Work Update, Bad Politics and Bad Religion, Amazing Rats

[tcpip]

Two weeks since my last update?! This more than full-time work is for the birds, I swear. OK, three work changes worthy of note. One was discovering I'd signed a contract that included G.S.T. rather than excluding it. Damn nuissance and rather careless of me, but I suspect will soon be fixed. Second was pushing myself too hard on Friday afternoon after migrating some fifty sites, suffering from a pounding headache and thus accidently deleting the entire site of a major client. Yes, we had a backup, but not the best one possible. Third was recovering our mail system this morning after a the database in postgrey was hanging and thus refusing incoming mail to a large number of clients. Life really never is a dull moment as a sysadmin, it really isn't.

Reactionary feminist Mary Sullivan argues against the rights an desires of sex workers and receives justified responses. I take the opportunity to agree with her; to the 'logical' conclusions. iron_orchid alerts me that nutbar Catharine McKinnon will be at ANU in a few days. Do keep in mind this is the sort of person who will argue for a global and legal ban on all "pornography". Have fun Canberra people!

On-topic on the subject of ridicule and contempt, the Melbourne Unitarian Church has published Dr. Helen Szoke's speech supporting the Racial and Religious Vilification Act (2001). My response argues that many religious and racial beliefs deserve ridicule and contempt. A little less on-topic, The Age published my letter on the alleged requirement of an "Eternal God" for the universe to exist.

You have to see this; surfing rodents!; but wait, there's more. If you're called a rat, take it as a compliment. The full journal article, "Generalized Reciprocity in Rats", is available.

Comments

[jennifergearing.livejournal.com]

Oh come on, dude. I have a slew of issues with MacKinnon, but you bring yourself into disrepute if the best argument against her you can mention is 'Oh Noes She Wants To Ban Teh Porn!'. Seriously. I know you're better than sounding like a guy who's panicking about evil feminists taking his porn away.

Incidentally, I didn't know she was in town. Given I'm in Canberra at the moment, you've done me a favour by alerting me to her presence. Tah. :)

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

"Presented together with the Centre for International Public Law (CIPL)" plus "created ordinances recognizing pornography as a civil rights violation."

I can see where this is heading.

It made them do it. Sooner or later, in one way or another, the consumers [of pornography] want to live out the pornography further in three dimensions. Sooner or later, in one way or another, they do. It makes them want to; when they believe they can, when they feel they can get away with it, they do." (emphasis in the original) Catharine McKinnon, Only Words, Harvard University Press, 1993 ]

My main concern with McKinnon is that she seems to think that only an elite group (presumably of people who think like her) can determine what sort of literature (or film) we can or cannot produce or watch.

I wonder if such beliefs will extend to bans on the C and F# tritone?

[jennifergearing.livejournal.com]

That's better. Like I said, have bucketload of issues with MacKinnon. That passage is one of them. But you were sounding a little ridiculous up there.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Just brief; after all, the link on the Online Opinion piece should make my views on the matter clear enough.