Merry Christmas

I mean, seriously. I have got to update this picture.

Christmas music

I admit it. I like Christmas music. Even the Jesus-y stuff. In fact, I think most people enjoy it, but it has become popular to get a few seconds of attention by making a big deal out of how much a person hates it.

Camp Sunshine donations (again)

Once again, this is a scheduled post because I’m out of the country, so I want to make sure I can be as active as possible about the fundraising I’m doing for a place here in Maine called Camp Sunshine. They’re there for children with life-threatening illnesses, so what they do is pretty amazing. Along with Atheists of Maine, I’m hoping we can raise a few thousand dollars by the time this is all said and done in February. (Incidentally, this whole thing culminates in a February polar dip off the coast of Maine.)

So if you can donate, please go here. Every dollar counts.

On the 2nd Amendment

Let’s start from the beginning:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If one is to look at the history of the Second Amendment, there’s plenty of arguments on either side for ways to interpret it. However, I think the most compelling argument is that it went through numerous revisions specifically designed to emphasize its militia/military aspects. Here’s what that says to me: The right to own a gun has limits. I do not believe, as our modern courts have been hinting at, that the Second Amendment gives a citizen free reign over gun purchases and ownership. The government has a right to put forth limits on gun ownership; states and the feds can outlaw guns in national and other parks, cities can ban their sale, and background checks can be as big of a pain in the ass as a group of representatives or voters wish to make them.

All that said, I do happen to favor a fairly unfettered right to gun ownership. There are clearly weapons which serve no purpose other than to terrorize, but for the vast majority of gun purchases, I have no issue. People are often safer if they own a gun or if they’re in an area with an average law-abiding, gun-toting member of the NRA (the awfulness of that organization aside). However, there are limits to this argument: specifically, to the United States and similar countries. We already have prolific gun ownership and a thriving black market for guns. To attempt to curb it at this point will most likely just end up in a greater disparity between law-abiders and criminals who have guns – the line being skewed in favor of the latter group. After all, that black market isn’t thriving because it’s too easy to obtain a gun legally. However, on the flip side of things, I don’t think my arguments work in much of Europe. They have low gun ownership rates, strong gun laws, and a significantly reduced black market, all with the result of fewer gun crimes and deaths. Gun control is a success on that side of the pond. End of story.

So, while I do happen to be fairly in line with current mainstream, and especially conservative, view on the pragmatic end of this matter, I part in my basis. I favor liberal gun ownership in the United States, but I don’t think the Second Amendment gets us there.

Though of the day

This actually isn’t a scheduled post. As it turns out, I have WiFi here in Mendoza. So, two thoughts:

1) American Airlines is awful. It would have been nice if they mentioned that I needed to change airPORTS in Buenos Ares before I bought my ticket.

2) Mendoza is an incredibly nice city.

Fun fact of the day

Evolution has no goals.

Take the Lenski experiments, for example.

Richard Lenski and his researchers followed several lineages of E. coli for 20 years (in fact, they’re still following them). They would freeze samples every 500 generations so they could go back and re-run the tape of evolution should some fundamental change occur. And, eventually, such change did occur. Some E. coli were able to consume a natural by-product of their environment after nearly 30,000 generations. Lenski et al. unfroze the old generations to see just what enabled the bacteria to obtain their new found skill. As it turned out, they had to go back many thousands of generations; it wasn’t just one mutation, but at least three. The first two were effectively random. But they were necessary in order to get to the third mutation – the one that opened up a new food product for the colonies. But in the re-running of the tape, not all lineages re-evolved the new mutations. They weren’t predestined to evolve a particular trait; nothing was inevitable.

And so it is with all of life. We are our genes, and how our genes are propagated via natural selection is not a goal-oriented process.

Well, I’m off

I should be walking on top of the highest peak in the Southern and Western hemisphere in about 15 days.

Aconcagu

I’ve got a friend watching FTSOS while I’m gone. He may make a post or two, but I’m not sure. Either way, I’ve scheduled a bunch of stuff, so posts will be made.

Thought of the day

So many feminists* wonder why the word “privilege” evokes such an antagonistic reaction, but I think it’s clear: It’s a code word. Its only purpose is for like-minded people to know when they equally detest a particular aspect of some culture.

I think it would just speed things up if they simply asked white males to apologize at the outset of every conversation. That’s the sexist, racist bullshit they want, after all.

*I mean Internet, caricature feminists: an overwhelmingly vocal, illogical minority.

The most offensive opportunistic politicization of the recent shootings

As events unfolded in the Connecticut shootings, many people took to Facebook to express their horror at what had happened. Some of it was surely the same attention getting grief that we saw with Steve Jobs, but it’s clear that no one found any pleasure in any of these events, to say the least. However, this supposed grief didn’t stop anyone from politicizing the issue from whatever angle they could. Gun advocates said teachers need to be armed. Gun-control advocates said we need better laws. Others said we need to move beyond all that for just a moment. Still others said this is the time to discuss these issues. I tend to agree with that last one. We might call that politicization, but we can’t just ignore what’s happening; I don’t find those sort of discussions offensive. What I do find offensive is illogical, sexist attacks:

Through history, there have been a lot of suggestions as to the cause of mass shootings. In the 60s, it was the permissive culture. In subsequent decades, it’s been the teaching of evolution, working mothers, birth control pills, and “evangelical jockocracies.” The interesting thing about all of these suggestions is that they may point indirectly at a much more plausible explanation. To begin with, we must ask who is offering these explanations in the first place. Overwhelmingly, the answer is white males. Most likely not coincidental is the fact that since 1982, one very specific type of mass shootings has been almost entirely perpetrated by white males.

Rachel Kalish and Michael Kimmel (2010) proposed a mechanism that might well explain why white males are routinely going crazy and killing people. It’s called “aggrieved entitlement.” According to the authors, it is “a gendered emotion, a fusion of that humiliating loss of manhood and the moral obligation and entitlement to get it back. And its gender is masculine.” This feeling was clearly articulated by [the Columbine shooters], the perpetrators of the Columbine Massacre. [One of them] said, “People constantly make fun of my face, my hair, my shirts…” A group of girls asked him, “Why are you doing this?” He replied, “We’ve always wanted to do this. This is payback… This is for all the sh*t you put us through. This is what you deserve.”

This is ugly in is stupid simplicity. From a response I saw on Facebook:

That’s all very interesting but this theory fails to account for the Asian kid at Virginia Tech. The Fort Hood Shooter. The D.C. Sniper and his accomplice. Race is incidental in these crimes. Why should it be any different with white men?

And what about mental illness? What about emotional instability? What about the specific experiences of these shooters? This isn’t some black and white issue (no pun intended). To pretend that it is is nothing more than an awful, disgusting excuse to pursue one’s pet agenda.

Let’s point to our gun culture. Let’s point to the way our media glorifies these shootings*. Let’s point to our mental healthcare apparatus. And let’s not make our points mutually exclusive with one another. There’s a lot going on here.

*I have edited out specific names of shooters. They don’t deserve the personalized attention we give them; CNN has noticed this and, though they are far from perfect, they’ve made an effort to only utter this most recent shooter’s name once per broadcast. For more, watch this:

Thought of the day

The cost for my upcoming expedition to Aconcagua has been tremendously greater than when I hiked Kilimanjaro. I believe the secret lies in the fact that I hiked one mountain, but that I’ll be going on an expedition up the other.