Radiochemistry of Astatine

BrNated · 2020-07-26T15:30:50+00:00

Bliss was the creator of the Bliss Bibliographic Classification system developed in the 1930s-1940s. In the PDF, you can find his original proposal for organizing books on page 320 (PDF page 340). His classification scheme helped provide the framework the Library of Congress classification scheme used decades later.

BrNated · 2020-07-24T17:25:30+00:00

I use a Dewey-ish system that relies on three digit codes as a foundation:

000 - General Works and Resources; 100 - Natural Science; 200 - Applied Science; 300 - Social Science; 400 - Institutions and Life; 500 - Literature; 600 - Language; 700 - Arts and Recreation; 800 - History and Geography; 900 - Other

On top of that, I try to use mnemonics... for example, 8 typically indicates history so 108 would indicate general science history; 0 is always a general/multidisciplinary category; 9 is always an "other" category for specific subjects that don't fit in a subdivision (e.g. 139.7 is "green chemistry"). As with the previous example, decimals are also used to denote specific subjects (e.g. 548 indicates literature that focuses on a particular racial group, 820 indicates Africa in general, and thus 548.2 indicates African literature).

Beyond subject, the type of literature is also indicated such whether its an encyclopedia, textbook, pamphlet, etc... for example, magazines are 015 and with natural science being 100, the code for a natural science magazine would simply be 100:015. (###.### indicates subject, :### indicates literature type).

BrNated · 2020-07-24T16:53:28+00:00

If a trans person was sufficiently passing enough, then they'd technically be of the sex class of the opposite biological sex I guess (just not actually that biological sex). Which means you have the strange situation where you could call them a passing trans woman a woman based on sex class instead of sex which I think at least some GC people would have an issue with...

I'm personally lean a bit more on basing terms like man, woman, etc on biology rather than something like sex class though I wouldn't be completely against the latter. But as you said, a decent portion of GC people would have an issue because regardless of the label, trans women for example still don't have to fear pregnancy, needing an abortion, etc and thus don't have the complete "lived experience" which I find understandable.

BrNated · 2020-07-24T03:15:05+00:00

I don’t think your comment is too long - I’ve always thought that gendered words like that were just characteristic of a lot of languages (I.e. language gender such as in German). This is a new perspective I’d like to look into. Thank you for introducing me to it.

BrNated · 2020-07-23T19:58:48+00:00

I've seen the phrase "sex class/caste" be used to describe which sex society perceives you as as opposed to biological sex (e.g. a case where a person has XY chromosomes but also CAIS and is thus raised as a female - even though some would debate whether that person is a biological intersex male or intersex female, they'd still be treated as a female in society, typically).

BrNated · 2020-07-23T19:53:09+00:00

Thank you for your reply. This is an interpretation I've never heard put this way before - I'll have to look more into it.

This kind of reminds me of like the Roman interpretation of gender where it's thought there is the "normative male" gender and then everything else beneath it where women are typically forced to the bottom.

BrNated · 2020-07-23T03:28:39+00:00

Agreed. I think this is a step in the right direction but not quite there yet.

I'd personally define sex on which gamete (sperm or ova) that the body is designed around making in order to clear up that changing your bodily appearance with SRS or hormones doesn't change your sex. A modified penis is not a actual vagina and modified vagina with arm skin slapped on it is not a penis. One will still have male/female bone structure and without constant medication, one's body will still slowly attempt to revert back to their natural born sex.

The only case where it makes sense to "assign" sex is for intersex people and even then, intersex people can still accurately be labeled male or female most of the time (i.e. most intersex people still have reproductive systems/bodies that correspond much more to one of the two sexes; there are zero cases of true hermaphrodites with functioning reproductive organs of both sexes).

Also I generally agree with the sex =!= gender thing though I did once read an interesting interpretation on a GCdebatesQT forum that argued sex == gender. Basically what they argued was that even if a man performed the "female gender" expectations such as wearing a dress and "taking care of the home," that still wouldn't mean they're female gender but rather a subset of the male gender. Basically how they defined gender was based off what sex a person/society perceives you as (e.g. wearing makeup and wearing dresses as a man just places you in a subcategory of the male gender, just not the stereotypical one which is why two people of different sexes doing the same thing are treated differently)... or maybe I'm just too far down this rabbit hole...

BrNated · 2020-07-21T20:50:41+00:00

I began to realize I was attracted to guys just as highschool began. In retrospect, I can clearly remember having crushes on guys since middle school but I didn't make sense of it until my freshman year.

Even after realizing I was attracted to guys, I didn't immediately think of myself as gay. I thought I had a "crush" on my best friend at the time who was girl and was the only person I could feel like I could talk about very personal things such as sexuality to (despite never having sexual feelings towards her; I didn't really understand the difference between having strong friendly feelings and actual romantic and/or sexual feelings at the time).

I also thought that I wasn't gay because the thought of anal didn't appeal to me nor was I really effeminate (a reason why I have a strong distaste for stereotypes that I find harmful to this day). Yes, this may sound a bit ridiculous but that's exactly the sort of logic my teenager self used back in the day (seriously, I used to think I was a biromantic asexual because I didn't like the thought of anal sex).

Eventually I got my shit together junior year and now feel that I have properly pinpointed my sexuality as just simply 'gay.' Only ever had one person for support; plenty of crushes but never told any.

BrNated · 2020-07-17T04:44:33+00:00

I'm in a somewhat similar boat - I'm a gay man who's more socially liberal and economically moderate but have sort of been politically homeless because of my recent alienation from how the "LGBT+ community" has been running itself. It's due to this that I've been exploring all sorts of communities including RightWingLGBT. With Reddit and Twitter being so prevalent and so many news sites bending over, I find it a bit hard to tell which views or being astroturfed to the moon and which ones are not.

BrNated · 2020-07-05T05:23:54+00:00

Holy crap, I just searched for your post on Reddit and wow. Zero comments, only 29% upvotes as of writing this. I don't see how "sexuality isn't a personality trait" and "we could be criticizing LGBT characters better" is that controversial.

I wonder if they saw "I am not the greatest fan of LGBT+ stuff" and went "uh oh, what flaming bigot - downvote time."

BrNated · 2020-07-05T01:47:28+00:00

Thanks for this.

"...they keep focusing on badly written characters' LGBT+ status instead of their status of being badly written."

This is something I haven't realized before. This may just happen because it's been a trope for LGBT characters in general, but this is a good point regardless.

I remember reading a post (I think on r/UnpopularOpinion) that said there's a conflicting split that LGBT+ characters should either be added because you know... LGBT+ simply exist VERSUS LGBT+ characters should only be put in if their sexuality is going to be a driving point of the plot or (proper) character development.

BrNated · 2020-07-03T04:31:54+00:00

You're right - considering how ban-happy Reddit has been lately, I suppose the extra security is reasonable.

BrNated · 2020-07-03T03:27:06+00:00

Thank you so much for this!

BrNated · 2020-07-03T03:24:46+00:00

It isn't banned (yet) but it's been made private. You'd have to message the mods on there and see if they'll let you in though I'd guess they're being inordinately cautious as of right now.

BrNated · 2020-07-01T16:41:46+00:00

What I'm curious about is how community subs will evolve - like how s/GenderCritical has already been made restrictive and ban-hammer-prone in exchange for removing themselves from s/all. Their description does say that they will create a proper GC debate community however.

I wonder if we'll start seeing subs appear in pairs: one being a restrictive, community-focused sub and the other being the open, debate-oriented sub (or perhaps subs that focus on the debate between two communities like r/GCdebatesQT instead of broad categories that would be something like r/debateGC).

BrNated

MODERATOR OF