Sunday, November 18, 2007

200 Lashes for a rape victim?

Just another example of Saudi Arabia's backward trends, for all those readers who don't stay on top of their middle east news. The Saudi courts recently upped the punishment for a rape victim to receive 200 lashes. Let me a repeat, a rape VICTIM is handed a jail term and lashing for the circumstances leading up to her rape. What was her crime? Meeting an old friend, an unrelated male, to retrieve some photographs.

The seven males who abducted the two and raped them both initially were sentenced for periods from 10 months to 5 years. After her lawyer contested it, the courts increased their sentences to 2-9 years. Oh, but wait, they increased her sentence to 6 months in jail and 200 lashes. Why? She bothered talking to the media.

Just another instance of how our "ally" Saudi Arabia continues to deny basic human rights to its female citizens. Current rules include a dress code; prohibitions against driving unaccompanied, traveling anywhere unaccompanied, and testifying in court; requirement to have a male's permission for surgery, and inability to vote. Add in the fact that they blatantly support extremist ideology both at home and abroad, you wonder, why again are we so insistent that they're our ally???

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Sometimes I wish I was a lesbian

I figured that would get your attention. Now, in all honesty, I really like being a woman, and wouldn't really want to be the man in a relationship. But apart from that and the fact that I've yet to be attracted to females, sometimes I think it would be easier being a lesbian.

Take, for instance, the fact that I pick up women much more frequently than I do men. I keep meeting women who I click with immediately, who I have difficulty ending conversations with, and overall enjoy their company. Now, this is great when it comes to gaining more confidants, friends I trust enough to see the real me and whose opinions I trust and value. And if I was a lesbian, this would also generate potential partners to date. Unfortunately, as a heterosexual female, this is not one of the benefits.

I think the longer I go through my life, the more I understand the gender dynamics that are constantly at play. Perhaps my ability to click with women can be attributed to the fact that I don't see them as having potential and can therefore let down my guard more readily, but this only partially explains it. I mean, the feminist in me fights the notion that women and men are inherently different in their social skills and interactions, but societally imposed or not, there seems to be a dichotomy. Women (at least with each other) tend to be more open about their lives, confide in each other more regularly for advice or sympathy, bond by their conversations, and define their friendships based on their ability to trust the other person. On the other hand, men tend to hide their emotions more (from themselves and others), analyze less, bond over activities, and define their friendships based on their willingness/ability to have each other's back. Now, both have obvious strengths and weaknesses, and regardless of what gender fulfills what roles, you tend to need both skill sets covered.

My question to my readers, therefore, is this: Do I do a fair job at describing this dichotomy, and if so, is it more difficult to find opposites/complements to which you connect, or those that are like you?

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

It's time to fund research

For years the United States has been a leader in medically related research. Yet, due to budget cuts over the past 8 years, we have not had the resources for scientists and health professionals to pursue integral scientific and health related research. To put this in perspective, almost every faculty member I know has had to take less graduate students, cut prospective research projects and spend most of their time applying for grants instead of actually completing research. This is because the National Institute of Health is at an all time funding low, and less than 6% of grant applications are currently approved. These grants fund research on Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and cancer, among others, to help increase our understanding of how the body works, how various diseases affect it, and what we can do about them. And for the past 8 years, we've been effectively saying that this isn't important to us as a country.

It is imperative that we start to fund this research before we lose our edge, both in scientific discovery and ability to address those health issues that plague our nation. President Bush recently vetoed a bill that would slightly increase NIH funding and compensate for some of the drastic cuts in recent years. If the 2008 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill fails at getting enough votes for an override, the National Institute of Health will get what equates to a 3.7% decrease in funding (given current rates of inflation). This is already funding drastically few projects, and Bush just put us in a position to decrease funding even further. Please urge your congressmen to vote pass this bill. It's about time we start putting money this important area.

Sunday, November 04, 2007

Acceptance

As I spend more time getting to know people, I think I'm starting to understand traits we all seem to have in common. To some degree or another everyone is in constant pursuit of acceptance by their peers. Take dating, for example. The largest compliment one can receive is that someone of the opposite sex likes you. Apart from a superficial crush, someone who really knows all of you and likes you for who you are really builds your self-esteem. It's total acceptance of you. Yet we often spend months getting to the point where we trust the other person enough to show him/her our true selves. That way there's less risk of being (and being hurt) by rejection.

Even in non-romantic social spheres, people crave it. I used to be highly turned away from my synagogue's youth group because I hated the pressure to be the cool kid, and everything you had to have and pretend in order to be so. But outside of the popular spheres, we all share this basic need. If we can define a group in which we belong, we feel automatic acceptance. When groups clearly define themselves, they end up narrowing their circle of acceptance. Goth kids in school still get derided for not being alternative enough, liberals at a liberal university get mocked for not being progressive enough, Christians get snubbed for not acting Christian enough, etc. Even in non-official groups, people change their behavior when they're in a group. Now, some are more subtle than others, but if you know someone well enough, you can see the front they put up to increase their likelihood of social acceptance.

Perhaps this is why good friends are so important to have. They're defined by their ability to see you in your entirety (or near entirety), really know you as a person, and still enjoy your company. Now, this doesn't mean each person needs to have a hundred-person network, yet they do need at least 1-2 people deep down they really trust. It's why while I think the terms extroverted and introverted can really describe a person's personality, the term "loner" is a misnomer. Those who define themselves as such are really just trying to convince themselves and everyone around them that they are above this basic human need. That way they won't be disappointed if someone fails them. In reality, this self-protectionary measure is a social mask they wear full time. Perhaps, these people are the ones who need a friend the most.