r e s m a r t e d

Sep 08

Sex: you’re doing it wrongthecuntmentality: genderbitch: Sex is not “trying to score” Sex is not about getting numbers in There is no fucking quota you have to meet. Sexual partners are partners, not statistics Sex is not a revenge tool Sex is not a weapon. And if someone doesn’t want it, you’re raping them. Reluctance is not wanting it. “Putting up with it” is not wanting it. Drunk and nonfunctional is not wanting it. Unconscious is not wanting it. Wearing certain clothing is not wanting it. Bugging someone until they say yes out of exasperation is not wanting it Being afraid of you is not wanting it. Hugging you is not wanting it Cuddling you is not wanting it Being naked near you is not wanting it Having lots of sexual partners is not wanting it Needing to stop during it is not wanting it. Calling out the safe word is not wanting it. Crying is not wanting it Struggling away is not wanting it Going limp and unresponsive is not wanting it. Truth. Sex: you’re doing it wrong

thecuntmentality:

genderbitch:

And if someone doesn’t want it, you’re raping them.

Truth.

Craigslist Censorship & Child Trafficking The Internet has changed the dynamics of prostitution and trafficking, making it easier for prostitutes and traffickers to connect with clients without too many layers of intermediaries. As a result, the Internet has become an intermediary, often without the knowledge of those internet service providers (ISPs) who are the conduits. This is what makes people believe that they should go after ISPs like Craigslist. Faulty logic suggests that if Craigslist is effectively a digital pimp who’s profiting off of online traffic, why shouldn’t it be prosecuted as such? The problem with this logic is that it fails to account for three important differences: 1) most ISPs have a fundamental business — if not moral — interest in helping protect people; 2) the visibility of illicit activities online makes it much easier to get at, and help, those who are being victimized; and 3) a one-stop-shop is more helpful for law enforcement than for criminals. In short, Craigslist is not a pimp, but a public perch from which law enforcement can watch without being seen. 1. Internet Services Providers have a fundamental business interest in helping people. When Internet companies profit off of online traffic, they need their clients to value them and the services they provide. If companies can’t be trusted — especially when money is exchanging hands — they lose business. This is especially true for companies that support peer-to-peer exchange of money and goods. This is what motivates services like eBay and Amazon to make it very easy for customers to get refunded when ripped off. Craigslist has made its name and business on helping people connect around services, and while there are plenty of people who use its openness to try to abuse others, Craigslist is deeply committed to reducing fraud and abuse. It’s not always successful — no company is. And the more freedom that a company affords, the more room for abuse. But what makes Craigslist especially beloved is that it is run by people who truly want to make the world a better place and who are deeply committed to a healthy civic life. 2. Visibility makes it easier to help victims. If you live a privileged life, your exposure to prostitution may be limited to made-for-TV movies and a curious dip into the red-light district of Amsterdam. You are most likely lucky enough to never have known someone who was forced into prostitution, let alone someone who was sold by or stolen from their parents as a child. Perhaps if you live in San Francisco or Las Vegas, you know a high-end escort who has freely chosen her life and works for an agency or lives in a community where she’s highly supported. Truly consensual prostitutes do exist, but the vast majority of prostitution is nonconsensual, either through force or desperation. And, no matter how many hip-hop songs try to imply otherwise, the vast majority of pimps are abusive, manipulative, corrupt, addicted bastards. To be fair, I will acknowledge that these scumbags are typically from abusive environments where they too are forced into their profession through circumstances that are unimaginable to most middle class folks. But I still don’t believe that this justifies their role in continuing the cycle of abuse. Along comes the Internet, exposing you to the underbelly of the economy, making visible the sex-power industry that makes you want to vomit. Most people see such cesspools online and imagine them to be the equivalent of a crack house opening up in their gated community. Let’s try a different metaphor. Why not think of it instead as a documentary movie happening in real time where you can actually do something about it? 3. Law enforcement can make online spaces risky for criminals. Law enforcement is always struggling to gain access to underground networks in order to go after the bastards who abuse people for profit. Underground enforcement is really difficult, and it takes a lot of time to invade a community and build enough trust to get access to information that will hopefully lead to the dens of sin. While it always looks so easy on TV, there’s nothing easy or pretty about this kind of work. The Internet has given law enforcement more data than they even know what to do with, more information about more people engaged in more horrific abuses than they’ve ever been able to obtain through underground work. It’s far too easy to mistake more data for more crime and too many aspiring governors use the increase of data to spin the public into a frenzy about the dangers of the Internet. The increased availability of data is not the problem; it’s a godsend for getting at the root of the problem and actually helping people. When law enforcement is ready to go after a criminal network, they systematically set up a sting, trying to get as many people as possible, knowing that whoever they have underground will immediately lose access the moment they act. The Internet changes this dynamic, because it’s a whole lot easier to be underground online, to invade networks and build trust, to go after people one at a time, to grab victims as they’re being victimized. It’s a lot easier to set up stings online, posing as buyers or sellers and luring scumbags into making the wrong move. All without compromising informants. 4. Using the Internet to combat the sex-power industry It makes me scream when I think of how many resources have been used attempting to censor Craigslist instead of leveraging it as a space for effective law enforcement. During the height of the moral panic over sexual predators on MySpace, I had the fortune of spending a lot of time with a few FBI folks and talking to a whole lot of local law enforcement. I learned a scary reality about criminal activity online. Folks in law enforcement know about a lot more criminal activity than they have the time to pursue. Sure, they focus on the big players, going after the massive collectors of child pornography who are most likely to be sex offenders than spending time on the small-time abusers. But it was the medium-time criminals that gnawed at them. They were desperate for more resources so that they could train more law enforcers, pursue more cases, and help more victims. The Internet had made it a lot easier for them to find criminals, but that didn’t make their jobs any easier because they were now aware of how many more victims they were unable to help. Most law enforcement in this area are really there because they want to help people and it kills them when they can’t help everyone. There’s a lot more political gain to be had demonizing profitable companies than demanding more money be spent (and thus, more taxes be raised) supporting the work that law enforcement does. Taking something that is visible and making it invisible makes a politician look good, even if it does absolutely nothing to help the victims who are harmed. It creates the illusion of safety, while signaling to pimps, traffickers, and other scumbags that their businesses are perfectly safe as long as they stay invisible. Sure, many of these scumbags have an incentive to be as visible as possible to reach as many possible clients as possible, and so they will move on and invade a new service where they can reach clients. And they’ll make that ISP’s life hell by putting them in the spotlight. And maybe they’ll choose an offshore one that American law enforcement can do nothing about. Censorship online is nothing more than whack-a-mole, pushing the issue elsewhere or more underground. full article - huffington post, activist danah boyd Craigslist Censorship & Child Trafficking

The Internet has changed the dynamics of prostitution and trafficking, making it easier for prostitutes and traffickers to connect with clients without too many layers of intermediaries. As a result, the Internet has become an intermediary, often without the knowledge of those internet service providers (ISPs) who are the conduits. This is what makes people believe that they should go after ISPs like Craigslist. Faulty logic suggests that if Craigslist is effectively a digital pimp who’s profiting off of online traffic, why shouldn’t it be prosecuted as such?

The problem with this logic is that it fails to account for three important differences: 1) most ISPs have a fundamental business — if not moral — interest in helping protect people; 2) the visibility of illicit activities online makes it much easier to get at, and help, those who are being victimized; and 3) a one-stop-shop is more helpful for law enforcement than for criminals. In short, Craigslist is not a pimp, but a public perch from which law enforcement can watch without being seen.

1. Internet Services Providers have a fundamental business interest in helping people.

When Internet companies profit off of online traffic, they need their clients to value them and the services they provide. If companies can’t be trusted — especially when money is exchanging hands — they lose business. This is especially true for companies that support peer-to-peer exchange of money and goods. This is what motivates services like eBay and Amazon to make it very easy for customers to get refunded when ripped off. Craigslist has made its name and business on helping people connect around services, and while there are plenty of people who use its openness to try to abuse others, Craigslist is deeply committed to reducing fraud and abuse. It’s not always successful — no company is. And the more freedom that a company affords, the more room for abuse. But what makes Craigslist especially beloved is that it is run by people who truly want to make the world a better place and who are deeply committed to a healthy civic life.

2. Visibility makes it easier to help victims.

If you live a privileged life, your exposure to prostitution may be limited to made-for-TV movies and a curious dip into the red-light district of Amsterdam. You are most likely lucky enough to never have known someone who was forced into prostitution, let alone someone who was sold by or stolen from their parents as a child. Perhaps if you live in San Francisco or Las Vegas, you know a high-end escort who has freely chosen her life and works for an agency or lives in a community where she’s highly supported. Truly consensual prostitutes do exist, but the vast majority of prostitution is nonconsensual, either through force or desperation. And, no matter how many hip-hop songs try to imply otherwise, the vast majority of pimps are abusive, manipulative, corrupt, addicted bastards. To be fair, I will acknowledge that these scumbags are typically from abusive environments where they too are forced into their profession through circumstances that are unimaginable to most middle class folks. But I still don’t believe that this justifies their role in continuing the cycle of abuse.

Along comes the Internet, exposing you to the underbelly of the economy, making visible the sex-power industry that makes you want to vomit. Most people see such cesspools online and imagine them to be the equivalent of a crack house opening up in their gated community. Let’s try a different metaphor. Why not think of it instead as a documentary movie happening in real time where you can actually do something about it?

3. Law enforcement can make online spaces risky for criminals.

Law enforcement is always struggling to gain access to underground networks in order to go after the bastards who abuse people for profit. Underground enforcement is really difficult, and it takes a lot of time to invade a community and build enough trust to get access to information that will hopefully lead to the dens of sin. While it always looks so easy on TV, there’s nothing easy or pretty about this kind of work. The Internet has given law enforcement more data than they even know what to do with, more information about more people engaged in more horrific abuses than they’ve ever been able to obtain through underground work. It’s far too easy to mistake more data for more crime and too many aspiring governors use the increase of data to spin the public into a frenzy about the dangers of the Internet. The increased availability of data is not the problem; it’s a godsend for getting at the root of the problem and actually helping people.

When law enforcement is ready to go after a criminal network, they systematically set up a sting, trying to get as many people as possible, knowing that whoever they have underground will immediately lose access the moment they act. The Internet changes this dynamic, because it’s a whole lot easier to be underground online, to invade networks and build trust, to go after people one at a time, to grab victims as they’re being victimized. It’s a lot easier to set up stings online, posing as buyers or sellers and luring scumbags into making the wrong move. All without compromising informants.

4. Using the Internet to combat the sex-power industry

It makes me scream when I think of how many resources have been used attempting to censor Craigslist instead of leveraging it as a space for effective law enforcement. During the height of the moral panic over sexual predators on MySpace, I had the fortune of spending a lot of time with a few FBI folks and talking to a whole lot of local law enforcement. I learned a scary reality about criminal activity online. Folks in law enforcement know about a lot more criminal activity than they have the time to pursue. Sure, they focus on the big players, going after the massive collectors of child pornography who are most likely to be sex offenders than spending time on the small-time abusers. But it was the medium-time criminals that gnawed at them. They were desperate for more resources so that they could train more law enforcers, pursue more cases, and help more victims. The Internet had made it a lot easier for them to find criminals, but that didn’t make their jobs any easier because they were now aware of how many more victims they were unable to help. Most law enforcement in this area are really there because they want to help people and it kills them when they can’t help everyone.

There’s a lot more political gain to be had demonizing profitable companies than demanding more money be spent (and thus, more taxes be raised) supporting the work that law enforcement does. Taking something that is visible and making it invisible makes a politician look good, even if it does absolutely nothing to help the victims who are harmed. It creates the illusion of safety, while signaling to pimps, traffickers, and other scumbags that their businesses are perfectly safe as long as they stay invisible. Sure, many of these scumbags have an incentive to be as visible as possible to reach as many possible clients as possible, and so they will move on and invade a new service where they can reach clients. And they’ll make that ISP’s life hell by putting them in the spotlight. And maybe they’ll choose an offshore one that American law enforcement can do nothing about. Censorship online is nothing more than whack-a-mole, pushing the issue elsewhere or more underground.

full article - huffington post, activist danah boyd

5 facts on craigslist censor 1) It was technically voluntary. There’s no court order or anything. The site was basically indirectly threatened into self-censoring, after seventeen attorneys general wrote an open letter to Jim Buckmaster and Craig Newmark, the CEO and Founder of Craigslist respectively, last Tuesday, requesting that they “immediately take down the Adult Services portion of craigslist.” In the letter, the attorneys general begged the founders to “finally hear the voices of the victims, women and children” who “plead with you to make this important change.” Shutting down the Adult Services section is the “right thing to do to protect innocent woman and children,” the letter insisted. 2) It’s not the first time something like this has happened. It’s been a process. Back in May of 2009, the site closed its “erotic services” section, replacing it with the “adult services” page that is now in question again. Any of this sounding familiar? At that time, Melissa Gira Grant, a blogger and writer on sex, technology, politics, and culture, wrote a compelling piece on Slate explaining how shutting down the”erotic services” section hurts prostitutes and cops. It seems the message didn’t get through. 3) You can still buy sex online, and in person, for that matter. This one’s pretty self-explanatory folks. “The show must go on,” as they say. Censoring one section of Craigslist is not going to put the kibosh on prostitution, or even trafficking, for good. For the curious or unconvinced, I suggest checking out this handy guide to buying sex online, put together by Gawker writer Adrien Chen, who notes that “if Attorneys General and anti-trafficking groups are actually serious about shutting down the Internet sex trade—and not just jumping on a Craigslist panic wagon—they’re going to have to look far beyond Craigslist” before launching into a laundry list of alternative ways to find sex-for-pay online. 4) The Craigslist Adult Services section is a red herring in the fight against trafficking, sexual assault, and child abuse. The Craigslist Adult Services page may make for a sexy red herring, but the actual task of ending violence and sexual assault against women and children is not outside of our grasp. As Melissa Gira Grant points out on AlterNet in her latest article on the subject: “If these lead prosecutors are truly concerned about ending violence and exploitation, then their focus on one intermediary advertising Web site, among dozens of other sex ad venues, could be considered criminally shortsighted. There’s a tremendous amount the attorneys general could do to actually curb the suffering of people within the criminal and legal systems in which they have power.” 5) Censuring Craigslist won’t help women, and could actually hurt them, even and especially victims of trafficking. The “feminist” take on sex work is something that has a lot of implications, complications, and variations. I don’t claim to have “the one right feminist way to help women and victims of trafficking.” But I’m firmly of the camp that agency and consent matter, and I tend to agree with smart women like Danah Boyd, a longtime activist and victim of violence herself who wrote a pretty spot-on article on the Huffington Post called “How Censoring Craigslist Helps Pimps, Child Traffickers and Other Abusive Scumbags” in which she explains why the debate around Craigslist adult services has “centered on the wrong axis”. She makes a compelling case for the idea that Craigslist, rather than a modern-day “digital pimp,” actually serves (errr, served) as a kind of “public perch from which law enforcement can [could] watch without being seen”. I recommend reading the whole article, as it articulates pretty thoughtfully how this most recent Craigslist censor does more harm than good for women and girls. full article - feministing 5 facts on craigslist censor

1) It was technically voluntary.

There’s no court order or anything. The site was basically indirectly threatened into self-censoring, after seventeen attorneys general wrote an open letter to Jim Buckmaster and Craig Newmark, the CEO and Founder of Craigslist respectively, last Tuesday, requesting that they “immediately take down the Adult Services portion of craigslist.” In the letter, the attorneys general begged the founders to “finally hear the voices of the victims, women and children” who “plead with you to make this important change.” Shutting down the Adult Services section is the “right thing to do to protect innocent woman and children,” the letter insisted. 2) It’s not the first time something like this has happened.

It’s been a process. Back in May of 2009, the site closed its “erotic services” section, replacing it with the “adult services” page that is now in question again. Any of this sounding familiar? At that time, Melissa Gira Grant, a blogger and writer on sex, technology, politics, and culture, wrote a compelling piece on Slate explaining how shutting down the”erotic services” section hurts prostitutes and cops. It seems the message didn’t get through.

3) You can still buy sex online, and in person, for that matter.

This one’s pretty self-explanatory folks. “The show must go on,” as they say. Censoring one section of Craigslist is not going to put the kibosh on prostitution, or even trafficking, for good. For the curious or unconvinced, I suggest checking out this handy guide to buying sex online, put together by Gawker writer Adrien Chen, who notes that “if Attorneys General and anti-trafficking groups are actually serious about shutting down the Internet sex trade—and not just jumping on a Craigslist panic wagon—they’re going to have to look far beyond Craigslist” before launching into a laundry list of alternative ways to find sex-for-pay online.

4) The Craigslist Adult Services section is a red herring in the fight against trafficking, sexual assault, and child abuse.

The Craigslist Adult Services page may make for a sexy red herring, but the actual task of ending violence and sexual assault against women and children is not outside of our grasp. As Melissa Gira Grant points out on AlterNet in her latest article on the subject:

“If these lead prosecutors are truly concerned about ending violence and exploitation, then their focus on one intermediary advertising Web site, among dozens of other sex ad venues, could be considered criminally shortsighted. There’s a tremendous amount the attorneys general could do to actually curb the suffering of people within the criminal and legal systems in which they have power.”

5) Censuring Craigslist won’t help women, and could actually hurt them, even and especially victims of trafficking.

The “feminist” take on sex work is something that has a lot of implications, complications, and variations. I don’t claim to have “the one right feminist way to help women and victims of trafficking.” But I’m firmly of the camp that agency and consent matter, and I tend to agree with smart women like Danah Boyd, a longtime activist and victim of violence herself who wrote a pretty spot-on article on the Huffington Post called “How Censoring Craigslist Helps Pimps, Child Traffickers and Other Abusive Scumbags” in which she explains why the debate around Craigslist adult services has “centered on the wrong axis”. She makes a compelling case for the idea that Craigslist, rather than a modern-day “digital pimp,” actually serves (errr, served) as a kind of “public perch from which law enforcement can [could] watch without being seen”. I recommend reading the whole article, as it articulates pretty thoughtfully how this most recent Craigslist censor does more harm than good for women and girls.

full article - feministing

[video]

Sep 04

poll: gender equality still a long way off It’s more than a generation since a cigarette ad declared to women, “You’ve come a long way, baby.” But a Harris Poll, released this week, suggests women feel they’ve still got a long way to go — with many men endorsing that opinion. One question in the survey (conducted in June) asked whether respondents agree with the statement, “The U.S. still has a long way to go to reach complete gender equality.” Overall, 30 percent agreed “strongly” and 34 percent “somewhat,” while 21 percent disagreed “somewhat” and 11 percent “strongly.” (The rest were unsure.) As you might guess, women were more likely than men to agree with the statement (74 percent vs. 52 percent). There was a good deal of variation among age groups, with the 65-plusers the most likely to agree there’s a long way to go to reach gender equality (71 percent) and the 34-45-year-olds the least likely (55 percent). The survey’s respondents (especially its women) see tangible manifestations of gender inequality. Most notably, 69 percent of all respondents (including 80 percent of women) agreed that “Women often do not receive the same pay as men for doing exactly the same job.” Similarly, 62 percent of respondents (including 75 percent of women) agreed that “Women are often discriminated against in being promoted for supervisory and executive jobs.” Fifty-one percent of women (and 33 percent of men) agreed that “Women often have much more trouble than men in getting credit, bank loans and mortgages.” If women suffer the downside of different treatment, they don’t necessarily benefit from an upside. Eighty-one percent of respondents agreed (including 36 percent agreeing “strongly”) that “Women today are treated with less chivalry than in the past.” Another part of the survey inquired into attitudes about relations between the sexes these days, and the findings were strikingly downbeat. While 43 percent agreed (13 percent strongly) that “Things are fine the way they are between men and women,” 52 percent disagreed (19 percent strongly). Women were markedly less likely than men (32 percent vs. 55 percent) to agree that things are fine between the sexes. full article - adweek poll: gender equality still a long way off

It’s more than a generation since a cigarette ad declared to women, “You’ve come a long way, baby.” But a Harris Poll, released this week, suggests women feel they’ve still got a long way to go — with many men endorsing that opinion.

One question in the survey (conducted in June) asked whether respondents agree with the statement, “The U.S. still has a long way to go to reach complete gender equality.” Overall, 30 percent agreed “strongly” and 34 percent “somewhat,” while 21 percent disagreed “somewhat” and 11 percent “strongly.” (The rest were unsure.) As you might guess, women were more likely than men to agree with the statement (74 percent vs. 52 percent). There was a good deal of variation among age groups, with the 65-plusers the most likely to agree there’s a long way to go to reach gender equality (71 percent) and the 34-45-year-olds the least likely (55 percent).

The survey’s respondents (especially its women) see tangible manifestations of gender inequality. Most notably, 69 percent of all respondents (including 80 percent of women) agreed that “Women often do not receive the same pay as men for doing exactly the same job.” Similarly, 62 percent of respondents (including 75 percent of women) agreed that “Women are often discriminated against in being promoted for supervisory and executive jobs.” Fifty-one percent of women (and 33 percent of men) agreed that “Women often have much more trouble than men in getting credit, bank loans and mortgages.”

If women suffer the downside of different treatment, they don’t necessarily benefit from an upside. Eighty-one percent of respondents agreed (including 36 percent agreeing “strongly”) that “Women today are treated with less chivalry than in the past.”

Another part of the survey inquired into attitudes about relations between the sexes these days, and the findings were strikingly downbeat. While 43 percent agreed (13 percent strongly) that “Things are fine the way they are between men and women,” 52 percent disagreed (19 percent strongly). Women were markedly less likely than men (32 percent vs. 55 percent) to agree that things are fine between the sexes.

full article - adweek

the reason we chicks are deaf Teenage girls who listen to personal music players too long or too loudly risk a type of hearing loss, U.S. researchers have found. The study examined 8,710 girls from low-income families with an average age of 16. They had their hearing tested when they entered a residential facility in the northeastern United States. High-frequency hearing loss — a common result of excessive noise exposure — increased from 10.1 per cent in 1985 to 19.2 per cent in 2009, audiologist Abbey Berg of Pace University in New York reported in Tuesday’s online issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health. “Not surprisingly, what I noticed was that the adolescent girls with high-frequency hearing loss also used personal listening devices for longer periods of time per day and they also had more tinnitus, which is ringing in the ear,” Berg said. High-frequency hearing adds clarity to speech, aiding in hearing sounds like “s,” “sh,” or “ch,” particularly in noisy environments. Teens with high-frequency hearing loss might have difficulty in the classroom, said Berg. Adolescent hearing loss could also have implications as girls age, reducing their ability to locate sound in space or follow rapid speech, Berg noted. Between 2001 and 2008, use of personal music players among the girls increased from 18.3 per cent to 76.4 per cent. full article - cbc.ca the reason we chicks are deaf

Teenage girls who listen to personal music players too long or too loudly risk a type of hearing loss, U.S. researchers have found.

The study examined 8,710 girls from low-income families with an average age of 16. They had their hearing tested when they entered a residential facility in the northeastern United States.

High-frequency hearing loss — a common result of excessive noise exposure — increased from 10.1 per cent in 1985 to 19.2 per cent in 2009, audiologist Abbey Berg of Pace University in New York reported in Tuesday’s online issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health.

“Not surprisingly, what I noticed was that the adolescent girls with high-frequency hearing loss also used personal listening devices for longer periods of time per day and they also had more tinnitus, which is ringing in the ear,” Berg said.

High-frequency hearing adds clarity to speech, aiding in hearing sounds like “s,” “sh,” or “ch,” particularly in noisy environments. Teens with high-frequency hearing loss might have difficulty in the classroom, said Berg. Adolescent hearing loss could also have implications as girls age, reducing their ability to locate sound in space or follow rapid speech, Berg noted.

Between 2001 and 2008, use of personal music players among the girls increased from 18.3 per cent to 76.4 per cent.

full article - cbc.ca

“vampire facelift” swears it’s natural and safe The new procedure, which is rapidly gaining popularity and publicity, earned its colorful moniker from the fact that it involves drawing blood from the patient and activating the platelets to produce a potent and natural serum that is injected into the patient’s facial skin to create a more youthful-looking appearance. David J. Mozersky, and Rene Jaso, board certified surgeons and founders of ContourLase Body Institute in San Antonio, refer to the procedure at their clinic as “G Factor Skin Rejuvenation”. “It really is a revolutionary treatment that restores youthful skin with minimum downtime, little discomfort, and a friendly price,” Dr. Mozersky said. “The ‘Vampire Lift’ or G Factor facial is the perfect answer for those fine lines and dull, old-looking skin that we all get when we enter middle age,” he said. “It is an all-natural, non-traumatic way to rejuvenate your skin.” full article - prweb “vampire facelift” swears it’s natural and safe

The new procedure, which is rapidly gaining popularity and publicity, earned its colorful moniker from the fact that it involves drawing blood from the patient and activating the platelets to produce a potent and natural serum that is injected into the patient’s facial skin to create a more youthful-looking appearance.

David J. Mozersky, and Rene Jaso, board certified surgeons and founders of ContourLase Body Institute in San Antonio, refer to the procedure at their clinic as “G Factor Skin Rejuvenation”. “It really is a revolutionary treatment that restores youthful skin with minimum downtime, little discomfort, and a friendly price,” Dr. Mozersky said.

“The ‘Vampire Lift’ or G Factor facial is the perfect answer for those fine lines and dull, old-looking skin that we all get when we enter middle age,” he said. “It is an all-natural, non-traumatic way to rejuvenate your skin.”

full article - prweb

craigslist drops adult services After years of mounting public pressure, Craigslist appears to have surrendered a battle over sexual ads on its website that some viewed as a test case for the boundaries of online freedom. The popular San Francisco classifieds site removed its controversial adult services section late Friday, defiantly replacing the link with the word “censored.” The move followed a torrent of legal threats and negative media reports that highlighted ads within the category that promoted prostitution and child trafficking, or led to violence against women. The harshest critics have called Craigslist an “online pimp” and the “Wal-Mart of online sex trafficking.” Last year, an Illinois sheriff filed a lawsuit that accused the site’s owners of knowingly promoting and facilitating prostitution, while the South Carolina Attorney General threatened criminal action against the company. Full article - sfgate craigslist drops adult services

After years of mounting public pressure, Craigslist appears to have surrendered a battle over sexual ads on its website that some viewed as a test case for the boundaries of online freedom.

The popular San Francisco classifieds site removed its controversial adult services section late Friday, defiantly replacing the link with the word “censored.” The move followed a torrent of legal threats and negative media reports that highlighted ads within the category that promoted prostitution and child trafficking, or led to violence against women.

The harshest critics have called Craigslist an “online pimp” and the “Wal-Mart of online sex trafficking.” Last year, an Illinois sheriff filed a lawsuit that accused the site’s owners of knowingly promoting and facilitating prostitution, while the South Carolina Attorney General threatened criminal action against the company.

Full article - sfgate

Jul 25

online anonymity & self-policing “One man’s vulgarity is another man’s lyric.” These are the words of Supreme Court justice John Marshall Harlan II in the majority opinion of a 1971 free-speech case, Cohen v. California. However, with the continuing rise in importance of the Internet, and the venomous culture that has begun to develop there, it may well be time for everyone to reassess exactly how we conduct ourselves in cyberspace. The Internet is an important medium for sharing information. However, it’s also, for the most part, a completely unregulated entity that allows users to say or do almost anything without fear of retribution. As such, the Internet can be a breeding ground for belligerence, ignorance and even racism. And, the anonymity it affords can allow us to comfortably hide our faces while we carry on our diatribes against the world. The Internet is a giant peer-to-peer information sharing network. But without many authority figures to enforce etiquette online, a diffusion of responsibility begins to develop among users. This enables them to say things they wouldn’t normally say, or be overly aggressive in dealing with others. Thirteen- and 14-year-olds are playing games rated for 17-year-olds and up, exposing them to all these negative aspects of online culture and often assimilating them into this way of thinking. These younger players want to be accepted by older players, who act as “agents of socialization” and present the foul language and aggressive behavior as the norm in online culture. The anonymity offered to online commenters results in a complete lack of accountability, allowing adults to bicker like petulant children from the safety of their home or office without fear of real-life consequences. I doubt that people who use offensive, often racist language in their online comments interact that way with people in their everyday life. By using a screen name to fling mud at others in cyberspace, users depersonalize themselves. This begs the question of whether you can consider an account without a real persona backing it to be a real person in the eyes of the law, entitled to First Amendment protection. full article - online athens online anonymity & self-policing

“One man’s vulgarity is another man’s lyric.”

These are the words of Supreme Court justice John Marshall Harlan II in the majority opinion of a 1971 free-speech case, Cohen v. California. However, with the continuing rise in importance of the Internet, and the venomous culture that has begun to develop there, it may well be time for everyone to reassess exactly how we conduct ourselves in cyberspace.

The Internet is an important medium for sharing information. However, it’s also, for the most part, a completely unregulated entity that allows users to say or do almost anything without fear of retribution. As such, the Internet can be a breeding ground for belligerence, ignorance and even racism. And, the anonymity it affords can allow us to comfortably hide our faces while we carry on our diatribes against the world.

The Internet is a giant peer-to-peer information sharing network. But without many authority figures to enforce etiquette online, a diffusion of responsibility begins to develop among users. This enables them to say things they wouldn’t normally say, or be overly aggressive in dealing with others.

Thirteen- and 14-year-olds are playing games rated for 17-year-olds and up, exposing them to all these negative aspects of online culture and often assimilating them into this way of thinking. These younger players want to be accepted by older players, who act as “agents of socialization” and present the foul language and aggressive behavior as the norm in online culture.

The anonymity offered to online commenters results in a complete lack of accountability, allowing adults to bicker like petulant children from the safety of their home or office without fear of real-life consequences. I doubt that people who use offensive, often racist language in their online comments interact that way with people in their everyday life.

By using a screen name to fling mud at others in cyberspace, users depersonalize themselves. This begs the question of whether you can consider an account without a real persona backing it to be a real person in the eyes of the law, entitled to First Amendment protection.

full article - online athens

Jan 14

Ebert calls Lovely Bones a “deplorable film” BY ROGER EBERT / January 13, 2010  “The Lovely Bones” is a deplorable film with this message: If you’re a 14-year-old girl who has been brutally raped and murdered by a serial killer, you have a lot to look forward to. You can get together in heaven with the other teenage victims of the same killer, and gaze down in benevolence upon your family members as they mourn you and realize what a wonderful person you were. Sure, you miss your friends, but your fellow fatalities come dancing to greet you in a meadow of wildflowers, and how cool is that? The makers of this film seem to have given slight thought to the psychology of teenage girls, less to the possibility that there is no heaven, and none at all to the likelihood that if there is one, it will not resemble a happy gathering of new Facebook friends. In its version of the events, the serial killer can almost be seen as a hero for liberating these girls from the tiresome ordeal of growing up and dispatching them directly to the Elysian Fields. The film’s primary effect was to make me squirmy. It’s based on the best-seller by Alice Sebold that everybody seemed to be reading a couple of years ago. I hope it’s not faithful to the book; if it is, millions of Americans are scary. The murder of a young person is a tragedy, the murderer is a monster, and making the victim a sweet, poetic narrator is creepy. This movie sells the philosophy that even evil things are God’s will, and their victims are happier now. Isn’t it nice to think so. I think it’s best if they don’t happen at all. But if they do, why pretend they don’t hurt? Those girls are dead. I’m assured, however, that Sebold’s novel is well-written and sensitive. I presume the director, Peter Jackson, has distorted elements to fit his own “vision,” which involves nearly as many special effects in some sequences as his “Lord of the Rings” trilogy. A more useful way to deal with this material would be with observant, subtle performances in a thoughtful screenplay. It’s not a feel-good story. Perhaps Jackson’s team made the mistake of fearing the novel was too dark. But its millions of readers must know it’s not like this. The target audience might be doom-besotted teenage girls — the “Twilight” crowd. The owner of the lovely bones is named Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan, a very good young actress, who cannot be faulted here). The heaven Susie occupies looks a little like a Flower Power world in the kind of fantasy that, murdered in 1973, she might have imagined. Seems to me that heaven, by definition outside time and space, would have neither colors nor a lack of colors — would be a state with no sensations. Nor would there be thinking there, let alone narration. In an eternity spent in the presence of infinite goodness, you don’t go around thinking, “Man! Is this great!” You simply are. I have a lot of theologians on my side here. But no. From her movie-set Valhalla, Susie gazes down as her mother (Rachel Weisz) grieves and her father (Mark Wahlberg) tries to solve the case himself. There’s not much of a case to solve; we know who the killer is almost from the get-go, and, under the Law of Economy of Characters that’s who he has to be, because (a) he’s played by an otherwise unnecessary movie star, and (b) there’s no one else in the movie it could be. Here’s something bittersweet. Weisz and Wahlberg are effective as the parents. Because the pyrotechnics are mostly upstairs with the special effects, all they need to be are convincing parents who have lost their daughter. This they do with touching subtlety. We also meet one of Susie’s grandmothers (Susan Sarandon), an unwise drinker who comes on to provide hard-boiled comic relief, in the Shakespearean tradition that every tragedy needs its clown. Well, she’s good, too. This whole film is Jackson’s fault. It doesn’t fail simply because I suspect its message. It fails on its own terms. It isn’t emotionally convincing that this girl, having had these experiences and destined apparently to be 14 forever (although cleaned up and with a new wardrobe), would produce this heavenly creature. What’s left for us to pity? We should all end up like her, and the sooner the better; preferably not after being raped and murdered.Ebert calls Lovely Bones a “deplorable film”

BY ROGER EBERT / January 13, 2010 

“The Lovely Bones” is a deplorable film with this message: If you’re a 14-year-old girl who has been brutally raped and murdered by a serial killer, you have a lot to look forward to. You can get together in heaven with the other teenage victims of the same killer, and gaze down in benevolence upon your family members as they mourn you and realize what a wonderful person you were. Sure, you miss your friends, but your fellow fatalities come dancing to greet you in a meadow of wildflowers, and how cool is that?

The makers of this film seem to have given slight thought to the psychology of teenage girls, less to the possibility that there is no heaven, and none at all to the likelihood that if there is one, it will not resemble a happy gathering of new Facebook friends. In its version of the events, the serial killer can almost be seen as a hero for liberating these girls from the tiresome ordeal of growing up and dispatching them directly to the Elysian Fields. The film’s primary effect was to make me squirmy.

It’s based on the best-seller by Alice Sebold that everybody seemed to be reading a couple of years ago. I hope it’s not faithful to the book; if it is, millions of Americans are scary. The murder of a young person is a tragedy, the murderer is a monster, and making the victim a sweet, poetic narrator is creepy. This movie sells the philosophy that even evil things are God’s will, and their victims are happier now. Isn’t it nice to think so. I think it’s best if they don’t happen at all. But if they do, why pretend they don’t hurt? Those girls are dead.

I’m assured, however, that Sebold’s novel is well-written and sensitive. I presume the director, Peter Jackson, has distorted elements to fit his own “vision,” which involves nearly as many special effects in some sequences as his “Lord of the Rings” trilogy. A more useful way to deal with this material would be with observant, subtle performances in a thoughtful screenplay. It’s not a feel-good story. Perhaps Jackson’s team made the mistake of fearing the novel was too dark. But its millions of readers must know it’s not like this. The target audience might be doom-besotted teenage girls — the “Twilight” crowd.

The owner of the lovely bones is named Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan, a very good young actress, who cannot be faulted here). The heaven Susie occupies looks a little like a Flower Power world in the kind of fantasy that, murdered in 1973, she might have imagined. Seems to me that heaven, by definition outside time and space, would have neither colors nor a lack of colors — would be a state with no sensations. Nor would there be thinking there, let alone narration. In an eternity spent in the presence of infinite goodness, you don’t go around thinking, “Man! Is this great!” You simply are. I have a lot of theologians on my side here.

But no. From her movie-set Valhalla, Susie gazes down as her mother (Rachel Weisz) grieves and her father (Mark Wahlberg) tries to solve the case himself. There’s not much of a case to solve; we know who the killer is almost from the get-go, and, under the Law of Economy of Characters that’s who he has to be, because (a) he’s played by an otherwise unnecessary movie star, and (b) there’s no one else in the movie it could be.

Here’s something bittersweet. Weisz and Wahlberg are effective as the parents. Because the pyrotechnics are mostly upstairs with the special effects, all they need to be are convincing parents who have lost their daughter. This they do with touching subtlety. We also meet one of Susie’s grandmothers (Susan Sarandon), an unwise drinker who comes on to provide hard-boiled comic relief, in the Shakespearean tradition that every tragedy needs its clown. Well, she’s good, too. This whole film is Jackson’s fault.

It doesn’t fail simply because I suspect its message. It fails on its own terms. It isn’t emotionally convincing that this girl, having had these experiences and destined apparently to be 14 forever (although cleaned up and with a new wardrobe), would produce this heavenly creature. What’s left for us to pity? We should all end up like her, and the sooner the better; preferably not after being raped and murdered.