Comments for Cases and Controversies

Comment on International Justice Update by Mucemi Mwangi

Mucemi Mwangi — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:31:59 +0000

I am a Kenyan living in Nairobi and keenly watching the unravelling imbroglio over prosecution of the principal suspects in the post 2007/2008 election violence. While it is true that there is a declared intention by member states to expand the jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice to cover Human Rights Law and ultimately aspects of criminal law, the suggestion that such a move may have been spurred or may be precipitated by the situation in Kenya does not seem to have any foundation.
The desire for an African-centred international criminal justice arrangement has two faces. The political elite in Africa would probably pursue it to temper justice with political context while the average citizen would seek it because they often have little faith in national options and yet the ICC is too far removed from their reality and its processes too complex and slow for their often exigent need for justice. It is a double edged sword.

Comment on The New Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations, Women of Color and Where We Get Our Research by Kathy O'Driscoll

Kathy O'Driscoll — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:31:50 +0000

Thanks for writing this thoughtful piece. I have not known what to make of the news bites….your insight paints a very clear and concerning picture. –Kathy

Comment on The New Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations, Women of Color and Where We Get Our Research by John Fearnside

John Fearnside — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:23:05 +0000

Breast cancer annoys me. More specifically, the legions of pink-festooned, self-congratulatory breast cancer “awareness” activists/survivors/shoppers annoy me. My prejudices aside, though, I think you’re right on. The European studies seem obviously lacking in data on non-white women. I’d be curious if non-whites are genetically more disposed to breast cancer, if it’s a function of economic conditions (poor diet, lower availability of health care, etc.) or if there are other causes. Of course, without study we won’t find out, will we? I suppose affirmative action won’t hurt but perhaps more direct incentives could also be offered to scientists (of any race) to gather and analyze more fully representative breast cancer data.

Let’s assume these new USPT recommendations represent an improvement in risk-benefit balance for white women. Are they likely to help, hurt or have no effect on non-white women? I suspect they will allow insurance companies to reduce coverage of breast cancer screening. This may well be justified to an extent, but will it make even less frequent screening that much more unattainable to the poor and under-insured (many of whom are also non-white)? Will coverage of screenings become more of a luxury option not provided in no-frills plans? What’s the history of how closely the insurance industry follows USPT recommendations? And who is this shadowy USPT anyway? Are they just a bunch of insurance industry shills? Do they control the weather?

Comment on New Fish Consumption Advisory in California Another Lesson in the Problems with ‘Risk Avoidance’ Approach by Steve Sikes

Steve Sikes — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 17:58:35 +0000

Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Branch
In the guide to eating fish. Lobsters are not listed. My home is in the red zone. Can I assume lobsters are ok to eat more than 1 or 2 per week.

Thank you for your time.

Steve

Comment on But Was It Racial Profiling? by Adam

Adam — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 23:19:04 +0000

Not to be aggressive about this, but…
“A white person would have shown respect to the police officer, handed ID, shown that he did indeed have a right to be there – end of story.”
That’s kind of exactly what you said.

Comment on But Was It Racial Profiling? by bernie

bernie — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:37:36 +0000

I did not write “that only a white person” would have shown ID. As far as what all other blacks would have done, I left that open.

Comment on But Was It Racial Profiling? by Adam

Adam — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 02:52:18 +0000

I agree with bernie, but only somewhat.
First off, I hate the idea that black people “should know to be on good behavior” when interacting with authority figures, that in itself is a racist result of racial profiling. Think back when the first schools allowed black students, and how disgustingly ignorant the white community was to them…they said things like “They should know better…”. However, that being said, we’re sadly forced to accept that racial profiling can have an accurately negative portrayal toward the black community. And as part of the black community, the professor might have benefited from being less aggressively toward authority figures, yes, this is true. But I don’t believe it sounds like racial profiling, and this is where I somewhat agree with bernie; I think that it was indeed Crowley’s attitude that got him in trouble instead of his skin color, but I don’t believe its because he “should have known to be nice” just because he was black, but instead because he looked like he was somewhere he shouldn’t have been. If it were two white men, and they gave the same attitude to the police officer, I don’t see any reason the officer wouldn’t have detained them just in the same. And that’s not because of their skin color, it’s solely because of their attitude toward the officer. So I guess the thing I disagree with with bernie’s reply is the claim that only a white person would have shown respect, handed ID, etc. I believe most any person would have shown ID and be respectful. The fact that Crowley assumed he was being racially profiled was most likely only thanks to his own pride and possible negative disregard for authority figures.

Comment on Gender Segregated Sports? by Kevin McCabe

Kevin McCabe — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 05:52:22 +0000

* Now there’s a game that has ‘evolved’ to favor men. Started out over two thousand years ago to train for ax fights and hasn’t changed much since. Interestingly, there’s a separate women’s version of the sport called camogie. A lot of the women I saw were better players than men.

Comment on Gender Segregated Sports? by Kevin McCabe

Kevin McCabe — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 05:49:13 +0000

Soccer has been nothing but good for my daughter, as has choir. She did Women’s Premier (silver) one year, but all the rest has been in Rec leagues. Once she was on a co-ed team, but left it for a Women’s Rec. At 16, pushing 17, I’m just glad she stays into it. On a different level, I think women pro basketball players are treated differently than men, most obviously in terms of compensation. I tried out Irish hurling a few years back.* I reffed a couple of Women’s Gaelic football games back then. The Gaels had a couple of players from the Storm. And, they were very, very effective atheletes. A judge I practiced in front of, and liked a great deal, is part owner of that team. I hope that whole sport catches fire.

Comment on Should we categorize sports participation by sex? by Sacha T.

Sacha T. — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:56:24 +0000

I am glad that the issue of sports in this context was addressed, because often the argument fails to challenge the premise behind competitive sports. My perspective is that competitive sports were originally conceived to display a certain ideal of masculinity. That is outdated. Also, I agree with Barbara’s excellent point that there’s a tendency to sexualize women in sports, such as the short skirts in Tennis and the affinity for women’s volleyball. That doesn’t help anymore than hypo-masculinization.

Sports should be about physical fitness, skills, and ability. Professor Spade is right about finding different ways to categorize players in sports. For instance, in wrestling there are specific categories based on weight. Also, I recall seeing little difficulty amongst school-aged kids with co-ed flag football, co-ed soccer, co-ed dodge ball, etc. I think if the categories were based on overall body type and fitness, then it would be fairer, there would be less pressure to use performance-enhancing drugs, and more people would participate and feel welcomed.