I don't blog a lot about feminism, LGBT issues, racism, and the like, for several reasons.
First of all, as a beardy white dude*, my opinions on those subjects are likely to be less nuanced than those of others. Second, the more I learn about these issues, the more I'm forced to come to terms with the fact that I used to be an ignorant dick. I've been meaning to write a post in my "Stuff I Used to Believe" miniseries about the distorted perspective that I used to have on the subject of feminism, but with everything that has happened in the community lately the post has simultaneously grown and shrunk in scope.
There's so much to talk about, but there are so many others who are so much more qualified to discuss it. So if you want to know what I think about any given feminist issue, I recommend consulting Greta Christina, Rebecca Watson, Jen McCreight. Not because I "toe the line", but because I consistently find them to be insightful and thought-provoking, and where we disagree on topics of equality (which is rare enough that I don't care to rack my brains searching for an example) I usually later discover that I am in error.
But there was something that I heard on the most recent episode of Life, the Universe & Everything Else that I couldn't let stand. Robert Shindler echoed a sentiment that I hear not infrequently (and often from men) in our group: that our group is special; that we don't have a sexism problem (and perhaps by extent any problem with equality). I've even said it myself.
Maybe it's true. I won't pretend to know. But that sort of sentiment can be harmful. If you think that your group is somehow special, it's easy to be blind to any problems that may occur. The biggest problem with privilege is how easy it is to be blind to it.
I am proud to be the organiser of the Winnipeg Skeptics, and I'm glad that we have relatively strong female and LGBT representation in our group. We could perhaps be better when it comes to racial equality, and I frankly have little idea what to do about that. As aware as I try to be of my own privilege, I'm sure that I still make my share of mistakes—and I hope that my fellow skeptics will do me the favour of calling me out if I slip.
I'm not trying to come down on Robert or anyone who has remarked that we don't have that woman problem that other groups have. Try not to hold your own group beyond reproach, because it may blind you to real issues that may arise. I'm not perfect, and we're not perfect. Our group may be better than most, but let's not get cocky! I'm sure that we still all have a lot to learn.
So instead of reading "Stuff I Used to Believe: Feminists Just Hate Men" (which I'll probably never write), go read Rebecca Watson's "The Privilege Delusion", Heina's "Beyond Jokes and Pick-Up Lines", and Greta Christina's "Why 'Yes, But' Is the Wrong Response to Misogyny".
And learn something. That's what skepticism is all about!
* (who also happens to be straight, cis-gendered, and fairly well-off)
Showing posts with label stuff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stuff. Show all posts
09 January 2012
31 January 2011
Stuff I Used to Believe: The Curse of Macbeth!
Yes, yes, actors and their superstitions.
Want to know a good way to freak an actor out? Say "Macbeth" in a theatre.
Many theatre folk would have you believe that simply uttering the word "Macbeth" in a theatre will bring ruin and misfortune upon the production and everyone involved in it. For this reason, it is the universal norm to say "The Scottish Play" (when referencing the work) or "The Scottish King" (when referencing the character).
Brian Dunning has previously covered this topic in some detail, but I figured that I might as well add a few personal touches.
I have a minor in theatre, and have performed in several amateur and semi-professional productions around Winnipeg. I have also taught drama to children at MTYP (briefly), the University of Manitoba's Mini-U, and during a summer program with the Evergreen School Division in Gimli. While I have never performed "The Scottish Play", I do have the "Dagger Speech" memorised, as I did a three-year stint at a local dinner theatre and one of the most popular characters that I played was an old thespian well into his dotage who would soliloquise at the drop of a hat.
If you're involved in any way with theatre, you're going to have to deal with superstitions. Many of my friends are actors, and they are by-and-large good folk, but in my personal experience* they are more superstitious than most. Although I used to be somewhat superstitious myself, I was always more amused than actually concerned by the putative Macbeth "curse". But, to avoid ruffling feathers, I avoided saying "Macbeth" all the same.
One particular friend of mine (I'll call her "Beth") has related the following story to me on several occasions. Beth was performing in a play with another actor (I'll call her "Macy") who refused to respect the beliefs (and superstitions) of others. Macy would name The Scottish King at every opportunity, and when asked politely to stop, first by Beth, then by other cast members, and finally by the director, Macy responded by childishly yelling the word over and over again. But by the time the run of the show was done, Macy, Beth, and the director had each broken a leg.
I don't recall ever believing that any curse was actually responsible for the events narrated in that story, however I repeated it often enough as an interesting anecdote.
I've heard poor ticket sales, accidents, and even traffic jams blamed on the curse, when it seems to me more likely that poor acting or promotion, carelessness, poor planning, and even the vagaries of chance were responsible. But the curse makes for a convenient scapegoat.
I play a popular collectible card game from time to time, and I see this sort of childish behaviour play itself out in that arena, too. When a player loses a game, it is always because "it was a bad shuffle", or it would have taken "just one more turn" to win. I even hear players say, "My deck hates me!" Few seem ready to take responsibility for the fact that they didn't play well.
I used to tell my students that you have to respect the superstitions of others, even if you don't believe in them yourself. Today, I would rephrase that: You have to deal with the superstitions of others, even if you don't believe in them yourself. As Richard Dawkins said (although he attributes it to Johann Hari), "I respect you too much to respect your ridiculous ideas."
* Logical fallacy alert!
My First Folio edition of The Tragedie of Macbeth.
Want to know a good way to freak an actor out? Say "Macbeth" in a theatre.
Many theatre folk would have you believe that simply uttering the word "Macbeth" in a theatre will bring ruin and misfortune upon the production and everyone involved in it. For this reason, it is the universal norm to say "The Scottish Play" (when referencing the work) or "The Scottish King" (when referencing the character).
Brian Dunning has previously covered this topic in some detail, but I figured that I might as well add a few personal touches.
I have a minor in theatre, and have performed in several amateur and semi-professional productions around Winnipeg. I have also taught drama to children at MTYP (briefly), the University of Manitoba's Mini-U, and during a summer program with the Evergreen School Division in Gimli. While I have never performed "The Scottish Play", I do have the "Dagger Speech" memorised, as I did a three-year stint at a local dinner theatre and one of the most popular characters that I played was an old thespian well into his dotage who would soliloquise at the drop of a hat.
If you're involved in any way with theatre, you're going to have to deal with superstitions. Many of my friends are actors, and they are by-and-large good folk, but in my personal experience* they are more superstitious than most. Although I used to be somewhat superstitious myself, I was always more amused than actually concerned by the putative Macbeth "curse". But, to avoid ruffling feathers, I avoided saying "Macbeth" all the same.
One particular friend of mine (I'll call her "Beth") has related the following story to me on several occasions. Beth was performing in a play with another actor (I'll call her "Macy") who refused to respect the beliefs (and superstitions) of others. Macy would name The Scottish King at every opportunity, and when asked politely to stop, first by Beth, then by other cast members, and finally by the director, Macy responded by childishly yelling the word over and over again. But by the time the run of the show was done, Macy, Beth, and the director had each broken a leg.
I don't recall ever believing that any curse was actually responsible for the events narrated in that story, however I repeated it often enough as an interesting anecdote.
I've heard poor ticket sales, accidents, and even traffic jams blamed on the curse, when it seems to me more likely that poor acting or promotion, carelessness, poor planning, and even the vagaries of chance were responsible. But the curse makes for a convenient scapegoat.
I play a popular collectible card game from time to time, and I see this sort of childish behaviour play itself out in that arena, too. When a player loses a game, it is always because "it was a bad shuffle", or it would have taken "just one more turn" to win. I even hear players say, "My deck hates me!" Few seem ready to take responsibility for the fact that they didn't play well.
I used to tell my students that you have to respect the superstitions of others, even if you don't believe in them yourself. Today, I would rephrase that: You have to deal with the superstitions of others, even if you don't believe in them yourself. As Richard Dawkins said (although he attributes it to Johann Hari), "I respect you too much to respect your ridiculous ideas."
* Logical fallacy alert!
11 January 2011
Stuff I Used to Believe: Caffeine is a Diuretic
Well, it is. Sometimes. For some people. In high doses.
A diuretic is a chemical substance that increases the rate of urination and thus dehydrating the subject. There is apparently a useful distinction to be made between diuresis and aquaresis (increasing water excretion without the attendant loss of electrolytes), however the information that I could find on the subject was scarce.
It's common knowledge that caffeine causes dehydration, however several recent studies have questioned this bit of popular wisdom. From the Wiki:
And here are the references from the entry:
The Claim: Caffeine Causes Dehydration (The New York Times)
Fluid, electrolyte, and renal indices of hydration during 11 days of controlled caffeine consumption. (PubMed)
Caffeine ingestion and fluid balance: a review. (PubMed)
Caffeine, Fluid-Electrolyte Balance, Temperature Regulation, and Exercise-Heat Tolerance (Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews)
About a year ago, one of our employees asked me why coffee was said to cause dehydration. I replied that caffeine was a diuretic, and recommended that he look it up. He did, and to my surprise noted that recent research had questioned this assertion.
So it seems to me that if you consume enough caffeine to be worried about its diuretic effect, you don't need to worry about its diuretic effect.
You do, however, have to worry about the other effects of caffeine. I am under doctor's orders (and dietitian's orders, according to my lovely wife) to reduce my coffee intake from roughly two litres each day to no more than two cups each day, as I suffer from fairly aggressive gastroesophageal reflux which is apparently exacerbated by caffeine consumption. Bollocks.
Image courtesy of Robert Knapp. Used under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0.
A diuretic is a chemical substance that increases the rate of urination and thus dehydrating the subject. There is apparently a useful distinction to be made between diuresis and aquaresis (increasing water excretion without the attendant loss of electrolytes), however the information that I could find on the subject was scarce.
It's common knowledge that caffeine causes dehydration, however several recent studies have questioned this bit of popular wisdom. From the Wiki:
Caffeine has diuretic properties when administered in sufficient doses to subjects that do not have a tolerance for it. Regular users, however, develop a strong tolerance to this effect, and studies have generally failed to support the common notion that ordinary consumption of caffeinated beverages contributes significantly to dehydration.
And here are the references from the entry:
The Claim: Caffeine Causes Dehydration (The New York Times)
Fluid, electrolyte, and renal indices of hydration during 11 days of controlled caffeine consumption. (PubMed)
Caffeine ingestion and fluid balance: a review. (PubMed)
Caffeine, Fluid-Electrolyte Balance, Temperature Regulation, and Exercise-Heat Tolerance (Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews)
About a year ago, one of our employees asked me why coffee was said to cause dehydration. I replied that caffeine was a diuretic, and recommended that he look it up. He did, and to my surprise noted that recent research had questioned this assertion.
So it seems to me that if you consume enough caffeine to be worried about its diuretic effect, you don't need to worry about its diuretic effect.
You do, however, have to worry about the other effects of caffeine. I am under doctor's orders (and dietitian's orders, according to my lovely wife) to reduce my coffee intake from roughly two litres each day to no more than two cups each day, as I suffer from fairly aggressive gastroesophageal reflux which is apparently exacerbated by caffeine consumption. Bollocks.
05 January 2011
Stuff I Used to Believe: Glass is a Liquid at STP
Yup.
Why did I believe that glass is a liquid at standard temperature and pressure? It's a common misconception that was imparted to me at a young age. I quickly incorporated into my understanding of how the world worked and it became one of those "facts" that I just knew.
From Wikipedia:
In fact, I believed that glass was a high-viscosity liquid until less than an hour ago. What made me look it up?
I do, too. In fact, I'm marking my calendar: the first Tuesday in February shall henceforth be Misconception Day!
Thanks, Randall!
Why did I believe that glass is a liquid at standard temperature and pressure? It's a common misconception that was imparted to me at a young age. I quickly incorporated into my understanding of how the world worked and it became one of those "facts" that I just knew.
From Wikipedia:
Glass is not a high-viscosity liquid at room temperature: it is an amorphous solid, although it does have some chemical properties normally associated with liquids. Panes of stained glass windows often have thicker glass at the bottom than at the top, and this has been cited as an example of the slow flow of glass over centuries. However, this unevenness is due to the window manufacturing processes used in earlier eras, which produced glass panes that were unevenly thick at the time of their installation. ... In fact, the lead frames of the windows are less viscous than the panes, and if glass was indeed a slow moving liquid, the panes would warp at a higher degree.
In fact, I believed that glass was a high-viscosity liquid until less than an hour ago. What made me look it up?
I do, too. In fact, I'm marking my calendar: the first Tuesday in February shall henceforth be Misconception Day!
Thanks, Randall!
02 January 2011
Stuff I Used to Believe: Smart(fx)
Some of you may recall that I used to have chiropractic treatments regularly. Well, that's only the tip of the pseudoscience iceberg.
While listening to Mark Chrislip's excellent QuackCast podcast on herbal remedies (episode 13), I recalled that I used to also drink copious quantities of Smart(fx).
From the Wiki:
I used to pound back one of those babies before every high school exam. Just in case.
The "original" flavour (my favourite, although the cranberry variety was good too) tasted vaguely like orange juice mixed with licorice, and was an acquired taste. It seems that the drink has been unavailable for some time. (And, probably as a result, links to the official Smart(fx) website result in the message "Account for domain naturaldrink.com has been suspended".) If I recall correctly, it was a cocktail of fruit juices, Ginkgo biloba, Paullinia cupana (guarana), and Panax ginseng (although I'm sure that there were probably other "medicinal" ingredients).
Presumably, had I drunk more of it I would have remembered using it sooner, as it claimed to improve memory and implied (at the very least) other cognitive benefits. In fact, I was briefly concerned over the ethics of using this "performance enhancing drug" to ace my exams.
I wonder what other crazy things I used to believe.
While listening to Mark Chrislip's excellent QuackCast podcast on herbal remedies (episode 13), I recalled that I used to also drink copious quantities of Smart(fx).
From the Wiki:
Smart(fx) is a brand of alternative beverage that originated in Toronto, Canada, in 1996. The various flavours of this beverage are made with juices and herbal extracts and contain no artificial flavours or added sugar. They are kosher and GMO-free and come in four flavours: Original, Cranberry, Raspberry-Green Tea, and Blueberry Hemp.
I used to pound back one of those babies before every high school exam. Just in case.
The "original" flavour (my favourite, although the cranberry variety was good too) tasted vaguely like orange juice mixed with licorice, and was an acquired taste. It seems that the drink has been unavailable for some time. (And, probably as a result, links to the official Smart(fx) website result in the message "Account for domain naturaldrink.com has been suspended".) If I recall correctly, it was a cocktail of fruit juices, Ginkgo biloba, Paullinia cupana (guarana), and Panax ginseng (although I'm sure that there were probably other "medicinal" ingredients).
Presumably, had I drunk more of it I would have remembered using it sooner, as it claimed to improve memory and implied (at the very least) other cognitive benefits. In fact, I was briefly concerned over the ethics of using this "performance enhancing drug" to ace my exams.
I wonder what other crazy things I used to believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)