Why I Am Not a Maker, Debbie Chachra, The Atlantic, January 23, 2015
Every once in a while, I am asked what I “make.” A hack day might require it, or a conference might ask me to describe “what I make” so it can go on my name tag.
I’m always uncomfortable with it. I’m uncomfortable with any culture that encourages you take on an entire identity, rather than to express a facet of your own identity (“maker,” rather than “someone who makes things”). But I have much deeper concerns.
An identity built around making things—of being “a maker”—pervades technology culture. There’s a widespread idea that “People who make things are simply different [read: better] than those who don’t.”
Genetic Testing and Tribal Identity, Rose Eveleth, The Atlantic, January 26, 2015
In many ways, the concerns that Native Americans have with genetic testing are the ones most people have: Who will be using this data, and for what?
Today, DNA can tell us a little about a lot of things, from disease risks to ancestral history. But ultimately it’s pretty limited. In fact, 23andMe was recently chastised by the FDA, which claimed the company was overselling the predictive power of their test for medical use. But in the future, that same little sample of DNA could be used for purposes that haven’t even been dreamed up yet. People might be okay with their DNA being used to research cures for cancer, or to explore their own genetic history, but balk at it being used to develop biological weapons or justify genocide.
These are questions that anyone who gives their genetic material to scientists has to think about. And for Native Americans, who have witnessed their artifacts, remains, and land taken away, shared, and discussed among academics for centuries, concerns about genetic appropriation carry ominous reminders about the past. “I might trust this guy, but 100 years from now who is going to get the information? What are people going to do with that information? How can they twist it? Because that’s one thing that seems to happen a lot,” says Nick Tipon, the vice-chairman of the Sacred Sites Committee of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, an organization that represents people of Coast Miwok and Southern Pomo descent. [Emphasis in original.]
The Value of Life: Female Killers & the Feminine Mystique (PDF file), Georgie Ann Weatherby, Jamie Blanche, Rebecca Jones, Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice Research & Education, Volume 2, Issue 1, 2008
Throughout history, female murderers have been considered a rare and unique breed of criminal. While male serial killers have been more numerous, the few high-profile female killers have made it clear that the media and public view these women extremely differently than their male counterparts. Research suggests that this discrepancy could be based on the cultural norms surrounding the view of women as inherently nurturing and feminine. Indeed the majority of crimes that women commit can be characterized as feminine in that they surround common womanly activities such as writing fraudulent checks or shoplifting. The type of crime is not the only hindrance to the female offender, their personal appearance is another aspect that is judged and critiqued. It has been concluded that gender images affect beliefs about which female offenders are deserving (or not) of leniency. When the crimes are especially heinous and against perceived female norms, the court system, media, and public come down exceedingly hard on these unnatural and doubly deviant criminals.
These rare and newsworthy cases of violent women are used by the media to play upon the emotions of the public. As soon as the crime is committed, the media immediately acts on the public’s sense of anomie (confused state of mind) and classifies the female murderer as either mad or bad. A mad portrayal in the media focuses on the state of mind of the criminal rather than her actions. This creates a feeling of sadness in the public associated with the helpless and insane view of the female. This woman is given the benefit of the doubt and her past experiences are highlighted. While her actions are frowned upon, her state of mind is pitied more readily than that of the bad woman. When the media portrays a woman as bad, the coverage is often exceptionally harsh. This woman is deemed to be evil. Her actions were the opposite of what is expected of her as a female and she must be a manipulative and evil person. This type of female killer is devoid of excuses in the eyes of the media and she deserves punishment to the fullest extent of the law. [Internal citations omitted.]
