Futurama: ‘They have phones in booths now?  Finally!  I don’t have to lug this cell phone around anymore!’

Then they came for the comment thread trolls, and I did not speak out, because I was frankly okay with it.

I call stick rule on wainrider!!

I know, I know, don’t feed the trolls.

I know, I know, don’t feed the trolls.

Awwwww.  Can’t we, though?  This one’s really cute.  Go on, look at those big genocidal eyes of his and tell me he isn’t adorable.

...looks like St0rmFr0nt is missing an idiot in good standing…

Talk about complete lack of redeeming social importance…

Just one nitpick about some of that survey data: age at first premarital intercourse doesn’t really capture what’s going on when age at marriage is changing rapidly.

Or, we could post recipes! That used to be a recommended response to trolls on Daily Kos.

I recommend this ITALIAN SWEET SAUSAGE STEW

sausage stew is made with Italian sausage, potatoes, garlic and onions, tomatoes, and seasonings.
Ingredients:

2 to 3 medium potatoes, peeled, cubed (or green beans, zucchini, green squash)
1 tablespoon cooking oil
1 to 1 1/2 pounds sweet Italian sausages
1 large clove garlic, minced
1/2 cup chopped onion
1 can (15 ounces) stewed tomatoes
2 cups chicken broth (or vegetable broth, water)
1 can (6 ounces) tomato paste
1 1/2 teaspoons dried oregano
1/2 teaspoon salt, or to taste
1/4 teaspoon pepper
2 medium green bell peppers, seeded, chopped (I prefer red, yellow or orange bell peppers)
Preparation:

In a large pot, heat oil over medium heat. Add sausage links and brown. Remove meat, Slice links into 1-inch pieces. Sautee garlic and onion in oil.  Add in sausage, tomatoes, peppers, chicken broth, tomato paste, oregano, salt, and pepper; stir to blend.

Simmer for 45 minutes. (or Cover and cook on LOW setting 8 to 10 hours in a crockpot, until potatoes are tender. Add bell pepper about 1 hour before serving.

Yummy!

Paul, I suggest you read the whole piece, so you see how all the statistics add up together:

http://www.alternet.org/story/153969/how_the_sexual_revolution_changed_america_forever

judybrowni, leave the tomato seeds in, or take them out?  And what if you can get fresh Roma tomatoes instead or stewed?...

Here’s another of my favorite winter stews.

1-2 pounds of stew beef, cubed
oil
onion
garlic
winter vegetables: rutabaga, parsnip, turnip, carrots, celery, potatoes
water or broth
salt & pepper

I’ve made this in so many variations, according to which vegetables I’ve bought, that I can say it’s fairly foolproof (although perhaps not wainrider.)

I prefer going with some combination of the turnips, parsnips and/or rutabagas; they bump up the sweet and savory contrast.

Brown the beef in the oil, remove and saute onions and garlic (I occasionally throw in some ginger for a more exotic flavor, or a dash or two of Worcestershire Sauce, or some thyme.)

Then add the beef back in, the diced vegetables (large chunks preferable), salt and pepper to taste, water or broth to just cover meat and vegetables.

Simmer for 45 minutes to an hour.

Thyme is the magic ingredient, I agree.

Mike, you literally can’t screw up that recipe, if you’ve got good SWEET Italian sausage (uncooked is best, but pre-prepared will do. I prefer chicken to pork.)

I’ve also done every combo of tomatoes/sauce, fresh canned roma, cherry or otherwise. I never minded the seeds.

But you’re best off with the canned tomatoes (I’ll add in any fresh tomatoes I have hanging around, especially if they’re getting a bit old.)

If you only have fresh tomatoes, I’d add some sauce or puree, if possible.)

You could also make that winter vegetable stew with lamb, I imagine.

I’ve also bumped up the protein in the Italian sausage stew by adding some ground beef. (but pour off the fat, after browning, or it can get too greasy.)

I make big batches of those two stews, and freeze meal-sized portions.

As to the canned tomatoes, diced is best.

However, I’ve also cut up the whole canned tomatoes myself, if that was all I had on hand. Or used the canned version that contained basil.

It’s very difficult to screw up that recipe.

ITT: roody poos refusing to get on the trains despite the necessity of such to the survival of humanity.

Yeah they probably consider it a “human right” to destroy the planet and ensure the destruction of humanity. Fucking selfish roody poos.

Trollololololololol

I agree about the thyme!

I think rosemary is a bit too strong for the winter vegetable stew (I’ve dried fresh rosemary), but I guess it would work with lamb.

For the Italian sausage stew I’ve also added some oregano or basil, but the fennel in the sweet Italian sausage flavors the vegetables beautifully on it’s own.

FYI, I know Marcotte’s probably gonna dox my ass for this but what she has is already publicly available by design anyway, just in case you faggots think that lolz are coming.

Here’s my recipe for Portuguese mince:

1 lb ground beef

1 medium onion

1/4th cup soy sauce, Kikkoman recommended but not mandatory.

2 tbsp dry white wine or dry sherry

1 inch wide slice of fresh ginger

1 clove of garlic

Chop the onion into bits, and break the clove with the handle of your knife.  Brown the meat with the onion, garlic and ginger.

When the meat is cooked, add the liquid ingredients, and cook from 30 to 60 minutes on a low heat.

Serve with white rice.

Indeed, you are a distinguished troll, my friend. You deserve medals for going above and beyond the call of lulz. I am but an amateur, a casual dabbler.

Aren’t death threats a bannable offense?  I would think so, and I hope a mod checks in during the weekend and we don’t have to wait until Monday.

Anyway, on topic.  These “cute” little quips used to be common.  And they didn’t work.  It’s like that time on the Golden Girls when Sophia told Dorothy to keep both feet on the floor, and Blanche suggested that she wear something she could take off over her head.  Often these slut-shaming tactics are a part of “abstinence-only”, even if they didn’t call it that back then.  If a parent can’t talk about birth control with their kid, they’re probably not comfortable talking about the physical act of sex.  Plenty of parents just warned “don’t get into bed with a man”, or “keep your legs closed”, and it didn’t work.

With the winter stew recipe its similar to what I make, but I throw it in the slow cooker. Coat the beef in flour and brown in oil, then add to the bottom of the crock pot, followed by the potatoes, carrots, etc. Add enough water to cover, or use a good tomato based veggie stock. I thicken it with a little flour just before serving or add a packet of brown gravy mix. Not exotic, but filling and warm, and even better the next day.

Don’t have a slow cooker, but one of these days…

Also gluten sensitive, so I don’t brown with flour. But thanks for the variation of the brown gravy mix, I’ll hafta check the label.

If I stick to just potatoes, carrots and celery in the winter vegetables, I get a traditional hearty stew.

However, I have a weakness for turnips, parsnips and rutabagas, which can be pricier, but when winter comes I’ll buy one of each that’s available, and they make for a sweeter stew.

As for sex education, back in the mid ‘60s in my lower middle class neighborhood, we didn’t get any in public school, and my parents never mentioned a damn thing.

No sex columnists, no internet, no pill available for high school kids, no nearby Planned Parenthood. But the pressure was on to be “good girls,” which worked about as well as you might imagine.

However, were big on the Object Lesson: one of my grammar school friends parents let her date an 18 year old when she was 14, and after she got pregnant, she was tossed out of school, and forced to marry.

The object lesson: she was allowed to come back to take finals, and an 8 month pregnant 14 year old certainly put the fear of same into me.

Another high school friend, same thing at 16: object lesson, an “apartment” in her parent’s basement, tossed out of high school, and a teenage husband.

Also had a couple college friends get knocked up: instant marriage.

Then abortion was legalized in a nearby staet, the Pill became widely available, and when one of my younger sister’s friends got pregnant, her minister steered her to a competent doctor, and she went on to become a pharmacist, marry later and have two children.

Yeah, that “keep your legs closed” never did work, nor does abstinence. Birth control, on the other hand…

Foster Freiss is 72, so let’s hope he subscribes to the Republican Health Care Plan, described so succinctly Alan Grayson - get sick, die faster, Mr. Freiss, much faster.

It doesn’t matter if people are actually having more sex, though there is data beyond self-reporting to indicate that they probably are. What matters is the perception. These old conservatives have convinced themselves that younger women live in a sexual free for all and they’re pissed.

It might have been generational once, but now I think it’s much more cultural. Even Friess was in his 20s during the 1960s, so if he wasn’t having as much sex as he wanted, it’s likely that he was either conflicted or too busy becoming a billionaire or both.

Freiss is from Rice Lake, WI. POp 8,000 today.  Not sure the ‘60’s have hit there, YET.

It isn’t my suppositions here—AMANDA was engaging in supposition, speculating that men way back when had less sex and that’s why they end up being conservatives on contraception

Agree with Amanda here, and a step further.  I’m not even sure that men would have had to abstaining from sex to be jealous. There was, likely, many a male who felt that same sword of Damocles of a potential pregnancy of his partner as inhibiting - he had to withdraw, or wear a rubber or face a shotgun wedding, perhaps to someone who wasn’t his first choice. 

My guess is guys like Freiss had a lot of problems with the virgin/whore dichotomy, so back then, if he was screwing it wouldn’t have been the potential wife/virgin, but the not-top-shelf girl who put out - and damn if he wanted to get stuck with her for a wife if preggers. (I’m reminded of the drama Good Boys and True.)

It wasn’t that he didn’t have sex, just not uninhibited sex - and he’s jealous about missing THAT.

Read Freiss’ bio - jock.  And OT, but his wife looks an awful lot like Callista Gingrich.

#78:

I don’t object to your theory. But it’s based on the reality that people were having sex. If they weren’t, teenage pregnancy would be a lot lower in the 1950’s than it was. My data is hard data, whereas judi’s is from notoriously unrelaible sex surveys.

Freiss is from Rice Lake, WI. POp 8,000 today.  Not sure the ‘60’s have hit there, YET.

Remember that scene from Field of Dreams, when the book banning lady tells Amy Madigan “I experienced the Sixties” to which Madigan retorts “No, I think you had two Fifties and jumped right into the Seventies.”

Ah Dilan you never waver from your crackpot theories, not in the face of facts, and a half-century of evidence.

Never, never let truth get in the way of your resentful ego, you dumb bastard you!

#77 - phylospopher - Not to be too picky, but Rice Lake is in a district which trends Democratic (with the exception of the 2010 elections.)  From what I can tell, the district was also heavily in favor of the recall of Governor Walker…just remember, not all rural areas are reactionary.

In fact, Wisconsin has a history of the unexpectedly progressive movements…even and especially in the rural areas.

Besides, it’s those damn Gophers in Minnesota which have gone off the rails.  Michelle Bachmann, anyone?

(signed, a Badger)

Shorter Dilan:

Take a contrarian position on a irrelevant or minor point of a blog post—almost, but not quite off-topic. But definitely not in response to the main point the writer was making.

Dream up a crackpot theory to support the supposition, but post no links to evidence supporting it.

When being challenged with evidence to the contrary of crackpot supposition, ignore any such evidence, or try to refute in lame manner.

Supply a sole link to “evidence” that also doesn’t support crackpot theory—but claim that it does.

Rinse and repeat.

Thank goodness I was born after the invention of the condom. I can see how guys born before then might be jealous.

http://www.fwhc.org/jane.htm Anyway to revive this? And thank fucking dog I had my tubes tied. Don’t get me started on how I wanted it done at 18, but ” i might change my mind”. Nope. Never did. Why doesn’t anyone ever say to a person who wants kids Oh but you might change YOUR mind?

Tannenberg, I’m with you for a lot of badgers I know; many are Chicago area transplants.  I was very surprised when Walker got elected.

In my business trips to the town, not so much.  Last one was during ‘08 elections.  Not a lot of Obama signs compared to McCain. 

Just getting laid isn’t enough to keep people from being assholes. Hate and nastiness appear to be their own reward. I think there are probably plenty of people out there with happy, fulfilling lives, surrounded by the genuine love and respect of their friends, who simply enjoy being assholes.

My acupuncturist was a Professor of Research Biochemstry (in fact, hired by Beijing University to set up their research biochemistry lab), before he went on to get degrees in Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine, in Beijing.

He’d earned his western degrees at universities that include Columbia and in Germany (which brings the languages he’s proficient in up to three.) In addition to practicing acupuncture and formulating his own herbal remedies, Dr. Teng keeps himself well enough informed on developments in both western and eastern medicine, including pharmacology. So much so, that Dr. Teng and my GP consulted on which type of a pharmaceutical I should be taking, my GP was impressed by his suggestion.

So, although he doesn’t have whatever degrees sex researchers have to earn, probably wouldn’t be interested in the topic—and I wouldn’t ask, because that’s not his area of expertise—I’d value Dr. Teng’s opinion, as a (extremely well) educated man of science, over your’s Dilan, any day.

However, and more to the point, I value the last half century of research by academics and scientists who have studied sex in the U.S., over yet another of your crank theories, based on nothin’ but what you pulled out of your butt.

Shorter Chet:

I’m an asshole and you should feel sorry for me.

Ooops, apparently, I should have addressed the above to the troll Chet.

So, Chet: ditto.

Well, depending on exactly what it was he’d just pulled out of his butt, it might have some relevance to sex research, anecdotal, anyway. 

Sorry, Judi, I just couldn’t resist that set up.

Dilan hasn’t particularly earned any response other than invective.  He doesn’t speak in good faith, and those of us who are interested in the world as it exists are best served by quarantining our thinking from his attention whoring.

I have to admit if someone told me that the big issue in American politics right now is the pill, I wouldn’t believe it. I wonder how much of this is just republican primaries season. I want to believe they will say anything to get people to vote for them (there must be a lot of Jim Bobs among the republican electorate) but the presidential nominee will tone it down a bit because he will have to appeal to someone other than the Jim Bobs of America.

Hey, Chet, it’s you who brought up “acupuncturist” in a thread about a GOP sex creep.

Talk about thread jacking.

Neither you nor Dilan ever site your credentials for disputing the efficacy of acupuncture or sex research, or anything else for that matter (or link to anything but one source, either crank or not on point.)

But, you can practice medicine, over the internet! So much better than trained professionals!
You and Dilan are experts on everything better than experts with their silly years of training, decades of experience, and advanced academic degrees!

The marks of a troll.

When ignorance is bliss, ‘tis folly to be wise

pitbullgirl65 -
i know, right? i have porphyria, pregnancy will kill me [if i don’t miscarry before it becomes deadly - chance of not miscarrying is about 10%. chancing of living to 5 months pregnant? less than 1%] but every doc i went to, except the last doc, said “come back at X age, you “might change your mind” [how the FUCK do you “change your mind” about a genetic disease that will kill you?!] or “come back after you’ve had X children” [did you miss the whole “i will DIE?!”]. some ALSO said “come back with signed permission from your husband.” when i said “not married” they said “then you don’t need this”.

i FINALLY found a doc who A) believed that i was an adult and B) knew AND CARED about porphyria. tubes tied.

as for the republicans, i wish they’d be honest. they don’t really care about BC itself - they care that BC allows women to not get married young.

because as much as they bitch and whine about women “trapping” men in marriage, it’s been proved in multiple studies that marriage is a HUGE benefit for men - and a negative benefit for women.

married men are hired more, given more/higher raises, faster promotion, are among the last laid off and fired - because “they have a family to take care of”
contrawise, married women are hired less often, are given smaller raises less often, are generally “mommy-tracked” and recieve fewer promotions, and are among the first to be laid off/fired.
why?
well, EVERYONE “knows” that women are gonna get married, right? and married women think about their husbands/families while at work, and prioratize family over career [and women who DON’T prioratize family over career are either disbelieved or subtly punished for it at work]
and EVERYONE “knows” that married women are going to have children. and take maternity leave. and then be the primary caregiver, so will need to move to a flex schedule or use personal time to take care of the kids - doc appts and being sick and the first day of school…
women with children are perceived as working less hard, and for less time, than women without children and all men - even when they work harder and longer hours

gods save any man whose the primary child-care-giver - i was “privileged” to overhear the following exchange once:
“Why are you taking ANOTHER personal day, X?”
“My kids have the chickenpox. they can’t go to school, and i need to take them to the doctor.”
“yes, but why are YOU doing that? where’s your WIFE?!”
“as you know, my wife works for [defense contractor], makes 5 times what i make, with benefits that are at least 10 times better than i get here. as per our marriage agreement, since she makes more and has better benefits, i do the primary childcare”
“what is WRONG with you? be a MAN and take care of your family!”
“respectfully, sir, i AM taking care of my family. by doing what’s BEST for my family. i told you in all 3 interviews that i was the primary caregiver for my children; you told me this wasn’t a problem”
“OF COURSE i said that - i didn’t believe you! what kind of MAN lets his wife be the primary bread-winner while he acts as HER wife?”
“I’ll thank you, sir, to stop making judgements about my personal life, and to stop lecturing me every time i use personal days. i’m working here because you said you were a flexible company, and i enjoy working. but if you continue to discriminate against me in this manner, i have zero problem sueing you for that.”
“sue and lose your job!”
“i just say i don’t NEED this job. now if you’ll excuse me, i need to get my kids. should i return to clear out my desk and serve notice that i’m sueing?”
“just get your act together. take friday, too - if you think your precious children will be well enough for you to return to work by monday?”
“if they are, i’ll be here monday.”

[cont]

that’s verbatim - 6 months later, i read it to HR, because that supervisor had multiple complaints against him, some lodged by me, and whenever i overheard conversations like that, i typed them up and turned them in - but instead of just firing his ass, they had a “hearing”, where everyone who lodged complaints had to either “testify” or withdraw their complaint. surprisingly, most testified - i know that HR thought that if they MADE people testify, they’d withdraw the complaint, but there was a lot of solidarity in our department, fostered by “X”, who knew intimately what lots of women in the workforce went thru, because he went thru the same-but-worse because it wasn’t just shit about taking care of kids, but shit about him being a MAN and taking care of kids.

it’s one of the few instances i know of where the man-being-primary-caregiver WON the battle. i have a friend who stopped working to be take care of kids, and has been looking for a job for THREE YEARS [when his youngest started school] and can’t find a job because NO employer is willing to believe that he stopped working to care for his children - they ask if he wasn’t in drug rehab, or a felon, or a thousand other things, because it’s just UNBELIEVABLE that a man would be the primary caregiver.

and the republicans hate THAT, too - they see this trend of fathers actually PARENTING as emasculating men, a new “weapon of feminists” to “destroy American manhood”.

they want women back in the kitchen, having babies and taking care of them - because THAT sort of marriage is really, really, REALLY good for men [and who cares if it’s bad for women? they’re “taken care of” by their husband in this scenario…] and allows men to be “Real Men” and “take care of” their wives and children - not in the sense of actually CARING for them, but merely in the sense of bringing home money to pay for things. because Real Men don’t HAVE those “softer, womanly” emotions like love or sympathy, or a need to CARE for others, or any desire to actually KNOW their children [until their children are grown, maybe]

it’s NOT just about controlling women - it’s also about controlling MEN, and they’re jealous [and afraid of being like] men who have access to the full range of human emotions, who CARE about their wives and kids on more than a material level. THEY weren’t allowed to feel those things, weren’t allowed to have an honest-to-gods PARTNERSHIP with THEIR spouses, so NO ONE should be allowed to feel that and do that and live that way - jealous of, and desperately afraid that if they don’t fight it, they themselves will become, be FORCED to become, men who take care of their own kids, who maybe aren’t the primary bread-winners, who have to CARE and think and be responsible at HOME instead of marrying a woman who acts like his mother…

they want women to STAY perpetual mothers, and men to be the breadwinners in the workplace but another child for their wives to take care of. it was good enough for their fathers, it should be good enough for their sons!

that it completely dehumanizes both sexes, that it places women into a box of ONLY being mothers and sex-dispensers, that it means men never feel - or at least never EXPRESS - most emotions, and that it ignores all those who don’t fit into a neat gender-binary is the POINT.
i mean, if women were more than mothers-and-sex, what does it say about THEIR mothers? does it mean that they’ve helped dehumanize their OWN MOTHERS?! and if men are CAPABLE of feeling all the emotions that women do, what does it say about them and their fathers? does it mean that they’ve helped emotionally castrate their fathers, their sons, themselves?

better to just continue to enforce this “way of the world” than THINK about it and realize you’ve completely fucked up, easier to continue on the same way than discover that you’re wrong and then have to FIX it, because there’s NO WAY to fix their parents, it would be REALLY hard - and require letting someone else SEE your emotions - to fix yourself, and would require that you admit you were wrong to your children. and probably also to your WIFE. CAN’T have that!

Or, we could post recipes! That used to be a recommended response to trolls on Daily Kos.

Hmm.  Who on Daily Kos used to be on alt.folklore.urban I wonder?

@denelian: my dad lives in constant terror of having to admit error to his kids or wife, and it infests every waking moment of his life.  So much wasted energy and pointless suffering.

denelian, that was great. Honestly, I think the problem is not that other men get to be squishy and cuddly and have emotions and you don’t, but that if some of them start pussying out and treating women like people, it’s going to make you look bad. Your “dehumanizing” women was not a problem; women aren’t human in the first place. They’re women. They were put on earth for a reason. Those young eunuchs are fucking up by making women think they’re human, and making guys like you out to be the assholes when any sane person would see that you’re just doing what’s right and good. I really don’t think the option that they’re wrong even enters most of these guys’ heads.

One nice thing at least among hardcore conservatives is that they don’t bother with euphemisms like “be a man and take care of your family,” in favor of honest adminitions like “be a man and maintain absolute control over your family.” They’ve seen how those euphemisms can be abused.

@denelian: And my faith in humanity erodes even further…

PM, I think it was Joseph Heller who noted that the price of eternal vigilance was insanity…........

Neither you nor Dilan ever site your credentials for disputing the efficacy of acupuncture

To be fair, they don’t have to. There’s no objective scientific evidence that acupuncture works on anything other than the placebo effect, multiple studies have not shown any connection to anything other than placebo, and so on. Studies have also done things like randomly place needles or fool people by making them think needles have been placed (when they haven’t), and yet show the same supposed results as “real” acupuncture. So if doing something wrong, or not doing it at all, makes the patient believe it’s still working, the odds are pretty good there’s nothing there to begin with.

And this has been despite decades of acupuncture advocates trying to prove that it does something.

Right now, acupuncture should be considered as realistic as faith healing, aura manipulation, hologram balance-enhancers, or magnetic bracelets. That is, pure nonsense that depends on the gullibility and/or belief of the patient to make it work.

Blah, blah, blah, troll on acupuncture—with no evidence, or links to evidence of their own.

I have a file full of links to studies done on the efficacy of acupuncture on a disc.

But whenever I’ve posted them in comments, the trolls still bleat, no no no no those scientific studies aren’t evidence we accept!

Complete waste of time to present evidence to trolls, who in this case, have hijacked a thread having nothing to do with acupuncture.

Right on point for this diary, Saturday Night Live’s assessment of Foster Friess’ “apology” for the aspirin “joke.”

Poehler’s best dig came after discussing conservative supporter Foster Freiss’ now-infamous comment on the issue involving Bayer aspirin being used as contraception. He since apologized, but Amy wasn’t having it:

“Well, we’d love to accept your apology, Foster, but you made a mistake—and now you’re going to have to live with that mistake for the rest of your life.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/19/amy-poehler-weekend-update-really-birth-control-video_n_1287485.html?ref=comedy

Chet, yes, valid scientific studies—but what are your credentials for judging otherwise?

Crickets.

Studies have also done things like randomly place needles or fool people by making them think needles have been placed (when they haven’t), and yet show the same supposed results as “real” acupuncture. So if doing something wrong, or not doing it at all, makes the patient believe it’s still working, the odds are pretty good there’s nothing there to begin with.

That’s pretty damning evidence to me. I’m not a scientist or anything, so I don’t get automatic credibility, but that points strongly to a placebo interpretation.

I just Googled and came up with plenty of links with studies on the efficacy of acupuncture.

But I’ve played dueling links with trolls and wingnuts before and it’s a waste of my time (as well as threadjacking, in this case.)

So I’m going back to the tried and true internet traditional response to trolls: RECIPES!

QUICK AND EASY BARBEQUE SAUCE!

I’d run out of barbecue sauce, so I googled recipes, found common ingredients, checked my fridge and approximated.

I prefer a sweet and tangy sauce.

Combine:

Ketchup

Balsamic Vinegar

Mustard

Majority ketchup, with a splash of vinegar and a squirt or two of mustard.

I’d start with the amount of ketchup near equivalent to the amount of barbecue sauce you need, and add vinegar and mustard sparingly until you’ve achieved the taste you like.

You can also add a hit of cayenne, if you want it spicier, salt, pepper, powdered garlic, onion.

Or, if you don’t have balsamic vinegar, white vinegar with a hit of soy sauce.

As I said, you’re incapable of correctly judging the credibility of sources.

Says the troll who postulated that the same transport protein molecule could transport glucose and fructose molecules with equal ease and efficienty in the lumen of the small intestine.

I just Googled and came up with plenty of links with studies on the efficacy of acupuncture.

I can google and come up with a great many links that purportedly “prove” vaccines cause autism, that prayer cures diseases, and that women are biologically inferior to men when it comes to things like math and science.

So, y’know, so what.

But I bet one of those links you fond wasn’t Science-Based Medicine. And I, I admit, am not a doctor. Doctor Steven Novella is, however.

...the consensus of the best clinical studies on acupuncture show that there is no specific effect of sticking needles into acupuncture points. Choosing random points works just as well, as does poking the skin with toothpicks rather than penetrating the skin with a needle to elicit the alleged “de qi”. The most parsimonious interpretation of the evidence is that the needles (i.e. acupuncture itself) are superfluous — any perceived benefit comes from the therapeutic interaction. This has been directly studied, and the evidence suggests that the way to maximize the subjective effects from the ritual of acupuncture is to enhance the interaction with the practitioner, and has nothing to do with the acupuncture itself. Acupuncture is a clear example of selling a specific procedure based entirely on non-specific effects from the therapeutic interaction — a good bedside manner and some hopeful encouragement.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/emdr-and-acupuncture-selling-non-specific-effects/

CHOCOLATE/CINNAMON CHILI

1 -1 ½ lb ground beef
3 -4 ounces tomato paste
1 -1 ½ cup water
chili powder
onion powder
garlic powder
cinnamon
brown sugar
salt and pepper
3 -4 ounces dark chocolate
chili bean , if you like I don’t add any
Directions:

1
Brown ground beef, rinse, drain well add back to pan.
2
Add the half can of tomato paste and a little bit of the water to help thin it out.
3
Add chili, onion, garlic powders to taste, probably about a teaspoon of each and about a tablespoon of the cinnamon. salt and pepper to taste.
4
Add about 3 or 4 tablespoons of brown sugar, I like it a little sweeter so use less if you don’t.
5
Add the dark chocolate and stir until it melts.
6
Add more water to thin the chili, some will evaporate as it cooks.
7
Taste and adjust seasonings as desired.
8
Let simmer about 30 minutes to let the flavors mesh.

Chocolate and cinnamon deepen the chili flavor, and I also have thrown in more traditional chili spices: like cumin and paprikia.

I also usually add red, yellow or orange bell peppers,for vegies and texture. and also have thrown in more traditional chili spices: cumin, paprikia.

As well as thrown in a large can of crushed or diced tomatoes, instead of the paste.

And sauteed a diced onion and clove or two of garlic in the oil of the browned meat.

I usually compare several recipes on something , take what I think will work from each, adjust for the ingredients I have on hand, paying attention to the ratios of ingredients: meat to spices, etc.

Which might not work for baking—which is more chemistry—but seems to work out fine for things stews. Plus it’s more fun!

And, if you’re going to add more veggies you probably should add enough water to cover ingredients.

You know, if I’d actually done that, it would have been almost as stupid as the time I couldn’t tell the difference between saccarides.

It’s saccharides, Chet, for future reference.

The metabolism of fructose differs from that of other monosaccharides such as glucose in ways that modify insulin dynamics and obesity risk.

Link

And let’s remember what Chet was objecting to:

I was deathly ill for a period of years, now I’m reasonably healthy for 61.

Have had my disagreements with Dr. Teng (no doctor is God, although most believe themselves to be), and was always wary of the medical profession.

Don’t think any doctor is DA BOMB. Every doctor has his hobbyhorse to ride, and I didn’t ride all of Dr. Teng’s.

Did encounter my share of quacks in Western medicine, including one who may have overdosed me on vitamins he sold me (my health got exponentially worse as his “treatments” continued.)

Dr. Teng actually pared down the number of vitamins he advised me to take, none of which he sold me, like the quack had.

Like I said, reasonably healthy now, except when I fall off the wagon big time nutritionally, including milk products.

exholt, I don’t doubt you’re correct. Actually, all Dr. Teng told me was that there was no lab equiptment or budget to buy any. He had relatives who went through the Cultural Revolution on the Mainland, so he was well aware of the situation, I imagine.

If only they had that attitude towards people sitting on massive fortunes, since unlike some people getting laid more than others, income inequalities have genuinely bad effects on the country.

Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia’s Surplus Male Population (Belfer Center Studies in International Security)

What happens to a society that has too many men? In this provocative book, Valerie Hudson and Andrea den Boer argue that, historically, high male-to-female ratios often trigger domestic and international violence. Most violent crime is committed by young unmarried males who lack stable social bonds. Although there is not always a direct cause-and-effect relationship, these surplus men often play a crucial role in making violence prevalent within society. Governments sometimes respond to this problem by enlisting young surplus males in military campaigns and high-risk public works projects. Countries with high male-to-female ratios also tend to develop authoritarian political systems. Hudson and den Boer suggest that the sex ratios of many Asian countries, particularly China and India—which represent almost 40 percent of the world’s population—are being skewed in favor of males on a scale that may be unprecedented in human history. Through offspring sex selection (often in the form of sex-selective abortion and female infanticide), these countries are acquiring a disproportionate number of low-status young adult males, called “bare branches” by the Chinese. Hudson and den Boer argue that this surplus male population in Asia’s largest countries threatens domestic stability and international security. The prospects for peace and democracy are dimmed by the growth of bare branches in China and India, and, they maintain, the sex ratios of these countries will have global implications in the twenty-first century.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/13/opinion/13iht-edhudson_ed3_.html

China is already experiencing a tremendous increase in crime, and 50 to 90 percent of the crimes in the large cities are committed by bare-branch migrants. Over the course of history, Chinese rulers’ response to the bare branches was to battle them, expel them or co-opt them as soldiers. All Chinese governments have understood that the bare branches are a formidable club — if it is in your hand it can be useful, but poised over your head it is a serious security threat.

Indeed, the very type of government to which a nation can aspire is affected by a sex ratio abnormally favoring males. History demonstrates that such societies cannot be governed by anything less than an authoritarian political system. Furthermore, high-sex-ratio societies typically develop a foreign policy style crafted to retain the respect and allegiance of its bare branches — a swaggering, belligerent, provocative style.

Needs more cowbell, troll.

Well, it’s a serious problem. On the one hand, we hate girls and don’t want them to be born. On the other hand, you need girls for pussy. What the hell are we supposed to do? It’s so fucking frustrating and confusing and I just want to break a window or something.

Judybrowni’s recipes can be made vegtarian (add some cumin and smoky paprika for a “meaty” taste, also possible firm beans for protein and meaty texture), or with lamb or goat.  I have similar ones.  No more sausage anything for our house - too much bad cholestoral.  With chicken, they would still be good, but decidedly different tasting.

With right-wing lawmakers, sex with women IS only for procreation.  For fun, they have sex with other men.

denelian @ 100:  My spouse was the primary caregiver to our kids from 87 to 89.  At the end of that, he was back in school and as we were in a recession, he had an “excuse” and caught all sorts of shit from lots of people. 
In the current market, anyone who has been a primary caregiver is going to have problems.  I usually advise the younger women I work with considering it to continue working part time or take at least one class as future resume fodder.  Corp HR is a major bummer.  It’s not entirely a joke that you have to have a job to get a job.

judybrowni @ 118, I just add cocoa powder, much easier than dealing with chocolate and I can completely leave out the sugar if I want.
I also like to use brown mustard for the BBQ sauce.

My digestion doesn’t handle beans anymore if I try to use them as a protein source, although I love beans.

Hence, the beanless chili, with other vegetables I can deal with: bell peppers, onions, tomatoes.

I find the pork sweet Italian sausage too greasy, and prefer the chicken, but

I made the mistake of trying milk chocolate once and that did not suit chili, at all. But a dark chocolate Hersey bar was great and also works in a mole sauce (I like a hint of sweetness.) Oregano is also a spice you can add to chili.

Don’t dare keep cocoa powder or large stashes of chocolate in stock, I have a sweet tooth and would eat it all until it’s gone.

So, I buy a bar every now and then for chili.

Like the idea of brown mustard in barbecue.

Needs more cowbell, troll.

Is pointing out glaring factual errors trolling?

If you claim a 7-year old opinion piece from the NYT as your primary source, then, yes.

Yet, even if we granted Hudson and Den Boer that the
increased sex imbalance would have the implications they claimed, we
argue that Hudson and Den Boer would remain unduly alarmist about the
consequences of this demographic development.

Link

OK. Here you go:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=“bare+branches”+Asia

Complains that I used opinion piece from the NYT. Ignores that my “primary source” was a scholarly MIT Press book.

Furthermore, it looks like you didn’t read the paper you linked. Even if it thinks the book goes too far, the outlook it portrays is pretty bleak:

Psychologists have long known that marriage and fatherhood are associated with lower testosterone levels in males, thereby decreasing the likelihood that a father will engage in competitive behavior.^18 It is also known that acts of violence and crime tend to be perpetrated by males of 15-30 years of age.^19 In other words, as the conventional wisdom goes, unmarried males are more likely to engage in risky behavior, including violent crimes.  The differential propensity between single and married males to commit crimes raises disturbing specters of the millions of Chinese men who won’t be able to marry. Chinese commentators have noted that the rebels in Chinese history, such as those portrayed in the novel Water Margin, were primarily males who could not get married; some had even developed strong hatred against those who were married.^20 There is evidence that the large-scale migration has contributed to a rise in crime in urban areas. According to information from the Ministry of Public Security, migrants committed 50 percent of the crimes in Shanghai, Beijing, and Tianjin and over 80 percent in Guangzhou and Shenzhen.^21 In 2004, Guangdong province, which has the largest migrant population in China, recorded over 510,000 criminal cases, about 80 per cent of the cases were reportedly committed by migrants.^22 Tensions between locals and migrants have sometimes reached the boiling point. As social tensions heighten, this growing phalanx of the alienated or disgruntled may turn to aggressive or extreme means, increasing the likelihood of social violence. In short, the rising number of surplus males in China may challenge Chinese policy makers and society.

Let me guess: you Googled the first criticism of my source you could find. Then you assumed it must be completely on your side.

Let me guess: you Googled the first criticism of my source you could find. Then you assumed it must be completely on your side.

Funny, that’s not their final take on the subject, troll:

The effect of ageing is likely to be compounded by an expected
decline of the youth population by the mid-2010s. As shown in Figures 3
and 4, both the percentage of 15-24 year-olds in the population and the
absolute number of 15-24 year-olds will continue to decline from the highs
set in the mid-1980s. While these trends show some modest reversal in the
2003-2012 period (in an echo of the baby boom of the 1980s), the twin
decline resumes after that. Assuming no dramatic rupture in the political
and economic situation, we can conclude that the demographic pressure
for juvenile crimes will begin to ease substantially around 2015. As is
widely known, the Chinese Party-state has responded to the increases in
crime with periodic yanda (strike-hard) anti-crime campaigns. Invariably
these campaigns are characterized by heightened police action, tougher
sentencing guidelines in the courts, and, in a classic display of state power,
public sentencing rallies.35 With the easing of the demographic pressure
on crime rates around 2015, it is likely to reduce the urge by the Chinese
leadership to launch strike-hard campaigns and other rough tactics. There is thus the likelihood, further augmented by the legal and law enforcement reforms already under way, that the police state will become gentler, more professional, and more modulated.

DESPITE the near consensus on the connection between strict population control and the dramatic rise of sex ratio at birth in China, our study of China’s sex imbalance underscores the complexity of the issue. Even if the evidence seems to suggest a return to the historical norm in terms of the sex ratio at birth, the socio-political implications of this imbalance will likely be profound.

The sheer numbers of surplus males raises the specter of a host of social problems, including female trafficking and other forms of crime as well as assorted public health issues. Yet we contend that it would be unduly alarmist to predict a deficit of peace from the surplus of men. Not only are the magnitude and severity of “surplus males” problem exaggerated, but a number of other developments, notably rapid ageing and new government initiatives, will likely counteract the socio-political effects of China’s sex imbalance.

Let me guess, you’re the same troll Amanda has banned here a few times already, unable to learn from your previous experience.

So are you telling me the paper says there are no social problems whatsoever as a result of some people getting laid more than others?

Paper (your paper):

The sheer numbers of surplus males raises the specter of a host of social problems, including female trafficking and other forms of crime as well as assorted public health issues.

Amanda:

If only they had that attitude towards people sitting on massive fortunes, since unlike some people getting laid more than others, income inequalities have genuinely bad effects on the country.

So ... public health issues, female trafficking, and various other crimes aren’t “genuinely bad effects”?

So are you telling me the paper says there are no social problems whatsoever as a result of some people getting laid more than others

Yet we contend that it would be unduly alarmist to predict a deficit of peace from the surplus of men

“Unduly alarmist” is their term, for, example, right now, you’re not getting laid at all, and it hasn’t seemed to cause any social problems that I’m aware of right now.

So ... public health issues, female trafficking, and various other crimes aren’t “genuinely bad effects”?

Not only are the magnitude and severity of “surplus males” problem exaggerated, but a number of other developments, notably rapid ageing and new government initiatives, will likely counteract the socio-political effects of China’s sex imbalance.

Selective quoting.  Genius, I tells you, pure genius!

Not only are the magnitude and severity of “surplus males” problem exaggerated

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

Incidentally, Jaak Panksepp’s book Affective Neuroscience more or less agrees with what I have to say as well.

Selective quoting.

Look who’s talking.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

And it doesn’t mean that they are serious.

Look who’s talking.

Sure, let’s put things into context:

The sheer numbers of surplus males raises the specter of a host of social problems, including female trafficking and other forms of crime as well as assorted public health issues. Yet we contend that it would be unduly alarmist to predict a deficit of peace from the surplus of men. Not only are the magnitude and severity of “surplus males” problem exaggerated, but a number of other developments, notably rapid ageing and new government initiatives, will likely counteract the socio-political effects of China’s sex imbalance.

You chose to quote just the first sentence, (which I quoted in my link with the rest of the paragraph) in order to prove what?

As for Jaak, I’m sure a text book written 13-14 years ago is an authority to cite as the latest understanding of human neurobiology.

You chose to quote just the first sentence, (which I quoted in my link with the rest of the paragraph) in order to prove what?

That the authors agree that a male surplus could be problematic. They don’t seem to deny it. Just downplay it.

As for Jaak, I’m sure a text book written 13-14 years ago is an authority to cite as the latest understanding of human neurobiology.

And Hebb’s law is from the 50s. Does that make it wrong?

Do you even have this book? What do you know about neuroscience?

Carver Mead released Analog VLSI and Neural Systems in 1989.

Only a loud-mouthed bozo who doesn’t know what he’s talking about would judge a scholarly work on its age alone.

That the authors agree that a male surplus could be problematic. They don’t seem to deny it. Just downplay it.

Taking it out of context doesn’t prove anything, except perhaps that they’re more sanguine about the effects than you are, but they’ve studied the subject whilst you merely regurgitate arguments to prove your so-called point.

And Hebb’s law is from the 50s. Does that make it wrong?

Perhaps it doesn’t explain everything:

One such study reviews results from experiments that indicate that long-lasting changes in synaptic strengths can be induced by physiologically relevant synaptic activity working through both Hebbian and non-Hebbian mechanisms

Carver Mead released Analog VLSI and Neural Systems in 1989.

If a work can’t reflect the latest findings in a given area, then it isn’t relevant.

Even this encomium to Mr. Mead’s work praises it as a textbook for training, not cutting-edge latest understanding about a subject.

His 1989 textbook, Analog VLSI and Neural Systems, trained interdisciplinary researchers who are poised today to revolutionize the frontier of computing and neurobiology.

Only a loud-mouthed bozo who doesn’t know what he’s talking about would judge a scholarly work on its age alone.

You’re better at being a loud-mouthed bozo here so far, cataphut, than any of the other trolls that have infested this website in the past, but keep losing at the top of your lungs, I’m sure it bodes well for whatever mental stability you have left these days….........

Perhaps it doesn’t explain everything

Never said it did. You bozo.

If a work can’t reflect the latest findings in a given area, then it isn’t relevant.

His work continues to be influential:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/brainsinsilicon/about.html

Now, would you answer my question: what do you know about neuroscience and, in particular, any work that Panksepp has done?

Newtonian mechanics “doesn’t explain everything” either.

Do I see you attacking that because relativity has superseded it?

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=hebbian&as_sdt=0,39&as_ylo=2010&as_vis=0

Over 4,000 papers on Hebbian learning since 2010.

It’s clearly all wrong.

(You bozo.)

Instead of hardwiring the silicon neurons together, as Mead did in his silicon retina, we softwired them by assigning unique addresses. Every time a spike occurs, the chip outputs that neuron’s address. This address points to a memory location (RAM) that holds the synaptic target’s address, or to multiple memory locations if the neuron has multiple synaptic targets. When this address is fed back into the chip, a post-synaptic potential is triggered at the target. An extremely efficient technique, as the same post-synaptic circuit serves all the synapses that neuron receives—virtual synapses! Encoding, translating, and decoding an address happens fast enough to route several million spikes per second, allowing a million connections to be made among a thousand silicon neurons. These softwires may be rerouted simply by overwriting the RAM’s look-up table, making it possible to specify any desired synaptic connectivity.

Yep, they just took what he did with no changes whatsoever.

Over 4,000 papers on Hebbian learning since 2010.

A hypothesis commonly found in biological and computational studies of synaptic plasticity embodies a version of the 1949 postulate of Hebb that coactivity of pre- and postsynaptic elements results in increased efficacy of their synaptic contacts. This general proposal presaged the identification of the first and still only known long-lasting synaptic plasticity mechanism, long-term potentiation (LTP). Yet the detailed physiology of LTP induction and expression differs in many specifics from Hebb’s rule. Incorporation of these physiological LTP constraints into a simple non-Hebbian network model enabled development of “sequence detectors” that respond preferentially to the sequences on which they were trained. The network was found to have unexpected capacity (e.g., 50 x 10(6) random sequences in a network of 10(5) cells), which scales linearly with network size, thereby addressing the question of memory capacity in brain circuitry of realistic size.

http://www.pnas.org/content/91/21/10104.short

Yep, they just took what he did with no changes whatsoever.

Don’t remember saying that either. “Influential” apparently means “blindly imitated” now.

http://www.pnas.org/content/91/21/10104.short

That’s one paper out of 4,000. Since 2010. And you complain about me cherry-picking.

Yet the detailed physiology of LTP induction and expression differs in many specifics from Hebb’s rule.

Compare:

Yet the trajectory of Mercury’s orbit differs in many specifics from those predicted by Newtonian gravity.

You bozo.

That’s one paper out of 4,000. Since 2010. And you complain about me cherry-picking.

The fact that Non-Hebberian learning exists demonstrates he didn’t corner the market on how the nervous system learns.

Uh, you just compared Hebberian learning to Newtons’ understanding of gravity and physics, mein Herr.

Thanks for helping me demonstrate how ignorant you are, let’s do it again some other time.

The fact that Non-Hebberian learning exists demonstrates he didn’t corner the market on how the nervous system learns.

Quote me saying that he did. You are strawmanning.

Uh, you just compared Hebberian learning to Newtons’ understanding of gravity and physics, mein Herr.

Yes. Newtonian physics is incomplete. Did you know that relativity is more accurate? So why aren’t you bashing Newton?

Thanks for helping me demonstrate how ignorant you are

You can’t even spell “Hebbian”. Shut up, you bozo.

The elite genius here, “Dark Avenger”, is an apparent expert on the subject despite the fact that he can’t even spell the terms being discussed.

And Hebb’s law is from the 50s. Does that make it wrong?

No, it means it isn’t the be-all and end all of understanding how learning takes place.

The elite genius here, “Dark Avenger”, is an apparent expert on the subject despite the fact that he can’t even spell the terms being discussed.

Never said I was an elite genius, but thanks for the spell check, troll supreme.

“Unduly alarmist” is their term, for, example, right now, you’re not getting laid at all, and it hasn’t seemed to cause any social problems that I’m aware of right now.

It causes constant outbreaks of pissy blog trolling, for one thing. You have the occasional Nice Guy who mass-murders women because they wouldn’t fuck him, but the outrage rarely seems that directed and focused. I think a nonzero number of Western-world internet trolls might just be out on the street smashing windows today if they hadn’t spent the last ten or fifteen years growing soft in front of their computers.

That’s a nasty thought, js.

That’s actually my personal unsupported theory about why violent crime rates are decreasing. Being an asshole on the internet can be genuinely fulfilling, as I know from personal experience.

No, it’s legalized abortion that has suppressed violent crime rates:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect

Feel free to work yourselves into a masturbatory troll froth, I’m going to work and won’t be reading—or responding to—any of it.

Back to the original subject, Foster Friess, somebody ought to name an award after this guy.  Misogyny so blatant that Rick Santorum distances himself from it deserves to be memorialized somehow.