In the drug enhanced story of Passover, the Jews eat matzoh because they don't need carbohydrates. This is due to the fact that they are snorting coke, which suppresses appetite. You THINK they get that emaciated look from slavery, but we all know drugs are the best diet of all.
The Ten Plagues were the product of a mass hallucination, courtesy of those Egyptian worship cults. Logically, the Angel of Death had to have been a fancy name for a coma. Note how it sounds similar to "Angel Dust," the street name for PCP. I think we all know what the first born children were REALLY doing that night.
The lamb's blood is the mystery liquid on the floor of the elevator lobby at the college of your choice on a Saturday night. Then all of the Egyptians overdose and blame it on the Jews. The end.
Morbid Passover humor: Makat b'chorot, Death of the First Born, had the Pharaoh's son in...stitches! Because the Egyptians would have mummified him! It's the original dead baby joke! :D
And on that note, I have to go help make Passover dinner. Hey, maybe I'll actually get to wear a yarmulke at the Seder this year, which is a head covering that Jewish men wear on religious occasions. But my parents, being the Jews that they are, ordered the GENERIC cartoonist instead of the name brand one when I was born, because it wouldn't cost as much. He ended up drawing me all wrong.
See what I did there? I blamed my parents, and the Jews! :D
AHAHAHAHAHA.
Have a happy Passover, everyone.
Friday, April 6, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
Myth: A drug problem is always a problem.
Lay off the drugs. When I say that, I mean, lay off! Stop giving a small category of physiologically altering substances such a bad rap. I'm sick of hearing people condemn those who have died of drug overdoses for being addicts, and I'm sick of hearing that individuals who use drugs cannot be role models or worthy of admiration
And what of the 10% of Americans who are prescribed antidepressants every year? What of the millions of children who manage their ADHD with a stimulant? What of the 50% of commercials that advertise prescription drugs? America is not drug free, you Nancy Reagan induced dumbass, and neither are you. You hypocrites.
I repudiate this notion that altering the physiological substrate in order to enhance the organism's perceived state of wellness is a sin. Because to some degree, everyone seeks respite from unpleasant symptoms. They do what they can to alleviate their discomfort, assuage their anxiety, and take the edge off. Their methods exert an effect on their biology and chemistry. Why are some coping mechanisms more socially acceptable than others? What of the people who escape into video games and reality television?
Studies have shown that, in stark contrast to the activity of reading, watching television produces slow alpha brain waves in a fashion that is similar to the threshold of sleep. This preponderance of slow wave activity suggests that watching television demands minimal effort. The t.v. is, quite literally, an idiot box. And yet people come home and drown themselves in the stupor of someone else's lives for hours on end, and this is alright. You view with disdain the people who turn to the bottle, but what of the people who are dispelled by the doldrums of everyday life, who go through the motions and get old, who expend the minimal amount of existence? Do they deserve a medal?
I'm simply looking for some consistency. I'm tired of hearing, "Oh, he was a drug user, he did it to himself." Why do you condemn the drug user when they die, but not the tanner who developed skin cancer, the smoker who developed lung cancer, or the overweight person with the sedentary lifestyle who died of a heart attack? I thought that sympathy is supposed to be allotted to all individuals who are suffering, within the context of any illness, be it mental or physical. I don't understand the stigma associated with destruction that is self-inflicted. Do these actions not arise from despair and pain? Do these emotions fail to produce victims, to produce patients that are worthy of care and respect?
Why do you approve of the naturally occurring chemicals involved in the sensation of pleasure and love, but not of their synthetically produced counterparts that mimic not only the molecular formulas found in the body, but their actions on the brain?
And why do we accept the intentions of one business man over another? Are pharmaceutical companies driven by honesty, and not by greed? Is the aim of any given transaction going to be something other than profit?
I do not understand why illicit drugs are denounced when the drugs that are legal are just as capable of ruining lives, and under the pretense of being therapeutic! In my opinion, this affront to our trust is more despicable than the overt dishonesty of the dealer. Even when taken at the recommended dosage, a psychotropic drug such as an antidepressant is associated with serious dangers. Studies have suggested that in many cases, not only are the healing properties of these drugs largely unsubstantiated, but they can also incite violent behavior, produce a myriad of undesirable side effects, and most importantly, increase an individual's risk of suicide. Additionally, these drugs can trigger extremely unpleasant withdrawal symptoms when the prescription is lifted.
I am not going to pass judgment on or withhold compassion from people who seek relief in chemical form from a condition that can be debilitating and life threatening. The point is that neither should you, whether the medication is ingested under the supervision of a doctor or administered by the self. All of these drugs are habit forming, and we rely on them in one way or another in order to restore our ability to function and return to our former fully capable selves.
Besides, I don't adhere to the blanket statement that all drugs kill, that all drugs are deleterious to our health, and that all drug use is pathological. On the contrary, I agree with psychologists who argue that experimentation is the norm. In his book THE NATURAL MIND - An Investigation of Drugs and the Higher Consciousness, Dr. Andrew Weil claims that “The desire to alter consciousness periodically is an innate, normal drive analogous to hunger or the sexual drive...” I couldn't agree more.
And what if the ambition to trigger the untapped potential of intense emotion, to be moved and to be admitted access to an even higher level of cerebral creativity, is not just a biological need, but a by-product of evolutionary advancement, a signal that civilization has been achieved and people can afford the luxury of being moved and inspired, as they would be by art, music, and literature? Much as Socrates stated that "The unexamined life is not worth living," I will say the same of the unexpanded mind.
It seems to me that drugs need to be viewed on a continuum of individual risk, and, more importantly, we need to view individuals as individuals, not drug users vs. non drug users. It's not about what you are, it's about what you do with what you are. There is nothing that prevents people who dabble in drug use from being productive, and good, and kind, and intelligent! These categories are not mutually exclusive.
And what of the 10% of Americans who are prescribed antidepressants every year? What of the millions of children who manage their ADHD with a stimulant? What of the 50% of commercials that advertise prescription drugs? America is not drug free, you Nancy Reagan induced dumbass, and neither are you. You hypocrites.
I repudiate this notion that altering the physiological substrate in order to enhance the organism's perceived state of wellness is a sin. Because to some degree, everyone seeks respite from unpleasant symptoms. They do what they can to alleviate their discomfort, assuage their anxiety, and take the edge off. Their methods exert an effect on their biology and chemistry. Why are some coping mechanisms more socially acceptable than others? What of the people who escape into video games and reality television?
Studies have shown that, in stark contrast to the activity of reading, watching television produces slow alpha brain waves in a fashion that is similar to the threshold of sleep. This preponderance of slow wave activity suggests that watching television demands minimal effort. The t.v. is, quite literally, an idiot box. And yet people come home and drown themselves in the stupor of someone else's lives for hours on end, and this is alright. You view with disdain the people who turn to the bottle, but what of the people who are dispelled by the doldrums of everyday life, who go through the motions and get old, who expend the minimal amount of existence? Do they deserve a medal?
I'm simply looking for some consistency. I'm tired of hearing, "Oh, he was a drug user, he did it to himself." Why do you condemn the drug user when they die, but not the tanner who developed skin cancer, the smoker who developed lung cancer, or the overweight person with the sedentary lifestyle who died of a heart attack? I thought that sympathy is supposed to be allotted to all individuals who are suffering, within the context of any illness, be it mental or physical. I don't understand the stigma associated with destruction that is self-inflicted. Do these actions not arise from despair and pain? Do these emotions fail to produce victims, to produce patients that are worthy of care and respect?
Why do you approve of the naturally occurring chemicals involved in the sensation of pleasure and love, but not of their synthetically produced counterparts that mimic not only the molecular formulas found in the body, but their actions on the brain?
And why do we accept the intentions of one business man over another? Are pharmaceutical companies driven by honesty, and not by greed? Is the aim of any given transaction going to be something other than profit?
I do not understand why illicit drugs are denounced when the drugs that are legal are just as capable of ruining lives, and under the pretense of being therapeutic! In my opinion, this affront to our trust is more despicable than the overt dishonesty of the dealer. Even when taken at the recommended dosage, a psychotropic drug such as an antidepressant is associated with serious dangers. Studies have suggested that in many cases, not only are the healing properties of these drugs largely unsubstantiated, but they can also incite violent behavior, produce a myriad of undesirable side effects, and most importantly, increase an individual's risk of suicide. Additionally, these drugs can trigger extremely unpleasant withdrawal symptoms when the prescription is lifted.
I am not going to pass judgment on or withhold compassion from people who seek relief in chemical form from a condition that can be debilitating and life threatening. The point is that neither should you, whether the medication is ingested under the supervision of a doctor or administered by the self. All of these drugs are habit forming, and we rely on them in one way or another in order to restore our ability to function and return to our former fully capable selves.
Besides, I don't adhere to the blanket statement that all drugs kill, that all drugs are deleterious to our health, and that all drug use is pathological. On the contrary, I agree with psychologists who argue that experimentation is the norm. In his book THE NATURAL MIND - An Investigation of Drugs and the Higher Consciousness, Dr. Andrew Weil claims that “The desire to alter consciousness periodically is an innate, normal drive analogous to hunger or the sexual drive...” I couldn't agree more.
And what if the ambition to trigger the untapped potential of intense emotion, to be moved and to be admitted access to an even higher level of cerebral creativity, is not just a biological need, but a by-product of evolutionary advancement, a signal that civilization has been achieved and people can afford the luxury of being moved and inspired, as they would be by art, music, and literature? Much as Socrates stated that "The unexamined life is not worth living," I will say the same of the unexpanded mind.
It seems to me that drugs need to be viewed on a continuum of individual risk, and, more importantly, we need to view individuals as individuals, not drug users vs. non drug users. It's not about what you are, it's about what you do with what you are. There is nothing that prevents people who dabble in drug use from being productive, and good, and kind, and intelligent! These categories are not mutually exclusive.
Monday, January 31, 2011
3,000 gay people in a hotel. If you're not having fun, you're doing it wrong.
3,000 gay people in a hotel. If you're not having fun, you're doing it wrong. Well. Maybe that sounds bitchy of me, criticizing your sexual mechanics like that. And while we're at it, unlike the rest of you losers, I am not waiting until December 21, 2012 to get laid. But hey, that's your prerogative- which is the perfect segue, pronounced segway for the non-grammar connoisseur (I apologize for being more pretentious than Naked Juice when it insists that its recipe calls for no less than 178 acai berries), into the topic that I am addressing in this blog post.
Tomorrow afternoon, I am leaving for Minneapolis, where I will be attending the largest and most important LGBT leadership conference in the world. From February 2nd-6th, I will be receiving 600% of my daily dose of gay. I mean, I don't know how gay it could possibly get, seeing as temperatures in Minneapolis hover around a pretty consistent yet psychotic -9 degrees. That's hardly a hospitable climate for flaming.
But in spite of that petty inconvenience, I can already foresee that this conference is going to be the hallmark of my spring semester. To put it briefly, I need this conference so badly right now. This gathering of gay, as well as an assortment of other savory characters, is also going to yield quite a promising transgender turnout. This is my chance to be perceived in my entirety, to occupy and embrace the extreme end of the spectrum, those uncharted waters known as my true self. Such an unprecedented opportunity will, at least in my own eyes, serve as an optimal experiment in which I will end up either labeling the rest of my life as a full blown transgendered individual as plausible or implausible.
These next five days are going to be incredible. No one really knows what will go down within the four walls of the Creating Change Conference. In fact, I am bringing an entire box of condoms just in case there are really five walls, so that there are no surprises.
But even though the majority of human beings are apprehensive of the unknown, we should all be entitled to approach it in our own way. This brings me back to the point that whatever you want to do with your life, or your love, or your bed, so long as you hurt no one else, is your prerogative, and yours alone. I have expressed a desire in recent blog posts to have my individual agenda respected and, essentially, ignored. Perhaps Creating Change will transform my definition of being left alone. Perhaps it will come to mean something more. Maybe it will even mean being acknowledged.
There is so much room for change.
Today, I was checking out food in the Student Center cafeteria, and at first glance, the cashier referred to me as "sir." A longer look at The Jordan Experience caused her to retract her former supposition with an apologetic, "I'm sorry, I meant ma'am."
Me: It's quite alright.
Cashier: No it's not.
Me: It's fine, I really don't mind.
Cashier (snapping at me): Um, yes you do. I've been around the block a few times, so don't even try to say otherwise.
Me: Um...have a nice day.
Okay, authoritative cashier lady, YOU'RE RIGHT. Apparently, you know more about my gender identity than I do.
Besides being a fine addition to Story Time, this here charming tale is a perfect example of a society that is deeply uncomfortable with any examples of expression that deviate from the gender binary. The guy who prepares sandwiches in my school's main cafeteria once apologized profusely, with plaintive sincerity that both amused and unsettled me, when he called me "sir." It took five apologizes on his part and five reassurances on mine that it was indeed pardonable that he had addressed me as something that is incongruous with my biological sex.
I think society needs to understand that gender variance is not only okay, it's beautiful! I challenge our present day conceptions of male and female. At Creating Change, I will take these words and turn them upside down and inside out (unless the word is umbrella or condom, in which case, I would just be breaking it). Shakespeare alone invented over 2,000 words. It helps that he happened to have worn tights.
At this point, I would like to avoid pronouns altogether, but for the sake of efficacy in today's society, I have to choose one. By process of elimination, female automatically falls off. And hey, why should I have to identify as something when it feels inappropriate to do so? Why should I respond to being called something that is technically correct but at the same time feels so wrong?
After all, serendipity means, "An unsought, unintended, and/or unexpected discovery and/or learning experience that happens by accident and sagacity," but that doesn't mean if your condom goes MIA and you end up conceiving said accident that it needs to be named Serendipity.
Tomorrow afternoon, I am leaving for Minneapolis, where I will be attending the largest and most important LGBT leadership conference in the world. From February 2nd-6th, I will be receiving 600% of my daily dose of gay. I mean, I don't know how gay it could possibly get, seeing as temperatures in Minneapolis hover around a pretty consistent yet psychotic -9 degrees. That's hardly a hospitable climate for flaming.
But in spite of that petty inconvenience, I can already foresee that this conference is going to be the hallmark of my spring semester. To put it briefly, I need this conference so badly right now. This gathering of gay, as well as an assortment of other savory characters, is also going to yield quite a promising transgender turnout. This is my chance to be perceived in my entirety, to occupy and embrace the extreme end of the spectrum, those uncharted waters known as my true self. Such an unprecedented opportunity will, at least in my own eyes, serve as an optimal experiment in which I will end up either labeling the rest of my life as a full blown transgendered individual as plausible or implausible.
These next five days are going to be incredible. No one really knows what will go down within the four walls of the Creating Change Conference. In fact, I am bringing an entire box of condoms just in case there are really five walls, so that there are no surprises.
But even though the majority of human beings are apprehensive of the unknown, we should all be entitled to approach it in our own way. This brings me back to the point that whatever you want to do with your life, or your love, or your bed, so long as you hurt no one else, is your prerogative, and yours alone. I have expressed a desire in recent blog posts to have my individual agenda respected and, essentially, ignored. Perhaps Creating Change will transform my definition of being left alone. Perhaps it will come to mean something more. Maybe it will even mean being acknowledged.
There is so much room for change.
Today, I was checking out food in the Student Center cafeteria, and at first glance, the cashier referred to me as "sir." A longer look at The Jordan Experience caused her to retract her former supposition with an apologetic, "I'm sorry, I meant ma'am."
Me: It's quite alright.
Cashier: No it's not.
Me: It's fine, I really don't mind.
Cashier (snapping at me): Um, yes you do. I've been around the block a few times, so don't even try to say otherwise.
Me: Um...have a nice day.
Okay, authoritative cashier lady, YOU'RE RIGHT. Apparently, you know more about my gender identity than I do.
Besides being a fine addition to Story Time, this here charming tale is a perfect example of a society that is deeply uncomfortable with any examples of expression that deviate from the gender binary. The guy who prepares sandwiches in my school's main cafeteria once apologized profusely, with plaintive sincerity that both amused and unsettled me, when he called me "sir." It took five apologizes on his part and five reassurances on mine that it was indeed pardonable that he had addressed me as something that is incongruous with my biological sex.
I think society needs to understand that gender variance is not only okay, it's beautiful! I challenge our present day conceptions of male and female. At Creating Change, I will take these words and turn them upside down and inside out (unless the word is umbrella or condom, in which case, I would just be breaking it). Shakespeare alone invented over 2,000 words. It helps that he happened to have worn tights.
At this point, I would like to avoid pronouns altogether, but for the sake of efficacy in today's society, I have to choose one. By process of elimination, female automatically falls off. And hey, why should I have to identify as something when it feels inappropriate to do so? Why should I respond to being called something that is technically correct but at the same time feels so wrong?
After all, serendipity means, "An unsought, unintended, and/or unexpected discovery and/or learning experience that happens by accident and sagacity," but that doesn't mean if your condom goes MIA and you end up conceiving said accident that it needs to be named Serendipity.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
It's Like Taking Candy From a Baby. Except That You're Killing It Instead.
I attended my first Biopsychology class this semester. It goes without saying that I find the content fascinating. Perhaps a little too fascinating, because I am already using my new found knowledge to potentially wreak havoc on mankind. In order to illustrate the importance of environmental factors in early development, my professor explained that if an infant is not exposed to horizontal lines at all in early life, it will not recognize horizontal lines at all upon the initial exposure. One student raised his hand and inquired,
“So, if they see a horizontal line, would they just…run into it?”
To which my professor replied,
“Something along those lines.” (Haha, I just realized the excellent pun there. But I don’t think she did that on purpose.)
This prompted me to turn to my friend and say,
“Hey! You know what would be really funny? Say that you reared an infant on the Golden Gate Bridge, which has tons of vertical lines, because it’s a suspension bridge. Now say that after two years or so, you uproot this infant and place it in front of…an OCEAN.”
I wonder. So, if this infant saw a horizontal line (in this case, the horizon), would it just…run into it?
I am so terrible. Thank god I’m never having kids.
“So, if they see a horizontal line, would they just…run into it?”
To which my professor replied,
“Something along those lines.” (Haha, I just realized the excellent pun there. But I don’t think she did that on purpose.)
This prompted me to turn to my friend and say,
“Hey! You know what would be really funny? Say that you reared an infant on the Golden Gate Bridge, which has tons of vertical lines, because it’s a suspension bridge. Now say that after two years or so, you uproot this infant and place it in front of…an OCEAN.”
I wonder. So, if this infant saw a horizontal line (in this case, the horizon), would it just…run into it?
I am so terrible. Thank god I’m never having kids.
My Response to an Article That Claims Video Games Cause Depression in Teenagers
I responded to this article for a psychology homework assignment: The NY Times, "Do Video Games Cause Depression in Teenagers?" We have to say what we would like to know more about. Basically, I criticize the presentation of scientific research. But I also criticize the positions held by the actual scientists. I am such a NERD.
In two recent studies, scientists assessed the mental health and video gaming habits of adolescents and teenagers in order to establish a relationship between heavy gaming and the manifestation of depression. Researchers followed the gaming habits of Singaporean and Chinese students from varying ends of the age spectrum. Children who, at the beginning of the study, were already more impulsive and more socially awkward, also happened to spend more time playing video games. These same children were more likely to display symptoms of depression and anxiety in follow up studies that were conducted several months to a couple of years later. Dr. Gentile, an associate professor of psychology at Iowa State University, believes that young people with certain risk factors are more likely to become pathological gamers, and that gaming in turn preys upon their vulnerability and plunges them into further depression and anxiety. While he does not cite video games as the main culprit of depression, he does assert that excessive gaming exacerbates it, and consequently recommends that parents who suspect their child to be an unhealthy gamer restrict their use of video games.
There are several things that this article does not explicitly state, and because they may be paramount to the interpretation of these studies, I would like to know more about them. First of all, the article never specifies the ratio of genders represented. A country like China, which is featured in the first study, suffers from a major gender imbalance to begin with. Additionally, I am aware that the majority of Asia is approximately five years behind the West in the development of video game development, and the ratio of male to female video gamers was much higher five years ago in the West. In fact, this ratio, while shifting in recent years, continues to prevail. This is why I think it is safe to assume that, in a country like China, where there are more men to begin with, and the majority of people who play video games happen to be men, these studies probably did not feature many female participants. This is very important, because men manifest their depression differently than women do in that men tend to outwardly express anger and irritability rather than sadness and tearfulness. If a depressed female counterpart seeks out an alternative outlet for her depression, it might mean that the foundation of the vicious video game playing and depression cycle is the negative mood, rather than the games. This can be an indicator that seriously unhealthy video game playing, rather than being a trigger of depression, is a sign of depression that already exists.
I would also like to know more about the environmental factors of the individuals involved in the studies. For example, it would be extremely helpful to know their level of satisfaction with their social lives and home lives. Although the studies feature a large range of age groups, growing up is generally a difficult process, and sometimes more so for some than others. This article does not document third variables that would initiate a need for the increased isolation and social withdrawal offered by video game playing, such as rejection from peers and bullying. This third variable also carries out into an assessment of the outcome of avid video game playing over a period of time. For example, if the origin of a need for increased isolation is a lack of acceptance in school, then the need for isolation is only going to grow worse as the individual progresses into more advanced years of adolescence and social climates become much more hostile. Just because symptoms of depression and poor performance in school associated with depression happen to become more aggravated as video game use increases on a linear timeline does not mean that video games are definitely the cause. It seems that the scientists, as well as the author of this article, are focusing more on correlation rather than causation. Also, the article mentions that the few people in the study who stopped playing so many video games showed fewer symptoms of depression. First of all, knowing why they stopped playing in the first place is important. Maybe they had something new in their life to look forward to, such as a significant other or an improvement in their social life. This could explain both the decreased usage of video games as well as the elevation in mood.
In two recent studies, scientists assessed the mental health and video gaming habits of adolescents and teenagers in order to establish a relationship between heavy gaming and the manifestation of depression. Researchers followed the gaming habits of Singaporean and Chinese students from varying ends of the age spectrum. Children who, at the beginning of the study, were already more impulsive and more socially awkward, also happened to spend more time playing video games. These same children were more likely to display symptoms of depression and anxiety in follow up studies that were conducted several months to a couple of years later. Dr. Gentile, an associate professor of psychology at Iowa State University, believes that young people with certain risk factors are more likely to become pathological gamers, and that gaming in turn preys upon their vulnerability and plunges them into further depression and anxiety. While he does not cite video games as the main culprit of depression, he does assert that excessive gaming exacerbates it, and consequently recommends that parents who suspect their child to be an unhealthy gamer restrict their use of video games.
There are several things that this article does not explicitly state, and because they may be paramount to the interpretation of these studies, I would like to know more about them. First of all, the article never specifies the ratio of genders represented. A country like China, which is featured in the first study, suffers from a major gender imbalance to begin with. Additionally, I am aware that the majority of Asia is approximately five years behind the West in the development of video game development, and the ratio of male to female video gamers was much higher five years ago in the West. In fact, this ratio, while shifting in recent years, continues to prevail. This is why I think it is safe to assume that, in a country like China, where there are more men to begin with, and the majority of people who play video games happen to be men, these studies probably did not feature many female participants. This is very important, because men manifest their depression differently than women do in that men tend to outwardly express anger and irritability rather than sadness and tearfulness. If a depressed female counterpart seeks out an alternative outlet for her depression, it might mean that the foundation of the vicious video game playing and depression cycle is the negative mood, rather than the games. This can be an indicator that seriously unhealthy video game playing, rather than being a trigger of depression, is a sign of depression that already exists.
I would also like to know more about the environmental factors of the individuals involved in the studies. For example, it would be extremely helpful to know their level of satisfaction with their social lives and home lives. Although the studies feature a large range of age groups, growing up is generally a difficult process, and sometimes more so for some than others. This article does not document third variables that would initiate a need for the increased isolation and social withdrawal offered by video game playing, such as rejection from peers and bullying. This third variable also carries out into an assessment of the outcome of avid video game playing over a period of time. For example, if the origin of a need for increased isolation is a lack of acceptance in school, then the need for isolation is only going to grow worse as the individual progresses into more advanced years of adolescence and social climates become much more hostile. Just because symptoms of depression and poor performance in school associated with depression happen to become more aggravated as video game use increases on a linear timeline does not mean that video games are definitely the cause. It seems that the scientists, as well as the author of this article, are focusing more on correlation rather than causation. Also, the article mentions that the few people in the study who stopped playing so many video games showed fewer symptoms of depression. First of all, knowing why they stopped playing in the first place is important. Maybe they had something new in their life to look forward to, such as a significant other or an improvement in their social life. This could explain both the decreased usage of video games as well as the elevation in mood.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
The Closet is Calling Me and It Makes Me Sad. =(
I have felt physically sick for days now with an affliction that cloaks my stomach in the coarse fibers of dread and a boldness rivaling that of bone. Winter break has invalidated the efforts that I so carefully enacted during my first semester at TCNJ. I wonder now if it is possible to overstay your own welcome...
Although my friends insist that going back into the closet is not the answer, it is something that I must seriously consider if I wish to lead a productive life within the parameters of the society that is relevant to my pursuits. My mother especially has been a significant source of hostility. Apparently I am now a freak, and an ugly freak at that, one who is setting myself up for failure both professionally and personally. No one likes people who look as I do...
The thing is, my own doubts had dismantled me long before my mother said a word. I don't know if transgenderism can be my tomorrow. The daily struggle is a daunting prospect, while the customary affronts to my exterior will be unbearable.
That being said, this part of me is not something I can repudiate. It is basic and permanant, a steady fixture, a focal point, a fundamental facet of my being, a future, a FACT.
Imagine a universe that you will irrevocably, involuntarily, be incorporated into, an afterlife that is inside of you. Like a morbid curiosity, you cannot turn your back, and once you do, you will never be able to envision the same way again.
All throughout high school, I have been keenly attuned to this instinct that I am identical to my male friends in every way, despite what anatomy imposes upon us. The prospect of being forced to forget is a source of deep despondancy.
I cannot ignore the remote disgust I have always experienced when others automatically ascertain that I am a woman, and that I have consistently found their assumptions to be intrusive and erroneous in some way, even when I could not decipher precisely why.
I want to cry because I have grown accustomed to the delicious freedom of not having an unwanted identity constantly encroaching upon me, because gender really is the end all be all of existence, the all encompassing approach to one's expression, interests, emotions, and appearance. It is the only inner sense that everyone else will be aware of, at all times. To feel that you are representing the wrong array of attributes is agonizing and insulting.
I want to cry because I have grown accustomed to the delicious freedom of not having an unwanted identity constantly encroaching upon me, because gender really is the end all be all of existence, the all encompassing approach to one's expression, interests, emotions, and appearance. It is the only inner sense that everyone else will be aware of, at all times. To feel that you are representing the wrong array of attributes is agonizing and insulting.
Being at TCNJ means being free of the nightmare, the negligence of who I am in my core despite what others engage in when their eyes accomodate an overtly female physique and facial structure.
To be home is to be sad. Even the thought of a long stretch of summer is incredibly disheartening.
I've heard that all moments are dispensible. The problem is that there will be others to accompany them. When an individual decides to look each one in the eye, and to allow that look to linger, this is known as a life worth living, the life that is pursued with passion and sincerity. It is the only form of existence that I would extol. If I had to give away every inch of myself, this is the part that I would fight for. It implies adversity and integrity at the same time, and it is why I tell the people I love not in spite of knowing that I might lose them, but specifically because I know I might lose them.
But this ardent code of conduct is for the strong, brave, and tenacious. And ever since I initiated this transformation, it has eroded away at me...
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
My Upcoming Flight and Why I Think TSA Scanners Suck (In a Bad Way)
Growing up in a family full of health professionals has done more than arm me with an understanding of medical jargon. Not only has my upbringing imbued me with a sense of what is medically sound in a clinical setting (a skill that is highly useful as a newly medically autonomous adult), but it has also taught me to question everything that poses a potential threat to my health.
On February 1st, I have to fly on a plane to Minneapolis for a special leadership conference, the details of which I shall discuss in a later post. Strangely enough, it is not the invasiveness of the procedures implemented by security personnel that I object to. Rather, my first and foremost concern is the danger posed by the TSA full body scanners.
Countless doctors and scientists are issuing public warnings about the dangers of exposure to this specific variety of radiation. Dr. Michael Love from John Hopkins University school of medicine notes that the scanners will be a source of skin cancer for some. John Sedat, a University of California at San Francisco professor of biochemistry and biophysics, is convinced that "vulnerable populations" such as pregnant women, children, and the elderly increase their cancer risk by being subjected to these machines. Other experts in X-ray imaging warn that the scanners can cause breast cancer.
And while it is true, as the TSA, and many more Laid Back (and notably less informed) Larry's are quick to point out, that during high-altitude flights, the thinner atmosphere offers less protection from cosmic radiation anyway, they are missing something that is huge. TSA body scanners focus ionization radiation directly into the flesh, muscles, and organic tissues, while cosmic radiation is distributed, as cited in an article by NaturalNews, across the entire mass of the body. And for all of those Unflappable Uncles (like mine) who think that these scientific opinions are an overreaction (after all, internet WiFi waves are everywhere, all of the time), I would like to make a point of clarification.
Well first of all, I will point out that God too is apparently omnipresent, as He is everywhere all of the time, and God is the leading cause of death (according to George Carlin). So by that thread of logic, there actually is a cause for alarm.
Secondly, I will ask the Unflappable Uncles to consider that these WiFi waves are similarly distributed across the entire mass of the body. Furthermore, WiFi electromagnetic radiation is equivocal to low frequency radio transmissions. And yes, it is true that terahertz waves (the waves being utilized by the TSA scanners) emit lower energy photons than, say, ultraviolet waves. So yeah, they are a bit more friendly.
....They just tear apart your DNA.
That's right. I was going to bestow the sequel to the movie "Teeth," which features a girl with a vagina that eats people, with the title "Thunder Lips." Instead, I think that it should be called "Terahertz." It even sounds like an STD, or a dinosaur!
On that same note, studies conducted by biophysicists have shown terahertz radiation to be damaging and preventing cellular repair of DNA.
Oh man...once, when I was high, I thought that my friend's jeans made her look like an asparagus mermaid. Do not proceed to ask me what that means, because I have no freakin' clue. What I can say is that I have seen firsthand the deleterious effects of jeans that go bad. It is even worse when they are spelled with a "g."
I'm honestly not sure of my stance on the "right to privacy vs. safety first" issue when it is a matter of airport security. On the one hand, the Israeli airline El Al employs security tactics such as racial profiling, but has not had a terrorist incident in 30 years. On the other hand, TSA workers are not properly trained in areas such as psychological profiling, and with these security protocols still in their stage of infancy, I am sure that there is a potential for abuse and exploitation of innocent people, especially during the new and improved body searches. I am also sure that I will feel differently about the notoriously sexual pat downs administered by TSA workers once I experience it myself, especially because this particular procedure is more intrusive than effective.
However, of this I am certain: I would rather unzip my clothes than my DNA, any day.
I cannot in good conscious step through these TSA scanners armed with the knowledge of a 2008 CDC report that makes note of X-ray machines missing protective lead curtains and other safety features, which were dismantled by TSA employees themselves! Because I really do want to protect my stupid ovaries that I won't even use.
Skin cancer runs in my family; my cousin needed to have cancerous cells removed when she was as young as twenty-four. My aunt also had breast cancer, which makes me more statistically vulnerable to developing it myself. Additionally, as someone who has needed an abnormally high amount of X-rays due to dental problems, oral surgeries, and a staph infection, I have already accumulated unhealthy doses of radiation. It is absolutely reasonable that I would want to limit my exposure to non-diagnostic X-rays, especially when the long-term results of exposure to terahertz radiation have not yet been reviewed.
I'm not going anywhere near those scanners on February 1st.
Fuck you, TSA. Oh wait...I actually might.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)