More snarking of the lousy g-spot study, and a few more links

[moominmuppet]

Meet the Scientists Who Think the G-Spot Doesn't Exist
A team of British "scientists" at King's College London claims to have determined "fairly conclusively" that the G-spot does not exist. And their evidence? -- I know I already linked to this laughable study and some dissection of it, but this is a particularly good article, with some extra nifty and educational bits dropped throughout. (and I love the reminder that we've known about this part of the female anatomy since Galen, for fuck's sake)

RM has some good stuff to say about LJ's recent gender choice bullshit

And serenejournal has some good stuff to say about remembering that sexual and relationship style orientations are orthogonal to each other and to kink preferences. And also, that humor at others' expense is generally a pretty assholish maneuver anyway (my addition, there).


Holy crap! The pharmacy _finally_ replied to my first email (send almost three weeks ago, back when I still had meds *eyeroll*).

Edit to add:
The chytrid fungus, and its devastating effects on amphibian populations, is especially upsetting to me; I've been fascinated by amphibians since childhood, and had quite a number of pet salamanders, back when they were under every other log. So finding an article about my favorites (Japanese Giant Salamanders -- incredible beasts!), _and_ learning that they seem to have a different relationship to the fungus that might help with further research to save other species... Win of the day! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8497330.stm

Comments

[sylvanfae]

I'm boggling at the kink one. But then, I just think of kinks as variations of sexual pleasure activities, not "weird things people do in bed". Just because I haven't tried certain ones or haven't been interested in trying them doesn't mean I'm *not* kinky.

I'm also not into sex at this particular time of my life, but other people are free to talk about sex around me and with me. I don't feel like they're assuming anything about me. I'm not vanilla and I'm not frigid and I'm not kinky, at the moment, but I'm aware of and knowledgeable and experienced in all of them.

And also, My LJ is my journal, and I'll write whatever I want in it, and subscribers (friends) are along for the ride. I haven't done filters and I don't foresee myself making any. Like she said, skip over it if you're not into that discussion. I don't think it's an assumption at all. I think it's journaling and talking about the topics you want to talk about, in a place that's meant for talking with people and journaling. *shrug*

I do agree that any combination of the labels can abide in any given person (and are subject to change without notice). And like you said, mockery of anyone is bad juju anyway. I just don't see it as an assumption. Maybe more of someone bristling because of being sensitive to identity labels.

[moominmuppet.livejournal.com]

I tend toward very large umbrellas in my theory and use of terminology. However, I also feel strongly about not being "identity police" in other people's lives, and assigning identity tags to them against their will with how I choose to state things. This was a good reminder to be vigilant about that, because it really does matter to people in subtle day-to-day ways.

And yes, I think the big hot-button here was that not only were assumptions apparently being made, but being made in the context of something hurtful and offensive happening. I sure as shit react more strongly to be presumed to be straight if it happens in the context of someone telling homophobic jokes in my presence.

[moominmuppet.livejournal.com]

I'd also say that by my definitions almost anyone could choose to identify as queer or kinky, but I understand that plenty don't. They're really massively broad concepts, and I like 'em that way, for the purposes of my own life and politics.