IN’s Reproduction Bill Yoinked

Indiana’s “Handmaid’s Tale” bill has been pulled.

A controversial proposed bill to prohibit gays, lesbians and single people from using medical procedures to become pregnant has been dropped by its legislative sponsor.

State Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, issued a one-sentence statement this afternoon saying: “The issue has become more complex than anticipated and will be withdrawn from consideration by the Health Finance Commission.”

(via Terrance)

Want a child? Better get married…

If this passes, I may want to stop admitting that, though I grew up in Alaska, I was born in Indiana…and most of my extended family on my dad’s side is still there.

Indiana Republicans are working on a bill that will make it so that only legally married women will be allowed to reproduce.

Republican lawmakers are drafting new legislation that will make marriage a requirement for  motherhood in the state of Indiana, including specific criminal penalties for unmarried women who do become pregnant “by means other than sexual intercourse.”

As Terrance points out:

You better believe gays and lesbians seeking to have children via artificial insemination, surrogacy, etc., will stopped in their tracks by this law.

What I don’t understand is why the law only addresses motherhood. Why isn’t it a class B felony under this law for a man to engage in “unauthorized reproduction”? You don’t have to read The Handmaid’s Tale to envision what these folks have in store.

Just horrendous. This needs to get stopped, as soon as possible.

(via Terrance and Boing Boing)

Update: The bill has been yanked.

A controversial proposed bill to prohibit gays, lesbians and single people from using medical procedures to become pregnant has been dropped by its legislative sponsor.

State Sen. Patricia Miller, R-Indianapolis, issued a one-sentence statement this afternoon saying: “The issue has become more complex than anticipated and will be withdrawn from consideration by the Health Finance Commission.”

Heh — “more complex than anticipated.” In other words, she realized that word had gotten out just how insane this was.

Cage Match: Gaiman vs. Whedon

Okay, so no, it’s not really a cage match. What it is is a really good interview in Time with Neil Gaiman and Joss Whedon, on the eve of the release of their movies, Mirrormask and Serenity (respectively).

Plenty of good stuff in this interview — I knew I was going to enjoy it right from the start…

TIME: Joss, this is Lev from Time magazine. You’re also in the virtual presence of Neil Gaiman.

Neil Gaiman: I’m not virtual. I’m here.

TIME: Sorry. You’re virtual, Joss. Neil’s real.

Joss Wedon: Okay. I wondered.

TIME: I’m glad we settled that.

Neil on writing, and the drive to avoid repeating yourself:

I saw a lovely analogy recently. Somebody said that writers are like otters. And otters are really hard to train. Dolphins are easy to train. They do a trick, you give them a fish, they do the trick again, you give them a fish. They will keep doing that trick until the end of time. Otters, if they do a trick and you give them a fish, the next time they’ll do a better trick or a different trick because they’d already done that one. And writers tend to be otters. Most of us get pretty bored doing the same trick. We’ve done it, so let’s do something different.

Neil and Joss on their primary fan base:

TIME: Let’s talk about your respective fan bases. A lot of them self-identify as kind of on the geeky side.

NG: I think the fan base is literate. You need to be reasonably bright to get the jokes and to really follow what’s going on. That, by definition, is going to exclude a lot of people who will then get rather irritated at us for being pretentious and silly and putting in things they didn’t quite get. But it’s also going to mean that some of the people who do get the stuff will probably be fairly bright.

JW: Especially, I think, living in any fantasy or science fiction world means really understanding what you’re seeing and reading really densely on a level that a lot of people don’t bother to read. So yes, I think it’s kind of the same thing.

But I also think there’s a bit of misconception with that. Everybody who labels themselves a nerd isn’t some giant person locked in a cubbyhole who’s never seen the opposite sex. Especially with the way the Internet is now, I think that definition is getting a little more diffuse.

On mainstream culture’s growing acceptance of genre work:

TIME: I almost miss the stigma that used to attach to these things. Now everybody’s into Tolkien. And I feel a little like, hey, I’ve been into that stuff my whole life. And in fact, you used to beat me up for it.

JW: I miss a little of that element, the danger of, oh, I’m holding this science fiction magazine that’s got this great cover. There a little bit of something just on the edge that I’m doing this. That’s pretty much gone. Although when I walk into a restaurant with a stack of comic books, I still do get stared at a little bit.

NG: I always loved, most of all with doing comics, the fact that I knew I was in the gutter. I kind of miss that, even these days, whenever people come up and inform me, oh, you do graphic novels. No. I wrote comic books, for heaven’s sake. They’re creepy and I was down in the gutter and you despised me. ‘No, no, we love you! We want to give you awards! You write graphic novels!’ We like it here in the gutter!

JW: We’ve been co-opted by the man.

Neil on “family” films:

…in America, it almost seems like family has become a code word for something that you can put a five-year-old in front of, go out for two hours, and come back secure in the knowledge that your child will not have been exposed to any ideas. I didn’t want to do that. I like the idea of family as something where a seven-year-old would see a film and get stuff out of it, and a fifteen-year-old would get something else out of it, and a 25-year-old would get a different thing out of it.

Joss on his upcoming “Wonder Woman” treatment:

NG: She’s such a character without a definitive story. Or even without a definitive version.

JW: That’s how I feel. I hope to change that because I really feel her. Let’s face it: She’s an Amazon, and she will not be denied.

TIME: I’m really hoping her bustier will slip down a little bit further than it did in the show.

JW: You’re just after a porno, aren’t you?

TIME: Yes.

JW: It’s all about priorities. Yes, it’s very empowering for her to be naked all the time.

(via Pop Astronaut)

Think of the Children!

Tangentially related to my being asked to delete photographs I’d taken of children last 4th of July, a rather absurd situation from New York: a woman was ticketed for sitting on a park bench because she didn’t have any children.

It’s an only in New York story. A woman was given a ticket for sitting on a park bench because she doesn’t have children.

The Rivington Playground on Manhattan’s East Side has a small sign at the entrance that says adults are prohibited unless they are accompanied by a child. Forty-seven-year-old Sandra Catena says she didn’t see the sign when she sat down to wait for an arts festival to start. Two New York City police officers asked her if she was with a child. When she said no, they gave her a ticket that could bring a one thousand dollar fine and 90 days in jail.

The city parks department says the rule is designed to keep pedophiles out of city parks, but a parks spokesman told the Daily News that the department hoped police would use some common sense when enforcing the rule.

The spokesman told the paper that ticketing a woman in the park in the middle of the day is not the way you want to enforce the rule.

Yes, of course, pedophilia is a terrible thing. But this approach of assuming anyone who so much looks at a child that isn’t theirs is a pedophile is paranoid to the point of ludicrousness, and incredibly offensive to boot.

(via Joel Blain)

Yes! We Have No Bananas!

This is fascinating, and — amusing as it sounds — actually pretty serious: we could be as little as five years away from a banana apocalypse…and that’s not even the worst case scenario.

In “Can This Fruit Be Saved?“, Popular Science looks at the threats to the current banana market, and what’s being done to combat them. As trivial as it may seem, there could be a lot at stake for America’s favorite fruit.

For instance, there are actually 300 different types of banana, but chances are, you’ve only ever tasted one kind of banana. And even more than that, in a genetic sense, you’ve only ever tasted one banana.

For nearly everyone in the U.S., Canada and Europe, a banana is a banana: yellow and sweet, uniformly sized, firmly textured, always seedless. Our banana, called the Cavendish, is one variety Aguilar doesn’t grow here. “And for you,” says the chief banana breeder for the Honduran Foundation for Agricultural Investigation (FHIA), “the Cavendish is the banana.”

The Cavendish-—as the slogan of Chiquita, the globe’s largest banana producer, declares-—is “quite possibly the world’s perfect food.” Bananas are nutritious and convenient; they’re cheap and consistently available. Americans eat more bananas than any other kind of fresh fruit, averaging about 26.2 pounds of them per year, per person (apples are a distant second, at 16.7 pounds). It also turns out that the 100 billion Cavendish bananas consumed annually worldwide are perfect from a genetic standpoint, every single one a duplicate of every other. It doesn’t matter if it comes from Honduras or Thailand, Jamaica or the Canary Islands—-each Cavendish is an identical twin to one first found in Southeast Asia, brought to a Caribbean botanic garden in the early part of the 20th century, and put into commercial production about 50 years ago.

That predictability is a problem, though, as what kills one banana will kill them all. It’s happened before…and it’s already happening again.

After 15,000 years of human cultivation, the banana is too perfect, lacking the genetic diversity that is key to species health. What can ail one banana can ail all. A fungus or bacterial disease that infects one plantation could march around the globe and destroy millions of bunches, leaving supermarket shelves empty.

A wild scenario? Not when you consider that there’s already been one banana apocalypse. Until the early 1960s, American cereal bowls and ice cream dishes were filled with the Gros Michel, a banana that was larger and, by all accounts, tastier than the fruit we now eat. Like the Cavendish, the Gros Michel, or “Big Mike,” accounted for nearly all the sales of sweet bananas in the Americas and Europe. But starting in the early part of the last century, a fungus called Panama disease began infecting the Big Mike harvest. The malady, which attacks the leaves, is in the same category as Dutch Elm disease. It appeared first in Suriname, then plowed through the Caribbean, finally reaching Honduras in the 1920s. (The country was then the world’s largest banana producer; today it ranks third, behind Ecuador and Costa Rica.)

Growers adopted a frenzied strategy of shifting crops to unused land, maintaining the supply of bananas to the public but at great financial and environmental expense—the tactic destroyed millions of acres of rainforest. By 1960, the major importers were nearly bankrupt, and the future of the fruit was in jeopardy. (Some of the shortages during that time entered the fabric of popular culture; the 1923 musical hit “Yes! We Have No Bananas” is said to have been written after songwriters Frank Silver and Irving Cohn were denied in an attempt to purchase their favorite fruit by a syntactically colorful, out-of-stock neighborhood grocer.) U.S. banana executives were hesitant to recognize the crisis facing the Gros Michel, according to John Soluri, a history professor at Carnegie Mellon University and author of Banana Cultures, an upcoming book on the fruit. “Many of them waited until the last minute.”

Once a little-known species, the Cavendish was eventually accepted as Big Mike’s replacement after billions of dollars in infrastructure changes were made to accommodate different growing and ripening needs. Its advantage was its resistance to Panama disease. But in 1992, a new strain of the fungus-—one that can affect the Cavendish—-was discovered in Asia. Since then, Panama disease Race 4 has wiped out plantations in Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia and Taiwan, and it is now spreading through much of Southeast Asia. It has yet to hit Africa or Latin America, but most experts agree that it is coming. “Given today’s modes of travel, there’s almost no doubt that it will hit the major Cavendish crops,” says Randy Ploetz, the University of Florida plant pathologist who identified the first Sumatran samples of the fungus.

Lots more in the article, including looks at two different approaches to saving (or, if necessary, replacing) the Cavendish banana: traditional breeding, or genetic engineering.

Neat stuff.

Men In Kilts

The PI carried a nice look at Utilikilts on Saturday (thanks to Melissa for pointing it out to me):

It’s the freedom, they say. The freedom to move, to feel the breeze, to stay cool on a hot summer day.

And all this freedom comes simply from banishing pants to the back of the closet, say the men who wear the Utilikilt, a rugged modern take on the Celtic kilt.

The garment – made in Seattle by the company of the same name – adds a twist of practicality to the traditional kilt. Made with tough fabric and accessories such as cargo pockets and a hammer loop, the garment has attracted marine biologists to construction workers who often point to the comfort factor as their reason for donning the pleats. About 12,000 kilts are sold each year, said Steven Villegas, the company’s founder and owner.

Sure, nothing that hasn’t been said here before, but it’s always nice to see a little press for the company.

iTunesRoxanne” by Police, The from the album Every Breath You Take: The Singles (1978, 3:12).

Pussy Power!

Today’s news of the weird: Inventor fuels car with dead cats.

A German inventor has angered animal rights activists with his answer to fighting the soaring cost of fuel — dead cats.

Christian Koch, 55, from the eastern county of Saxony, told Bild newspaper that his organic diesel fuel — a homemade blend of garbage, run-over cats and other ingredients — is a proven alternative to normal consumer diesel.

Koch said around 20 dead cats added into the mix could help produce enough fuel to fill up a 50-liter (11 gallon) tank.

Never fear, though…it turns out that while the biodiesel fuel Koch is working on is real, the “dead cats” angle was nothing more than the overactive imagination of a Bild newspaper reporter.

A German inventor said he has developed a method to produce crude oil products from waste that he believes can be an answer the soaring costs of fuel, but denied a German newspaper story implying he also used dead cats.

“I use paper, plastics, textiles and rubbish,” Koch told Reuters.

“It’s an alternative fuel that is friendly for the environment. But it’s complete nonsense to suggest dead cats. I’ve never used cats and would never think of that. At most the odd toad may have jumped in.”

Bild on Tuesday wrote a headline: “German inventor can turn cats into fuel — for a tank he needs 20 pussies.” The paper on Wednesday followed up with a story entitled: “Can you really make fuel out of cats?

A spokesman for Bild told Reuters the story was meant to show that cat remains could “in theory” be used to make fuel with Koch’s patented method.

The author of the story said Koch had never told him directly that he had used dead cats as the story implied.

Sounds like Bild employs one reporter who’d make a better fit at the Weekly World News….

iTunesLiontamer” by Faithless from the album Outrospective (2001, 5:48).

Olbermann blasts Bush

Well, not so much Bush specifically, as the entire botched crisis management in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. It’s an astoundingly good editorial sequence — could it be that the media’s finally been jostled awake from its all-to-complacent willingness to give a pass to everything the current administration does?

Here’s the video clip. It’s an embedded .wmv file, unfortunately, but the transcript follows.

Read more

Safety: 10 best/worst places to live in the US

MSNBC crunched some numbers to come up with lists of the ten safest and most dangerous places to live in the US in terms of weather and natural disasters.

The ten safest:

  1. Honolulu, Hawaii
  2. Boise City, Idaho
  3. Santa Fe, N.M.
  4. Yakima, Wash.
  5. Spokane, Wash.
  6. Richland-Kennewick-Pasco, Wash.
  7. Medford-Ashland, Ore.
  8. Corvallis, Ore.
  9. Salem, Ore.
  10. Las Cruces, N.M.

And the ten most risky:

  1. Monroe, La.
  2. Dallas, Tex.
  3. Jackson, Miss.
  4. Lakeland-Winter Haven, Fla.
  5. West Palm Beach-Boca Raton, Fla.
  6. Kansas City, Mo.
  7. Elkhart-Goshen, Ind.
  8. Tulsa, Okla.
  9. Memphis, Tenn.
  10. Shreveport-Bossier City, La.

The Pacific Northwest seems to be a pretty good bet, all told, with six locations on the list, three in WA and three in OR…seven, if you count ID as part of the PNW. Amusingly, though, one of the WA locations is the Tri-Cities area, home to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation — but as the Seattle PI points out, these are lists looking at natural disasters.

(via the Seattle PI Buzzworthy blog)

Seattle Car Theft Statistics

Scary auto theft statistics for the Seattle area from a Seattle Times article:

  • King County car thefts last year: “…9,253 in Seattle and 3,624 in the rest of the county.”

  • “On average, a car is stolen every 12 minutes in Washington state. That’s an average of about 122 cars per day, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau.

    “Seattle-King County auto thefts represented more than a quarter of the 43,070 cars stolen last year in the state. By comparison, there were 4,825 auto thefts in Snohomish County last year.”

  • “A car thief in Washington has about a 1-in-16 chance of being arrested for each car stolen, according to data provided by the prosecutor. And, because of sentencing guidelines, a car thief will face a year or more behind bars only after the seventh offense.”

  • “State sentencing guidelines call for zero to 60 days in jail for a first offense. Many car thieves are given parole or relatively short sentences for initial offenses.”

According to the article, the King County Sherrif’s Office is exploring ways to combat this, but have a way to go and little to no budget for it. Pretty eyebrow-raising.