More excellent work. I really, really love these! I especially love how you are tying in concepts from neuroscience.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: Freeky on June 07, 2017, 01:57:06 AMQuote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 07, 2017, 12:59:23 AMQuote from: Cain on June 06, 2017, 10:57:57 PM
Millenials killed soap, for fucks sake.
I had to Google "Millennials killed" to see what popped up, and holy shit, as far as I can tell, Millennials are just ruining the shit out of just about everything.
Not economic conditions or a changing information landscape. Nope, Millennials are specifically and personally killing all the things.
Hey, Business Insider says it's our preferences, so it MUST be so! But at least it's the Baby Boomers' fault.
http://www.businessinsider.com/baby-boomers-caused-millennials-destructive-spending-habits-2017-6
Quote from: Nephew Twiddleton on June 07, 2017, 02:50:25 PM
Well, I graduated. I still have my senior thesis to finish, but I have my BS.
My professor said when he gets back from vacation we can discuss having me stay on in the lab between now and grad school.
Quote from: Cain on June 06, 2017, 10:57:57 PM
Millenials killed soap, for fucks sake.
Quote from: PoFP on June 06, 2017, 05:29:50 PM
As far as I can tell, the procedure you linked to above requires the use of a fatal injection to the baby. I'm not completely sure if that's the case in all in-tact dilation and extraction procedures, but that appeared to be the case, based on the article. My points above, however, were based on the assumption that the baby would be in-tact and alive, meaning the abortion procedure would have to be non-lethal.
Interestingly enough, the in-tact dilation and extraction procedure appears to have no increase in health risks, contrary to what I expected. What I'm not sure of, however, is whether the fatal injection is required in order to keep the health risks low on the mother, considering she is not dilated to the extent that a normal birth would entail. I imagine that with lower levels of dilation, the baby would have an increase in health risks if it were not to receive the lethal injection. I assume, in this case, the risks would increase for the mother as well.
Quote from: Cain on June 06, 2017, 06:16:18 PM
I do find it ironic that the complaint about millenials is being brand obsessed, when I can plug "millenials killed X" into Google and get back about a billion hot takes on industries millenials are willfuly and maliciously destroying by not buying things (definitely not because they don't have money).
Quote from: Cain on June 06, 2017, 06:29:31 AM
Comey testimony this Thursday, 10am DC time, on CBS.
Quote from: PoFP on June 05, 2017, 02:59:29 PM
While almost all of what PDS said was a waste of brain processing power and time, I did find the proposal to leave the baby in-tact during termination of the pregnancy to be interesting.
While it's not ideal in many cases, as often-times, the abortion might be done to keep the baby from living a bad life because the the parents know they can't provide for it, it does satisfy the "what about the 'bodily integrity' of the baby?" question. Leaving the baby in-tact would obviously lead to more kids in the adoption system, which, as we all know, is awful. But, I could see baby bodily integrity - Non-lethal abortion procedure - being an argument used by the pro-lifers in the future (If they haven't used that argument already. I apologize if I'm missing updated information on the subject. I'm brand new to the abortion debate from the legal perspective.).
Not to mention, I think leaving it in-tact makes the procedure itself vastly different, and more complicated/dangerous/damaging, since the body isn't ready for birth during the time of the abortion.
Just my thoughts.
Quote from: LMNO on June 06, 2017, 01:24:13 PM
That was a wonderful read.
However, I do have a question: Do African-Americans born around 1970 consider themselves "Generation X"? I'm not sure I've seen an essay or cultural artifact about GenX that isn't about privileged white people.
I mean, I know that the so-called 'golden age' of hip hop* happened during the GenX heyday, which (as the article points out) also benefitted from the unusually good economy; but apart from ironic appropriation I'm not sure that 'typical' GenX culture and the black culture at that time ever really mixed.
Then again, seeing as how I'm a privileged white GenX-type person, there's a good possibility I'm simply blind to it.
*I consider pre-Biggie/Tupac/Puffy to be more of a "Golden Age", to be honest. The explosion of the hip hop industry seemed to overshadow acts like Public Enemy, KRS-One, the Native Tongues collective, Ultramagnetic MCs, etc. Then again, I was a punk boy, and never really liked grunge all that much so I'm guessing my hipster is showing.