Archive for April 13th, 2009

Reading Bonk

By Sheril Kirshenbaum | April 13, 2009 1:36 pm

373829312.JPGEarlier today, Chris posted a schedule for our C.P. Snow blog discussion. I’ll be participating in that of course, but am also hosting another conversation on Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex, which I’m currently reading as part of the research for my next book.  Here’s the plan

First, those interested should get a copy. I’m not one for scheduling assignments so there’s no official calender on when sections must be complete. We’ll begin in a couple weeks and everyone is invited to contribute to the conversation–even if you’re not reading along.

I’ll write about some of the most interesting subjects from Roach’s book and from there, I hope you’ll offer ideas and insights on topic or suggest a different direction about something else you find particularly fascinating. We’ll develop an ongoing conversation that will evolve over several threads.  Here’s the table of contents to give everyone an idea of what we’re in for:

  1. The Sausage, the Porcupine, and the Agreeable Mrs. G: Highlights from the pioneers of human sexual response
  2. Dating the Penis-Camera: Can a woman find happiness with a machine?
  3. The Princess and Her Pea: The woman who moved her clitoris, and other ruminations on intercourse orgasms
  4. The Upsuck Chronicles: Does orgasm boost fertility, and what do pigs know about it?
  5. What’s Going On In There? The diverting world of coital imaging
  6. The Taiwanese Fix and the Penile Pricking Ring: Creative approaches to impotence
  7. The Testicle Pushers: If two are good, would three be better:
  8. Re-Member Me: Transplants, implants, and other penises of last resort
  9. The Lady’s Boner: Is the clitoris a tiny penis?
  10. The Prescription-Strength Vibrator: Masturbating for health
  11. The Immaculate Orgasm: Who needs genitals?
  12. Mind over Vagina: Women are complicated
  13. Would Would Allah Say? The strange, brave career of Ahmed Shafik
  14. Monkey Do: The secret sway of hormones
  15. “Persons Studied in Pairs”: The lab that uncovered great sex

Unlike reading a lecture, Bonk is just as good out of order.  I started with the prologue, which immediately raises questions about the unusual challenges related to conducting sex research. Just yesterday, I randomly opened the book and started at the nearest chapter, which happened to be #7.  Without giving too much away, I’ll say it was a thought-provoking section. I learned that the first testicle transplants came from rather unexpected donors with some surprising results.  Then I turned back to the beginning and discovered that artificial insemination of pigs involves far more preparation than one would expect.

So far Bonk is funny and very enjoyable, but make no mistake… This NYTimes bestseller is grounded in science, while providing the context, history, and meaning of some very common–but rarely discussed–behaviors.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Books, Culture, Media and Science

The Two Cultures Reading Schedule

By Chris Mooney | April 13, 2009 11:47 am

two-cultures.jpg[This is the first in a series of posts written in anticipation of the May 9 “Two Cultures” conference at the New York Academy of Sciences, which we helped organize.]

So: I’ve decided to do this C.P. Snow blogging thing. Here’s the plan:

Anyone who’s interested, get yourself a copy of The Two Cultures. The lecture is less than 50 pages long, so it’s not like it’s a ton of work to read or anything. And (the joke is getting old) there are no equations!

We recommend the following edition, pictured at left: Cambridge/Canto, 1993 paperback. There is a spectacularly good opening essay by Stefan Collini, and then there’s also Snow’s 1963 essay “The Two Cultures: A Second Look” included at the back. These are great additional readings, though on the blog here we’ll only focus on the original lecture.

Here’s the schedule: We’re going to take a week to allow everyone to get, in hand, a copy. Then, blogging about the book will begin the week of April 20. We’ll divide the text up into three sections, and we’ll devote a week to each. So it will go like this:

Week of April 20: Part I, “The two cultures,” p. 1-21.
Week of April 27: Part II-III, “Intellectuals as natural Luddites”; “The Scientific Revolution,” p. 22-40.
Week of May 4: Part IV, “The rich and the poor,” p. 41-51.

Clearly, then, this will be a close readings. So: get your books, and start your engines…

Is "He Said, She Said, We're Clueless" Coverage Dying?

By Chris Mooney | April 13, 2009 9:46 am

Jay Rosen has an interesting post about “on the one hand, on the other hand” journalism, and credits my 2004 CJR article which was one early contribution to critiquing this form of reporting. (Jesus, I’ve been doing this for too long.)

There’s a reason the critique of false “balance” emerged, in significant part, from the science journalism world. In CJR, I was very much channeling the complaints of many evolutionary and climate scientists, who were outraged by media coverage and continually pointed out that since there’s no such thing as “balance” in science, reporting about science which employs such a paradigm often gets the story completely wrong. Indeed, such reporting empowers anti-science voices, who continually demand that their outlier stances be treated on a par with scientific consensus positions.

Anyways, Rosen explains the advantages of “he said, she said” from the journalistic perspective–basically, it saves a reporter from the trouble of having to do any serious intellectual work (it also has political advantages)–but then also postulates that it’s “in decline”:

Today, any well informed blogger, competing journalist or alert press critic can easily find the materials to point out an instance [of] false balance or the lame acceptance of fact-free spin. Professional opinion has therefore shifted and among the better journalists, some of whom I know, it is no longer acceptable to defend he said, she said treatments when the materials are available to call out distortions and untruths.

Um…maybe. It depends on who these “better” journalists are and whether they will still have a job in five years.

I will concede that there’s a creme of sophisticated print journalists who get the problem with phony balance. But I mean, if you watch CNN or something, it’s as omnipresent as ever. Moreover, cutbacks in the media industry, and the slaughter of journalistic “expertise” that has occurred as various kinds of media specialists (like science journalists) lose their jobs, makes the lazy crutch of “balance” more likely than ever to prevail.

For here’s another advantage to “he said, she said” from a media industry perspective: It’s cheap. Any intern can write a “balanced” story. You don’t need seasoned career journalists if that’s the kind of fare you’re producing. You definitely don’t need to pay their healthcare and pensions.

So I just don’t buy the idea that the blogosphere can beat back “he said, she said” in the media business. Once again, I see it as a basic matter of industry economics; and so far as that goes, all the trends seem to be in the direction of more journalistic laziness and lack of expertise, rather than less….

Natural Curiosity

By Sheril Kirshenbaum | April 13, 2009 8:39 am

..gets many of us started in science.


* Thanks to ‘Gregory‘ for sending the image.

MORE ABOUT: calvin, children, hobbes

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


See More

Collapse bottom bar