Male orders hymen!

My article describing how I bought an artificial hymen (a photo of which I've posted in the previous post below) and my commentary on the subject has been published by the Guardian:

"As a member of the XY tribe, evolution has spared me of one anatomically useless little membrane; and of course, my virginity, as a male, is of little interest to society. For women, however, it is frequently a very different matter.

Recently, news of a $15 Chinese-made artificial hymen sent ripples across the Egyptian media and blogosphere. China has been manufacturing this very same product for years, but it was an advertisement for a Chinese company offering shipping into the Middle East that started the discussion here in Cairo. ............................"

Please go read the article and come back here for comments and discussion!

Update:

So the article has been pretty well received on CiF - it's in the 'most commented' selection (right),

Made it up to Yahoo! Buzz,

And even generated an article that, well, described my article.

But the coolest bit is - someone made my conclusion into a pretty quote:

It's very weird to read yourself quoted, I tell ya'. Weird but very flattering!

Behold: the artificial hymen

This is it. The ubiquitous artificial 'made in China' hymen.

(and yes, this photo was taken in Cairo.)


Story will follow shortly...

If this is why you're making children - don't.

Friends who have, or are actively trying to have children will have to forgive me. I'm sure you're doing it for the right reasons. Most people, however, aren't.


We are supposed to be highly evolved creatures. We can envision the future. We know we're not doing it for the survival of the race. And it isn't a sexual impulse being fulfilled, we know how to control this - this, and birth control.
Could it be because our species still abides by a maternal/paternal (to a lesser extent) impulse?

Not all. It makes no logical sense.

The fact that it's a (near-)religious edict, to marry and make children and so on - سنة الحياة and the like - is only proof that there's something inherently illogical in the act of generating offspring: humanity needs all the encouragement - including the heavenly kind - to take the leap.

Why do people make children?

Picturing the happy months of pregnancy, and the adorable little thing subsequently produced can only be a partial explanation. Yes, you will have a beautiful baby that you will love unconditionally and that will drive you crazy but you'll still be looking forward to it. Yes, it will be absolutely amazing the first time your baby holds your finger.

But picturing the lifelong emotional roller-coaster, thinking forward to when your child is 15, full of pimples, dyes her hair in blue and declares she hates you every other hour - should be a good enough antidote to the mental image of rosy cheeks.

There must be more complex explanations. I can think of two. And neither, I'm afraid, is flattering.

We all seek to live fulfilling lives. Most try to do so through their careers.
In reality, few succeed.
A complementary source of gratification therefore comes from having children: after all, it's easy to do and is celebrated as a grand achievement!

Otherwise, why would the line "I knew my life had a purpose the minute I first held you in my hands" be such a recurrent one in father-and-son television scenes?

Precisely because the average person's life is unfulfilling, purposeless. The need to find a 'purpose' seemingly compels them to, well, generate little versions of themselves. Having children, in itself, gives them a sense of purpose, because you realise that society gives you the challenge of doing a good job raising this child which you engendered.
It's your retribution to society. You brought it here, you bring it up.

The following reason is related to the first:
The need to feel useful. Again, we love being depended upon. The go-to guy. Of course most people do it by achieving a certain level of professional expertise.

Failing this, some people will, once again, make a child. A tiny human being, so fully dependent on them for every little thing should be sufficient to provide a feeling self-worth, of usefulness.

Both reasons are not a good enough justification of having a child. Unfortunately, they probably account for more than a few


Who knows: I might have some of my own one of these days. Perhaps I'll be doing it for the right reasons, and perhaps I won't. I'll let you know.

Nobel's thirst for publicity gave Obama the prize

Barack Obama does not deserve a Nobel Peace Prize. and I believe the Prize committee, deep down, would agree. Then why did they award it him?

Before I address why I believe they chose BO, let me get this out of the way: Obama's record in "world peace" is not shallow - it's abysmal.

Guantanamo is not closed. Iraq is still a mess. More troops are being sent to Afghanistan, not less. US soldiers involved in torture are not being tried.
And don't get me started on his ridiculous, ridiculous attempt at half-assedly addressing the Middle East quagmire, which ended in the Israelis absolutely riding his ass.

Only last week, Saturday Night Live - which cannot be accused of being pro-Republican! - ran an opening skit on Obama's (lack of) achievement, concluding that he did have two accomplishments; they named, Jack, and Squat.





Of course, he's been getting the right amount of criticism and mockery. But never mind all that.

I'm ashamed for the Nobel Peace prize committee.

The small, 5-member committee of Norwegians has been obsessed with publicity, and since few around the world know of the leading figures in the medical or economic realms, and few care about breakthroughs in physics and chemistry - the Peace prize is where they can make headlines.

In the past 10 years, save for Wangari Maathai, their laureates have been high profile, famous personnalities and organisations. Yet they were generally worthy, though. After the utterly ridiculous choice of Al Gore in 07, last year's prize, which went to Martti Ahtisaari, seemed to reflect a return of the Nobel committee to their right mind: the man's work for peace, over four continents and for three decades, was rightfully rewarded.

In a NYTimes interview,the committee's chairman is quoted saying the following:
“It’s important for the committee to recognize people who are struggling and idealistic, but we cannot do that every year."

Yes, we can. (hihihihi). A major virtue of the Prize is that it rewards those who selflessly serve mankind, sometimes putting their own lives on the line.

Because if we're going to "go into the realm of realpolitik", by which he means 'select the rich and famous', then we should award the Nobel prize in Medicine to the hunky doctor on Oprah, and the Litterature prize for Dan Brown.

And if, as another member of the committee said, the "prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence", then I believe that a Nobel price in Economics for a PhD student who's blogging instead of researching. (hint, hint?)

The Cairo Tweetup - Photos!

If you weren't there, then you should know: you really missed something and you ought to feel bad about it. :)

Good coffee, old friends, new friends, amazing people, interesting conversation.
A great inaugural event for what should be made into a regular one!

See you guys...
Next month? I'm thinking, end of October/early November!

Below are some photos from yesterday's gathering.