From micarr1 at juno.com  Mon Aug  4 03:39:11 2003
From: micarr1 at juno.com (Margaret I Carr)
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 19:39:11 -0700
Subject: [LMB] Update on Croatian Winterfair Gifts project
Message-ID: <20030803.193912.-776509.4.micarr1@juno.com>

On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:46:19 -0600 House of Unruly Fish
<carosue at centurytel.net> writes:
SNIP 
> THIS:
> 
> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3534596606
> 
> is just an experiment on my part, to test interest in this venue and 
also 
> to sneak in a little pre-pub interest for PoS.  Listees should NOT  bid
on 
> this.  Honest!
> 
> But you can read it, because it's kind of fun.

Oh, yes. Definitely fun, but, do you realize how HARD it was NOT to bid?
I had to stop and take my copy off the shelf and hug and stroke it for a
bit to suppress the urge. 

Very nice pre-pub effort! You done good!

Margaret I. Carr



--------________--------________--------

From RayLists at quixnet.net  Fri Aug  1 00:03:21 2003
From: RayLists at quixnet.net (Ray)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:03:21 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all,   Polarization/flammable
 warning, was Can't stand it any more.
References: <000801c3579d$b8d00b70$6401a8c0@EVO800>
 <05bd01c357b5$91144e30$6c3a0144@Laptop>
Message-ID: <01f301c357b7$f089cbe0$6e9f68d1@RDrouill>

I vote to let the discussion continue.  I have been reading it, and it
continues to be civil.

Ray

----- Original Message -----
From: "pam" <pam at gotcher.us>
To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable warning,
was Can't stand it any more.


> I'll second the pizza.
> Pam
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gordon Jackson" <gordon at gordonj.net>
> To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:55 PM
> Subject: RE: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable
warning,
> was Can't stand it any more.
>
>
> > I would like to call Pizza on this thread please. I have learned the
> > hard way over the years that on any mailing list with a significant
> > number of participants resident in the continent of North America, there
> > are two topics which, if discussion is permitted on them and continues
> > for any length of time, have the potential to destroy mailing lists.
> > This is one of those topics. Do I have the support of two others?
> >
> > Anyway, would this not be more appropriate for the Star Crhche list? Or
> > does that no longer exist?
> >
> > Cheers, Gordon
> >
> > >Subject: Re: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable
> > warning, >was Can't stand it any more.
> >
> > >EXTREMELY offtopic inflammable, polarization stuff below.....
> > --
> > Lois-Bujold mailing list
> > Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> > http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
> >
> >
> --
> Lois-Bujold mailing list
> Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
>



--------________--------________--------

From CatMtn at aol.com  Fri Aug  1 00:01:05 2003
From: CatMtn at aol.com (CatMtn at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:01:05 EDT
Subject: [LMB] Re: Can't take it any more
Message-ID: <a5.3d7d7e3d.2c5af9b1@aol.com>

Sara A. writes:
> 
> >1.  If you don't want children, use birth control.  If you're male, use a 
> condom **no matter what she tells you**.  If you don't, you must deal with 
> the consequences.  I don't see any argument that tries to get around that 
> as either reasonable OR moral.

A friend whose family has a tendency to polycystic ovaries had two sisters 
who recently gave birth---one of them to triplets---conceived while they were on 
the pill.  Both are married, and although both were trying to avoid 
pregnancy, it wasn't a disaster for either of them.  However, men should take note that 
even if she IS TELLING THE TRUTH about being on the pill, it isn't 100% 
reliable.

Mary



--------________--------________--------

From jparish at siue.edu  Fri Aug  1 00:03:40 2003
From: jparish at siue.edu (jparish at siue.edu)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:03:40 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Filk plug
Message-ID: <3F2959FC.27808.306CA8E@localhost>

A couple of years ago, I wrote a filk, "I'm Going to Set Them Free", to 
the tune of "Takin' It to the Streets", by the Doobie Brothers. Several 
listmembers were unfamiliar with the original tune, however. I just 
noticed that PBS is soon to show an episode of Soundstage centered 
on Michael Macdonald, who was the lead singer for the Doobies on that 
song - and that song will be one of the ones featured. So, if anyone 
who receives PBS has any residual curiosity, now's your chance. (Here 
in the St. Louis area, it's next Tuesday at 8; check your local listings.)

Jim Parish



--------________--------________--------

From jparish at siue.edu  Fri Aug  1 00:07:05 2003
From: jparish at siue.edu (jparish at siue.edu)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:07:05 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Filk plug erratum
Message-ID: <3F295AC9.15023.309EEE1@localhost>

Sigh. That's "McDonald", not Macdonald. (And I know exactly who to 
blame for the slip-up. You know who you are...)

Jim Parish



--------________--------________--------

From kelts at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 00:09:54 2003
From: kelts at earthlink.net (Laura Gallagher)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:09:54 -0700
Subject: [LMB] thread discussion, and Betan birth control in the (old) news
In-Reply-To: <1059689416.3f2993c8d1f71@charrel.net>
Message-ID: <002201c357b8$da8bcd60$b6432904@earthlink.net>

Marna wrote:
> > For now I'd vote for letting it run.  
> > 
> > Thoughts from others? 

I have no objection - people seem to be trying to stay calm.  But PLEASE
people, use the OT: marker.  Some people will not want to read that
thread - make it easier for them to weed it out. 

Agnes wrote: 
> Just one, and it is actually on topic: does the fact that 
> Beta Colony has perfect (not "works 99%+ of the time *if 
> used correctly*") birth control make it fantasy instead of SF?   ;)

Ah, I'd actually been meaning to post something related to this for a
while, but got distracted.  And since it's not really related to the
earlier topic, but is more Betan Tech In The News, I shall post on
unafraid. 

Do we actually have textevd that Betan implants are 100%?  There
certainly does seem to be an underlying assumption that they are. 

Anyway, I recently learned about a birth control that's been currently
developed, that sounded to me VERY much like the Betan implants.  It's
been out in Europe for years, and out in the US for 3 years, but hey,
apparently I've been under a rock too much - just saw an ad for it a
couple weeks, and went off to the website to investigate.

http://www.mirena-us.com/

It's basically an IUD that releases a local dose of progesterone.
Local, not systemic, and no estrogen, so doesn't get the side effects of
the pill/Norplant. 

Similarities to Betan implant - it's not something you use, it's
implanted and you forget about it.   It's listed as more than 99%
effective.  (Hm, legal thought - I wonder if they'd EVER let anybody
advertise something as 100%.  It's listed as "effective as
sterilization)  It has a tendency to either really lighten periods, for
some women, or turn them off altogether for others. 

(From Barrayar:)
"I've had my implant since I was fourteen. I had a menstrual period once
then, I remember. We turn them off till they're needed."

Another similarity is that once you have it taken out, you go back to
the same level of fertility as if you'd been using no birth control at
all - no long delays getting back to normal fertility, as many women
experience with the pill.  Again from Barrayar, Cordelia's description:

"I didn't think it would happen so fast," Cordelia went on. "I thought
we'd be in for several months of earnest and delightful experiment. But
we caught the baby first try. So I still haven't had a menstrual period,
here on Barrayar."

The main *difference* I'm seeing from the Betan implants is that it is
very much advertised as a Mom's form of birth control [1] - they don't
generally recommend IUD-type birth control for women who have not had
children yet.  So putting it in a 14 year old would not be expected.
But if that could be overcome, you'd just about have the Betan implant. 


Laura Gallagher

[1][personal side note] Given that this upcoming baby, unlike the last,
was conceived just as fast as Miles, and thereby the spacing is a lot
closer than I'd really planned... why, YES, I've discussed Mirena with
my midwife, and I expect to run not walk to the local Planned Parenthood
as soon as possible after Whosis is born...
[/personal side note]



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 00:12:42 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LMB] Re: Can't take it any more
In-Reply-To: <a5.3d7d7e3d.2c5af9b1@aol.com>
References: <a5.3d7d7e3d.2c5af9b1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030731161127.O17887@shell.rawbw.com>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 CatMtn at aol.com wrote:

> A friend whose family has a tendency to polycystic ovaries had
> two sisters who recently gave birth--one of them to
> triplets--conceived while they were on the pill.  Both are
> married, and although both were trying to avoid pregnancy, it
> wasn't a disaster for either of them.  However, men should take
> note that even if she IS TELLING THE TRUTH about being on the
> pill, it isn't 100% reliable.

And it is absolutely criminal that doctors do not tell patients
taking antibiotics that they cannot rely on the birth control
pill while taking them.

This is how I got pregnant.

~malfoy
**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From pam at gotcher.us  Fri Aug  1 00:14:38 2003
From: pam at gotcher.us (pam)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:14:38 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all,   Polarization/flammable
 warning, was Can't stand it any more.
References: <000801c3579d$b8d00b70$6401a8c0@EVO800>
 <05bd01c357b5$91144e30$6c3a0144@Laptop>
 <01f301c357b7$f089cbe0$6e9f68d1@RDrouill>
Message-ID: <05fc01c357b9$83fabdc0$6c3a0144@Laptop>

Since we've had 3 pizza calls, this is not an option.
Pam
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ray" <RayLists at quixnet.net>
To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable warning,
was Can't stand it any more.


> I vote to let the discussion continue.  I have been reading it, and it
> continues to be civil.
>
> Ray
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "pam" <pam at gotcher.us>
> To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 6:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable
warning,
> was Can't stand it any more.
>
>
> > I'll second the pizza.
> > Pam
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gordon Jackson" <gordon at gordonj.net>
> > To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
> > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 2:55 PM
> > Subject: RE: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable
> warning,
> > was Can't stand it any more.
> >
> >
> > > I would like to call Pizza on this thread please. I have learned the
> > > hard way over the years that on any mailing list with a significant
> > > number of participants resident in the continent of North America,
there
> > > are two topics which, if discussion is permitted on them and continues
> > > for any length of time, have the potential to destroy mailing lists.
> > > This is one of those topics. Do I have the support of two others?
> > >
> > > Anyway, would this not be more appropriate for the Star Crhche list?
Or
> > > does that no longer exist?
> > >
> > > Cheers, Gordon
> > >
> > > >Subject: Re: [LMB] Mostly offtopic not all, Polarization/flammable
> > > warning, >was Can't stand it any more.
> > >
> > > >EXTREMELY offtopic inflammable, polarization stuff below.....
> > > --
> > > Lois-Bujold mailing list
> > > Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> > > http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Lois-Bujold mailing list
> > Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> > http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
> >
> -- 
> Lois-Bujold mailing list
> Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
>
>



--------________--------________--------

From bkemper at bigdogz.com  Fri Aug  1 00:25:48 2003
From: bkemper at bigdogz.com (Bart Kemper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:25:48 -0500
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>

Marna wrote:

> Nice to have you back! 
> 
> Sadly, I think I must have been leaving your neck of the woods around
> the time you were returning to it. 
>  
> 

Could be.  Been back (rather prematurely) since end of May, but have 
been rather busy catching up with wife, business, family, kids, etc.

>> It's right up there with "equal right" but women aren't eligable for the
>> draft.  
> 
> 
> As far as I can tell, that's not a very good example, simply because
> almost everyone I have ever spoken to who would agree that men and
> women ought to be equally eligible for conscription is a pretty strong
> supporter of MEN becoming INeligible for conscription.  Which is ALSO
> equality. 
> 

Totally different issues.  One is the actual call up.  The other is 
registration.  Registration for the draft in the US is mandatory for all 
males, regardless of health or other status.  If a US male does not 
register, he cannot get federal student loans, federal jobs, etc. etc. 
Women are not required to do so.  As such, males must bear the burden of 
being eligible for the draft as a price of citizenship, women are not. 
 From a classical (or Heinlienian) perspective, the would mean women are 
not full citizens since they do not bear the same burdens ... unless you 
wish to include the arguement of women being brood mares and that's 
their contribution.

Its not about whether the draft is right or wrong, popular or unpopular, 
it about the laws that are in place and placing a greater burden on one 
group than the other based on a false discriminator (gender) when people 
of the "other group" (females) are not only qualified to serve in the 
military (by the fact they are doing in right now and have been long 
before I was born) but they require *all* males, regardless of 
suitability, to register, thereby eliminating the arguement that "well, 
we need the guys for combat and drafting women won't help".  (which is 
an insanely stupid argument, anyway, since it ignores the reality of the 
military being well over 90% gender nonspecific in its jobs, and that 
most injuries and deaths occur to those not in combat arms).

Yes, I am fully aware groups like NOW state "we are against registration 
at all, therefore we are not being sexist"...but the reality is that the 
males do have to register and the law was already in place makes the 
assertation "we want the same for both genders" rather convenient..and 
weak.  It does not support an equal burden of citizenship does create a 
gender-based difference.  I find it up there with some organizations 
wanting to "pull down the walls" of all male universities but at the 
same time defend the "need for all female schools to provide a nurturing 
and healthy place".

> Popular support for conscription is extremely low. I can't see a
> movement to expand the list of possible draftees in ANY way getting
> any traction any time soon. 

That's the other issue...actually calling people up.  Theoretically it 
would take a major incident like another WTC, but by a nation state that 
declares war.  This is the actual implementation of the draft....and 
then weeding out those who would or would not be picked to serve. 
Different but related critter.

Eh...register everyone or register no one.  Given the males were ALREADY 
by law required to be registered, I find the stand of keeping women 
All all-male and all-female institutions (private ones, even if 
recieving some federal money) and let the free market show whether there 
is merit for a given school or given system....or ban *ANY* 
gender-specific university or college.

I love all of Mile's women because they seem to be the kind of woman I 
like to have as a friend...and someone I could have at my back.  They 
don't ask for special treatment based on plumbing and would be likely to 
hand you back YOUR plumbing if you tried to force it on them.  They are 
individuals and responsible for themselves, not part of a crippled 
handicapped group that needs special help to break even with the more 
superior and more capable other group (males).

Eh...sorry....got a note from an aquaintance... a medic in one of my old 
units and rumor is one of the idiots there is trying to go home by 
getting pregnant...and rumor is she using condoms with pinholes in them. 
  The word is out to stay away from her, but there apparently is no 
legal recourse to take for this by the chain of command since she is 
doing nothing illegal (having sex) as long as it isn't fraternization, 
and I'm guessing the military is a bit shy about looking bad for "being 
mean to females" after the LT Flynn debacle (the commissioned officer 
who refused direct written orders to not sleep with an enlisted woman's 
husband, who actually used her rank to tell the enlisted person to shut 
up as an order, and then Flynn was made into the victim, not the Air 
Force enlisted person.)  We have a long way to go before we have gender 
equality...and for me if it fails the "algebraic substitution test" 
where you can swap genders and it makes no difference, its wrong.



--------________--------________--------

From andi at diezmann.com  Fri Aug  1 00:20:29 2003
From: andi at diezmann.com (Andi)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:20:29 -0700
Subject: [LMB] Re: Can't take it any more, now uninformed doctors
In-Reply-To: <20030731161127.O17887@shell.rawbw.com>
Message-ID: <BB4EF24C.F6D5%andi@diezmann.com>

On 7/31/03 4:12 PM, "Azalais Malfoy" <tiamat at tsoft.com> wrote:

> And it is absolutely criminal that doctors do not tell patients
> taking antibiotics that they cannot rely on the birth control
> pill while taking them.
> 
> This is how I got pregnant.
> 


That would be one of my constant issues with doctors, as well - I do all my
own research on the medications I take, but my first question to a doctor
who prescribes me antibiotics is "will this interfere with my birth control
medication?" 
Sadly, most of them say "no, it won't, there's no interference." At that
point, I refuse to go back to that doctor again. This would be a major
reason why I have no primary doctor, as I haven't yet found one who I both
get along with, and who knows basic principles of drug interactions.
And this is after I *ask*. Most of them just have no clue.

It all makes me wonder what the true rate of birth control pill failure is -
since all the statistics have to include the women who take medications that
they are told do not cause a problem, but do.

Andi, constantly disappointed by the doctors who are supposed to know more
than they do. 



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 00:34:00 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:34:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
Message-ID: <20030731163242.J17887@shell.rawbw.com>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Bart Kemper wrote:

> and I'm guessing the military is a bit shy about looking bad for "being
> mean to females" after the LT Flynn debacle (the commissioned officer
> who refused direct written orders to not sleep with an enlisted woman's
> husband, who actually used her rank to tell the enlisted person to shut
> up as an order, and then Flynn was made into the victim, not the Air
> Force enlisted person.)

*jawdrop*

If a man did that, they (hopefully) would hang him up by his
b*lls to dry......

~malfoy, who can still be shocked, apparently
**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From acswagner at bellsouth.net  Fri Aug  1 00:39:15 2003
From: acswagner at bellsouth.net (acswagner at bellsouth.net)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:39:15 -0500
Subject: [LMB] OT: Hugo nominees
In-Reply-To: <003f01c357b0$5bcc92a0$6b01a8c0@D6FL1B21>
References: <200307311937.h6VJb5j6012837@lists.herald.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3F296253.28116.119AF5@localhost>

Hi there!

On 31 Jul 2003 at 15:09, Robert Warnicke wrote:

> Jim Parish wrote:
> 
> > Hmm. I haven't been paying attention. Let's see, _Hominids_ is by
> > Sawyer, right? Serialized in _Analog_ or _IASFM_? Read that, wan't
> > very impressed. 
> 
> I wasn't impressed either.  I have liked his other stuff.

I loved Hominids (and Humans for that matter), and can't wait for 
the third one Hybrids to come out at the end of the month.

> No, Kim Stanley Robinson.  I am looking forward to this, he wrote the
> Red/Green/Blue Mars books which I liked.   

Interesting.  I tried Red Planet and couldn't get in it.  It just didn't 
seem to have any spark.

Good thing that there are so many books out there for so many 
different tastes... :)  and we can still agree to like Bujold, too. 

Sasha



--------________--------________--------

From jwreynold at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 00:43:29 2003
From: jwreynold at earthlink.net (James Reynolds)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:43:29 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Albacon 2003
Message-ID: <C9E84B0A-C3B0-11D7-8835-000393BDA014@earthlink.net>

	I'm taking the liberty of sending this on, since Herself is the GoH.



From: Jonathan Sternfeld <jsternfe at nycap.rr.com>
Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003  5:41:08  PM US/Eastern
To: members at albacon.org
Subject: [Members] Hotel chosen!

Everyone,

We are proud to announce that we have completed negotiations with our 
hotel for 2003.
We will be holding this year's Albacon at the Roaring Brook Resort and 
Conference Center
located in Lake George, NY, from October 10-12, 2003.  For details on 
the facility you can
visit their website at http://www.roaringbrookranch.com.

The Albacon website will be updated shortly with our hotel rates.

-Sincerely,

Jonathan Sternfeld
Hotel Liaison
Albacon 2003

Jennifer Sternfeld
Chair, Albacon 2003


_______________________________________________
Members mailing list
Members at albacon.org
http://www.albacon.org/mailman/listinfo/members


	*** Jim Reynolds



--------________--------________--------

From alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca  Fri Aug  1 00:44:04 2003
From: alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca (alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:44:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0307311933430.31741-100000@pannier.cfsc.ottaw
 a.on.ca>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Bart Kemper wrote:
> Marna writes:
> > As far as I can tell, that's not a very good example, simply because
> > almost everyone I have ever spoken to who would agree that men and
> > women ought to be equally eligible for conscription is a pretty strong
> > supporter of MEN becoming INeligible for conscription.  Which is ALSO
> > equality.
>
> Totally different issues.  One is the actual call up.  The other is
> registration.  Registration for the draft in the US is mandatory for all
> males, regardless of health or other status.  If a US male does not
> register, he cannot get federal student loans, federal jobs, etc. etc.
> Women are not required to do so.  As such, males must bear the burden of
> being eligible for the draft as a price of citizenship, women are not.
>  From a classical (or Heinlienian) perspective, the would mean women are
> not full citizens since they do not bear the same burdens ... unless you
> wish to include the arguement of women being brood mares and that's
> their contribution.

Personal opinion: if there was actually any reason for conscription, then
logically women should be as subject to it as males, and both should be
exempted for reasons of age, health, dependents, etc.

But as Marna implied, I can see no reason for *any* form of conscription
*ever*. As Canada found in two world wars, it's far too divisive. And I
think that's what NOW is saying.

And as for citizenship: surely that is based on your full contribution to
society, your willingness to be an active citizen, your helpfulness to
your city and your neighbours? Either it's free to any adult or it's
everything you do in the civic realm, but just being registered for
the draft is really not all that relevant.

One question that's baffling me: what is the *cost* of the bureaucracy and
record-keeping necessary for this huge draft registration system that
isn't being used? Hasn't anyone suggested that maybe the money could be
better used elsewhere (or for paying down the national debt)? Seems very
odd to me.

-- 
Alayne McGregor
alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca / alayne at ncf.ca

"I believe God is a librarian. I believe that literature is holy ... it is that best part of
our souls that we break off and give each other, and God has a special dispensation for it,
angels to guard its making and its preservation." -- Sarah Smith, _Chasing Shakespeares_



--------________--------________--------

From kelts at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 00:44:54 2003
From: kelts at earthlink.net (Laura Gallagher)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:44:54 -0700
Subject: [LMB] OT: Blood pressure, was Host mothers
In-Reply-To: <p05200f0fbb4f36a95f8b@[10.0.1.4]>
Message-ID: <002401c357bd$be1839c0$b6432904@earthlink.net>

>  Sara A. wrote:
> >I enjoyed being pregnant, actually.  It was the near-death 
> experience at the end that got to me (eclampsia, seizure, was 
> unconscious for three days).

Beth wrote: 
> Oh. Charming. No wonder they were so quietly freaking out 
> about my blood pressure... (I only got to 180 or 190 over 110...)

Heh, I have to watch out and convince them that really, my blood
pressure is FINE.  Because it tends to get misdiagnosed, as I'm a large
lady.  

Case in point happened Tuesday, at my endocrinologist's.  The nurse
popped my arm into the automated BP cuff.  (hate that, makes it feel
like my arm will Pop Off)  The doctor came in, looked at it, and
exclaimed that my BP was up.  It read 157/91.  I KNEW that was not
normal for me.  I suggested that possibly they were using too small a BP
cuff for me.  Fortunately I have a *good* endocrinologist - she took one
look at the cuff and declared that I was right.  They couldnt get the
large size cuff to work with the automated machine, so she took it
manually.  Yep, 112/72, as usual.  I've read that a very large
percentage of large pregnant women who get diagnosed with high blood
pressure - and end up with c-sections, bp meds, etc - are misdiagnosed
because doctors don't know to check cuff size. 

I'd like to see it more correctly diagnosed - given that the women that
ARE having trouble can be in serious danger, and need the correct
treatment.  And the rest of us do not. 

Laura Gallagher



--------________--------________--------

From acswagner at bellsouth.net  Fri Aug  1 00:49:27 2003
From: acswagner at bellsouth.net (acswagner at bellsouth.net)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:49:27 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Re:now uninformed doctors
In-Reply-To: <BB4EF24C.F6D5%andi@diezmann.com>
References: <20030731161127.O17887@shell.rawbw.com>
Message-ID: <3F2964B7.21545.1AF250@localhost>

Hi Andi!

Well, it depends on the antibiotic whether or not it interferes with 
birth control.  

I was appalled when I found out that my youngest stepdaughter got 
pregnant when on an antibiotic and the doc hadn't told her that she 
needed alternative protection for the duration.  

On the other hand, on all the prescription leaflets that I have seen 
for antibiotics that do interfere with b/c, this fact was indicated, so if 
people just read those, they should know and take the proper 
action.

I still think it's the doctor's responsibility to inform the patient and 
from the amount of females I met in the U.S over the last 5 years, 
who got pregnant while on antibiotics, not a whole bunch of doctors 
mentions this rather important side effect. :(

Sasha

On 31 Jul 2003 at 16:20, Andi wrote:

> That would be one of my constant issues with doctors, as well - I do all my
> own research on the medications I take, but my first question to a doctor
> who prescribes me antibiotics is "will this interfere with my birth control
> medication?" 
> Sadly, most of them say "no, it won't, there's no interference." At that
> point, I refuse to go back to that doctor again. This would be a major
> reason why I have no primary doctor, as I haven't yet found one who I both
> get along with, and who knows basic principles of drug interactions.
> And this is after I *ask*. Most of them just have no clue.



--------________--------________--------

From jparish at siue.edu  Fri Aug  1 00:51:47 2003
From: jparish at siue.edu (jparish at siue.edu)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:51:47 -0500
Subject: [LMB] OT: Hugo nominees
In-Reply-To: <3F296253.28116.119AF5@localhost>
References: <003f01c357b0$5bcc92a0$6b01a8c0@D6FL1B21>
Message-ID: <3F296543.15173.332D94E@localhost>

Robert Warnicke wrote, of _Years of Rice and Salt_:
> Kim Stanley Robinson.  I am looking forward to this, he wrote
> the Red/Green/Blue Mars books which I liked.   

Sasha replied:
> Interesting.  I tried Red Planet and couldn't get in it.  It just
> didn't seem to have any spark.

I'm of two minds about Robinson. I find his works rather dry, as a rule, 
although I enjoyed the Orange County trilogy. I did get through the 
Mars trilogy, which (as a matter of timing) required me to read the first 
book three times and the second one twice. I have no particular desire 
to reread it, however. _A Short Sharp Shock_ was quite strange, and I 
doubt I understood it properly, but again I have no real need to go back 
to it. (That one, I probably will, eventually.) But I enjoy good alternate 
histories, so I'll give this one a try also.

Jim Parish



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 00:53:12 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LMB] Host mothers, was Can't stand it any more. OT:
In-Reply-To: <p05200f0fbb4f36a95f8b@[10.0.1.4]>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <5.2.1.1.0.20030731125824.02df44b0@mail.ev1.net>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731155041.027e8cb0@pop.mindspring.com>
 <p05200f0fbb4f36a95f8b@[10.0.1.4]>
Message-ID: <20030731164449.J17887@shell.rawbw.com>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Elizabeth McCoy wrote:

> At 3:53 PM -0400 7/31/03, Sara A. wrote:
>
> >I enjoyed being pregnant, actually.  It was the near-death
> >experience at the end that got to me (eclampsia, seizure, was
> >unconscious for three days).
>
> Oh. Charming. No wonder they were so quietly freaking out about my blood
> pressure... (I only got to 180 or 190 over 110...)

I had eclampsia, and while I wasn't unconscious for three days, I
did have all that other fun stuff, plus the baby died.  Placental
abruption.  Very, very, very painful.  Take normal labor and
raise it by a factor of ten.  By the time they put me under for
surgery I was more afraid that I WASN'T going to die than I was
that I was.  You lose the capacity for rational thought in that
kind of pain.

> >If I **knew for certain** that I wasn't going to go eclamptic,
> >I might consider it...not as a business, but maybe for a
> >friend.
>
> More the other way. According to what research we did after the
> fact, my chances are 1 in 20 of having it again _with the same
> father_ and 1 in 10 with a different father. I would imagine
> that being a hostmother would be the 1 in 10 chances.

Yep.  Also, what they don't tell you (because our society thinks
Motherhood is a Woman's Highest Calling) is that each incident of
eclampsia raises your chance of having irreversible renal failure
later in life, because it causes kidney damage.  Chances are,
like me, you were catheterized and given magnesium.  Well, this
means your kidneys were very unhappy.

I work in the Kidney Transplant Service at a large hospital.
Most of our female patients who do not have diabetes or
hypertension have kidney failure because they a) were on lithium
for a long time or b) continued getting pregnant even though they
had had episodes of preeclampsia, and had several bouts with it.

I am very glad I had my tubes tied, because in my first
pregnancy, which was terminated, I was already starting to
experience rising blood pressure in the first trimester, and in
my second one, I lost a baby due to placental abruption after
going into eclampsia in the seventh month.

I have no desire to experience end stage renal disease, dialysis,
or anti-rejection drug side effects.  Even if I wanted a child
with all my heart and had the resources to offer it the best life
ever...I'd adopt.

> I don't care to roll that die again, myself.

Good call.  I understand that the desire for A Child Of One's Own
is so strong in some people that they're willing to undergo
eclampsia for it, but it's nothing to do for cold hard cash.

~malfoy
**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 00:58:19 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:58:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LMB] Re: Can't take it any more, now uninformed doctors
In-Reply-To: <BB4EF24C.F6D5%andi@diezmann.com>
References: <BB4EF24C.F6D5%andi@diezmann.com>
Message-ID: <20030731165626.B17887@shell.rawbw.com>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Andi wrote:

> On 7/31/03 4:12 PM, "Azalais Malfoy" <tiamat at tsoft.com> wrote:
>
> > And it is absolutely criminal that doctors do not tell patients
> > taking antibiotics that they cannot rely on the birth control
> > pill while taking them.
> >
> > This is how I got pregnant.
>
> That would be one of my constant issues with doctors, as well -
> I do all my own research on the medications I take, but my
> first question to a doctor who prescribes me antibiotics is
> "will this interfere with my birth control medication?"
> Sadly, most of them say "no, it won't, there's no
> interference." At that point, I refuse to go back to that
> doctor again. This would be a major reason why I have no
> primary doctor, as I haven't yet found one who I both get along
> with, and who knows basic principles of drug interactions. And
> this is after I *ask*. Most of them just have no clue.

One doctor told me that it isn't proven by studies, and most of
the evidence is 'anecdotal', so a lot of doctors choose not to
warn.  Other doctors have warned me.

I think this is unbelievably bad practice.  It does a woman and
her partner no harm, whatsoever, to use condoms for the rest of
the month during and after a course of antibiotics, so better
safe than sorry!

~malfoy :)
**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From sbanker at purdue.edu  Fri Aug  1 01:10:01 2003
From: sbanker at purdue.edu (Samantha Banker)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 19:10:01 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Re:now uninformed doctors
In-Reply-To: <3F2964B7.21545.1AF250@localhost>
Message-ID: <000001c357c1$40c9d6a0$91c9d380@banker>

Sasha Said: 

> On the other hand, on all the prescription leaflets that I have seen 
> for antibiotics that do interfere with b/c, this fact was 
> indicated, so if 
> people just read those, they should know and take the proper 
> action.

On top of that, the pharmacy put a pink sticker on my dispenser stating
antibiotics and other prescriptions can make my b/c ineffective.  It's right
in front of me every Sunday when I do my medicine for the week.  (I'm on
lots, so it's easier to do it all at once.)  Though I get many of my
prescriptions mail order, I still give those drug names to my pharmacy (I
use only one, if I can help it.) so they can properly monitor for drug
interactions when filling a prescription.  That, and I question both the
doctor and pharmacist about potential side effects, and hold onto the
printout of important info for reference.

---Samantha



--------________--------________--------

From jamesandmary.burbidge at sympatico.ca  Fri Aug  1 01:33:51 2003
From: jamesandmary.burbidge at sympatico.ca (James Burbidge)
Date: 31 Jul 2003 20:33:51 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Legal paternity responsibilities (was: Can't stand it
 any more.)
In-Reply-To: <3F296D49.AA7D0245@marna.ca>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <5.2.1.1.0.20030731125824.02df44b0@mail.ev1.net>
 <3F296D49.AA7D0245@marna.ca>
Message-ID: <1059698033.1207.79.camel@linux>

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 15:20, Marna Nightingale wrote:
> Louann Miller wrote:
> > 
> > Re Bart: fwiw, the Louisiana law you describe (dna proves woman's husband
> > not the father, he's liable anyway) is unfair and I would support efforts
> > to repeal it.
> 
> It's all according to where you're standing, I guess: pre-DNA, that
> law both prevented men from claiming during divorce proceedings that
> their children weren't actually theirs and evading child support...
> and kept them from losing their parental rights if the wife made such
> a claim. 
> 

There are other factors as well.

First, many earlier cultures had a broad definition of "fatherhood"
which shaded into the range of adoption[1]: a man who raised a child of
his wife as his own was considered to _be_ the father, period.  It
simplified succession and property issues; and, of course, the actual
model for inheritance wasn't understood.  (This is, BTW, why the two
Gospels with infancy narratives _both_ assert the Virgin Birth _and_
provide a line of descent through Joseph as a Davidid -- the fact that
Joseph raised Jesus as his own made Jesus a Davidid, regardless of
Joseph's biological contribution.)

Secondly, many jurisdictions' motivations aren't worried about the
parents, or even the child, nearly as much as about the public purse. 
Support laws tend to be framed to minimize the chance that the public
purse will be called on to support a child.  Proving that a man is not a
child's father is not nearly as difficult as finding, without a good
candidate in front of one, the child's real father and requiring _him_
to pay up, especially after a period of years.

Thirdly, after a period of years, there's the question of the _child's_
reliance.  This aspect has come up on the list before.

[1] Take a look at Roman adoption parctices, if you want a thoroughly
blurred picture -- it was possible to adopt an adult, which *changed
that adult's _gens_* -- it was in fact used to allow at least one
patrician to stand as a tribune.



--------________--------________--------

From jamesandmary.burbidge at sympatico.ca  Fri Aug  1 01:34:21 2003
From: jamesandmary.burbidge at sympatico.ca (James Burbidge)
Date: 31 Jul 2003 20:34:21 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Years of Rice and Salt (was: Hugo nominees)
In-Reply-To: <003f01c357b0$5bcc92a0$6b01a8c0@D6FL1B21>
References: <003f01c357b0$5bcc92a0$6b01a8c0@D6FL1B21>
Message-ID: <1059698063.1078.81.camel@linux>

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 18:09, Robert Warnicke wrote:
> Jim Parish wrote:
> 
> > Hmm. I haven't been paying attention. Let's see, _Hominids_ is by
> > Sawyer, right? Serialized in _Analog_ or _IASFM_? Read that, wan't
> > very impressed. 
> 
> I wasn't impressed either.  I have liked his other stuff.
> 
> > _Years of Salt and Rice_... Silverberg? 
> 
> No, Kim Stanley Robinson.  I am looking forward to this, he wrote the
> Red/Green/Blue Mars books which I liked.   It looks like an alternative
> universe theme which has the West die out and has the East rise in
> power,   perhaps a little similar in the world building as The Peshawar
> Lancers which I recently read. 
> 

_Years of Rice and Salt_.

It's better than the _Mars_ books (which I thought started out OK and
went downhill).  Nothing at all like Steve's take on oriental alternate
history.  Certainly worth reading, although I'm not sure if it's what I
normally think of as Hugo calibre.

<Minor spoilers included in subsequent paragraphs of really quick
assessment below; if you don't want to know, skip while only the first
paragraph is in front of you.>

It's structured around a set of reincarnations by a small set of people
who began in a Tibetan village (referenced only in backstory) and tend
to be associated in their various lives.  They recall who they are only
between lives, in the bardo.  It turns out in the end that the book is
an example of a genre of literature which has developed during the AH
timeline.

The story begins just after the Black Death wipes out all of Europe with
a nomad in Timur's horde on the edge of Europe and ends in 2002 or so. 
Each story is a self-contained short story or novella.  Some are better
than others, and they have a range of styles.

There are three central characters, the believer-empathic type, the
critical=revolutionary type, and the intellectual-scientific type. 
(There's also a fourth, who's just nasty.)  There may be some others --
the group was originally about eight, and the full list of
names/initials is given only once, late on in the book -- but they're
not as major.

I don't think I buy KSR's model of economic and social change (there are
threads on r.a.sf.w. discussing this -- he has, for example, an isolated
scientific revolution in Samarkand with none of the social and
intellectual contxt that the same changes had in the Europe of OTL, and
he forces a set of late changes to end up with a "modern" world roughly
equivalent to ours at the same time as ours.  In addition, the later
stories tend to get preachy.



--------________--------________--------

From jamesandmary.burbidge at sympatico.ca  Fri Aug  1 01:44:37 2003
From: jamesandmary.burbidge at sympatico.ca (James Burbidge)
Date: 31 Jul 2003 20:44:37 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Legal paternity responsibilities (was: Can't
 stand it any more.)
In-Reply-To: <1059698033.1207.79.camel@linux>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <5.2.1.1.0.20030731125824.02df44b0@mail.ev1.net>
 <3F296D49.AA7D0245@marna.ca>  <1059698033.1207.79.camel@linux>
Message-ID: <1059698698.1207.87.camel@linux>

On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 20:33, James Burbidge wrote:

<Snippage>

Sorry for forgetting the OT: on this last one.



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 01:54:19 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:54:19 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Re: OT: I can't take it--
In-Reply-To: <1d1.e84c7a6.2c5af250@aol.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731205254.027ea8d0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 06:29 PM 7/31/03 -0400, you wrote:
>Do you really think it would be more fair for men who were not their fathers
>to be paying for them?


Um, where are you getting **that**?  What I have said that if someone IS 
the father, he's responsible.  Regardless of what he "meant" to do, or says 
he meant, or b/c failure, or whatever.

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 02:09:25 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:09:25 -0400
Subject: OT blaming the parents  Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.
In-Reply-To: <20030731131621.L17887@shell.rawbw.com>
References: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731153344.027d8a60@pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <5.2.1.1.0.20030731125824.02df44b0@mail.ev1.net>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731153344.027d8a60@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731205436.027e8010@pop.mindspring.com>

At 01:23 PM 7/31/03 -0700, you wrote:
>"If you didn't have the parents and parenting you were entitled
>to, none of your subsequent problems are your own fault, and you
>should be able to get away with any fool thing you do."


I think you know me well enough to know what I think of THAT.

I think that you aren't responsible for what happens while you're not 
personally in control of it.  And, based on my own experience, if your 
upbringing was sufficiently messed up, you should be allowed a grace period 
while you straighten your own head out.   That is, I think what you do 
during that time period shouldn't be held against you later, but no one 
should be required to stick around and put up with your behavior.  People 
who are deeply dysfunctional, **even** the ones who are genuinely and 
determinedly trying to change, tend to be unreasonable time and energy 
sinks among other things.

Even at twenty, I had a fair grasp of the concept that no one was required 
to make up for the lacks in my upbringing, and that no could or was going 
to fix the problem but me.  Whether other people are willing to put up with 
the obnoxiousness that normally attends young adulthood is their call; 
fortunately, Nature has arranged that the friends of twenty-somethings are 
generally other twenty-somethings.

After that, though....if you haven't dealt with your issues, they are now 
YOURS and no one else's.  They are your responsibility.  That's what being 
a grown-up is.

there's a great line in "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood".  Vivi 
Walker says, "My mother didn't ruin my life.  She almost did.  But all the 
real, long-term damage, I did to myself."

Well, I got "Falling Free" today in the mail, and I also got a copy of 
"Cordelia's Honor".....off to write more of MY novel, and then maybe read...

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From arcangel at io.com  Fri Aug  1 01:33:18 2003
From: arcangel at io.com (Elizabeth McCoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:33:18 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Blood pressure, was Host mothers
In-Reply-To: <002401c357bd$be1839c0$b6432904@earthlink.net>
References: <002401c357bd$be1839c0$b6432904@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <p05200f12bb4f64511354@[10.0.1.4]>

At 4:44 PM -0700 7/31/03, Laura Gallagher wrote:
>Beth wrote: 
>> Oh. Charming. No wonder they were so quietly freaking out 
>> about my blood pressure... (I only got to 180 or 190 over 110...)
>
>Heh, I have to watch out and convince them that really, my blood
>pressure is FINE.  Because it tends to get misdiagnosed, as I'm a large
>lady.  

Wheeeee. I will keep _that_ in mind...

With me, no, it probably really was that high. And not responding to
their meds. A little dip, then right back up.  Same after. I hovered
at 154/90 for two weeks, with or without meds (save for one brief
30 point drop which is when they took me off the meds). Then bam,
back to normal.

Mind, what mildly annoys me is that, while the nursery staff were
great at the local hospital (and even better at the non-local one where
the C-section was done), the kids-side OUTSIDE were... Well, when we 
stayed overnight for a no-breathing episode for the minx, they attached 
the oxy monitors to her and all... and didn't have the alarm turned on.

Made me VERY glad I clambered into the crib with her that night. O:p

>I'd like to see it more correctly diagnosed - given that the women that
>ARE having trouble can be in serious danger, and need the correct
>treatment.  And the rest of us do not. 

Amen. NO-ONE needs that whole mess, who doesn't NEED it.

-- 
--Beth, arcangel at io.com / archangel at sjgames.com  In Nomine Line Editor  
http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ 



--------________--------________--------

From arcangel at io.com  Fri Aug  1 01:49:42 2003
From: arcangel at io.com (Elizabeth McCoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:49:42 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Host mothers, and UTTERLY off topic OT:
In-Reply-To: <20030731164449.J17887@shell.rawbw.com>
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <5.2.1.1.0.20030731125824.02df44b0@mail.ev1.net>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731155041.027e8cb0@pop.mindspring.com>
 <p05200f0fbb4f36a95f8b@[10.0.1.4]>
 <20030731164449.J17887@shell.rawbw.com>
Message-ID: <p05200f13bb4f663183bb@[10.0.1.4]>

At 4:53 PM -0700 7/31/03, Azalais Malfoy wrote:
>On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Elizabeth McCoy wrote:
>
>> At 3:53 PM -0400 7/31/03, Sara A. wrote:
>>
>> >I enjoyed being pregnant, actually.  It was the near-death
>> >experience at the end that got to me (eclampsia, seizure, was
>> >unconscious for three days).
>>
>> Oh. Charming. No wonder they were so quietly freaking out about my blood
>> pressure... (I only got to 180 or 190 over 110...)
>
>I had eclampsia, and while I wasn't unconscious for three days, I
>did have all that other fun stuff, plus the baby died.  

Condolences. For better, for worse, condolences. I think that
the best thing about all my experience is that I... was not overly
worried. I mean, I was worried, but I had Good Feelings about it
for the minx.

Maybe it was that it all happened so fast, and I was in shock.

Something else doctors at the time don't mention is that induced
labor is MUCH stronger, contraction-wise. Silly granola people like
me would have liked to know that before suggesting inducing labor...

>[...] By the time they put me under for surgery I was more afraid 
>that I WASN'T going to die than I was that I was.  You lose the 
>capacity for rational thought in that kind of pain.

Between cramps and a need for a root canal that would have had me
making an appointment in a back alley for pliers... I think I know
a little of what you mean.

[...]
>Yep.  Also, what they don't tell you (because our society thinks
>Motherhood is a Woman's Highest Calling) is that each incident of
>eclampsia raises your chance of having irreversible renal failure
>later in life, 

Oh, even MORE charrrrrrrming. Bah.

>because it causes kidney damage.  Chances are,
>like me, you were catheterized and given magnesium.  Well, this
>means your kidneys were very unhappy.

Yup, and yup. That's how they found it for sure. Protein and high
blood pressure. No vision abnormalities of note. No headaches of
note (tension because I had been waking up every hour on the hour
for the past 3-4 nights, but, er, well). Edema up to my knees, but
"a little swelling is normal."

>I work in the Kidney Transplant Service at a large hospital.
>Most of our female patients who do not have diabetes or
>hypertension have kidney failure because they a) were on lithium
>for a long time or b) continued getting pregnant even though they
>had had episodes of preeclampsia, and had several bouts with it.

And people ask me why I have sworn ONLY CHILD. Mm-hm. If there's
another (and I rather doubt it), I'm adopting. The all-day-worst-
in-evening sickness was bad enough; rolling the dice again on 
renal failure.... Ugh.

>I am very glad I had my tubes tied, because in my first
>pregnancy, which was terminated, I was already starting to
>experience rising blood pressure in the first trimester, 

Oh, man. That's SERIOUS. Normally it only starts around the
7th month, which is when they start doing the 2-week visits.
(Which is, I later learn, to catch Pregnancy Induced Hypertension
(aka Toxemia, aka pre-eclampsia and/or full eclampsia)...

>I have no desire to experience end stage renal disease, dialysis,
>or anti-rejection drug side effects.  Even if I wanted a child
>with all my heart and had the resources to offer it the best life
>ever...I'd adopt.

Amen.

>> I don't care to roll that die again, myself.
>
>Good call.  I understand that the desire for A Child Of One's Own
>is so strong in some people that they're willing to undergo
>eclampsia for it, but it's nothing to do for cold hard cash.

Aaaaamen.  The only thing that even mildly tempts me is some weird
genetic urge to have one for _his_ family name to carry on, and,
er, it'd probably be easier to legally hyphenate the current kid's
at that.

Wish they had replicators, though. And live-in nannies by default.
-- 
--Beth, arcangel at io.com / archangel at sjgames.com  In Nomine Line Editor  
http://www.io.com/~arcangel/ 



--------________--------________--------

From jwreynold at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 02:44:23 2003
From: jwreynold at earthlink.net (James Reynolds)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:44:23 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Re: My Mistake!/Albacon 2003
Message-ID: <AD426D97-C3C1-11D7-9DA0-000393BDA014@earthlink.net>

	Ahh!  I completely forgot to put the proper header format on the 
Albacon post!

	Mea culpa!

	***Jim Reynolds



--------________--------________--------

From bkemper at bigdogz.com  Fri Aug  1 02:55:31 2003
From: bkemper at bigdogz.com (Bart Kemper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:55:31 -0500
Subject: [LMB] OT: procreation and responsibility
References: <200307312336.h6VNa5j6014720@lists.herald.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3F29C893.4000603@bigdogz.com>

> Generally, when a man says he's being unfairly 
>> taken advantage of by a woman who got pregnant and made him help support 
>> the child, what happened was not that he conscientiously used birth control 
>> and was the victim of circumstances.   What actually happened is that he 
>> was a dumbass and thinks he shouldn't have to bear the consequences.  I 
>> have zero sympathy for that.
>> 
> 
> 
> Back in the dark ages before DNA testing, I was acquainted with a woman who 
> wanted to marry a specific man who was not interested in her.  She told several 
> other women in a group, including me, that she intended to get pregnant and 
> force him to marry her.  He refused to have sex with her, so she looked for a 
> man who resembled him in looks, disappeared from a party with him, and returned 
> several hours later.  A couple of months later she was pregnant, and trying 
> to make *** marry her.  It didn't work.  Also, unfortunately for her, the judge 
> the case came up before's daughter was at the same party and knew the story, 
> so he dismissed her attempt at getting child support.  Small town 
> life--everybody knows everybody else's business, including things you really don't want to 
> know.  But there is an occasional unscrupulous woman out there, and men can 
> be vulnerable, too.
> 
> Mary


In the last few years I know of two different women, who being 
"empowered" to be as much of a jerk as guys are, got a guy drunk that 
had been turning them down, then raped him.  They don't call it 
that..."how can a woman rape a guy"....but the guys didn't even know it 
happened.  (One found out when this female showed pictures of his naked 
body apparently "at the ready position" ... and almost died of 
embarrasment).  My wife and I were the only ones to call it rape, 
everyone else was saying "hey, he just got lucky"...but then again, when 
a guy has sex from the boss most people call it "getting lucky", or if a 
woman abuser her spouse "he's just henpecked" (they have never been on 
the farm to see what "henpecked" is, obviously).

If we're talking about laws, it doesn't matter how common something is, 
its wrong and against the law.  We have laws against treason, and that 
is certainly not common.  There was an Army Times report about 5 years 
ago or so, in the aftermath of the Aberdeen problems, that reported 1 in 
4 women report being sexually harrassed (not specific if on duty or not) 
and 1 in 9 reported having been sexually assaulted or raped (again, not 
specified if on duty or not, or in the military at all).  What was more 
interesting was they asked the questions no one seems to care 
about....what about the guys.  1 in 8 reported having been sexually 
harrassed, 1 in 40 report having been sexually assaulted or raped.  Just 
as rape statistics of females have been theorized to have gone up 
because it has become more acceptable to come forward, I'm guessing its 
is harder for males to come forward, particularly if it is heterosexual.

In an old Mother Jones article, back when I had time to read a lot of 
magazines, it had a feature on spouse/partner abuse, and according to 
the article police and ambulance reports spousal abuse to be 50/50 
between men and women, yet if you say that term most people only picture 
the guy beating the woman.  I worked for BRAVO, the Brooklyn ambulance 
service, and I saw males hurting males, males hurting females, females 
hurting males (I remember this itty bitty spanish woman having bloodied 
the entire face of a big black husband with a pan, with him saying "aw, 
she's jsut mad at work, she loves me"), and females hurting 
females...that latter suprising me at the time on how vicious that was. 
  (Hey, I was young).

So I do not subscribe to the theory that the female gender is a victim 
or any less capable of being good OR bad than the male gender, nor do I 
think they should get a free pass for their decisions because of their 
gender.  The idea of "well, there aren't that many guys that are 
decieved by women" doesn't belie the fact there ARE guys that are 
decieved and the law unjustly enforces the broodmare helpless female 
solution on them.  As to how many...well, I don't know...but you can see 
just from this forum that if a person did come forward there would be 
those that would listen with an open mind to that person's situation and 
others that have a preconcieved notion based on gender and a perception 
of statistical trends....and this is a much more accepting and open 
minded group than most.

If women are broodmares and have no choice in whether to have sex (since 
good upstanding female citizens would never have sex out of wedlock) AND 
whether to use birth control AND whether to have an abortion AND whether 
to keep the baby, sure, then the poor helpless darlin' needs society to 
put the metaphorical shotgun in that mean male's back who had his will 
with this obviously helpless young thing and "make him do the right 
thing."  I don't buy it, any more than I believe a man with an erection 
is incapable of hearing the word "no". (Although *women* with high 
levels of hormones can be excused for their actions.)

The fact there may not be abortions available in all counties doesn't 
examine that there aren't even HOSPITALS in all counties, or even liquor 
stores in all counties.  It sounds so impressive to talk about 
counties...but wow, and awful lot of them are pretty empty.  I don't 
have the statistic, but I'd be more impressed by a directly relevant 
number, such as the amount of the population that is more than 4 hours 
away by car from someplace they can get an abortion...and I picked that 
number since that was how far one of my family member had to go to get 
his prostate checked, certainly a common enough problem that should be 
fairly universally available.  Its also how far my mother in law had to 
drive for her mammograms and all of her post-mastectomy exams.  Even 
with the four hour drive, they could still get the health care they 
needed, but it was inconvient.  If there is a statistic with a metric 
like that to detail the lack of availability I would find it more 
compelling.



--------________--------________--------

From bkemper at bigdogz.com  Fri Aug  1 03:00:03 2003
From: bkemper at bigdogz.com (Bart Kemper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:00:03 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Betan birthcontrol
References: <200307312336.h6VNa5j6014720@lists.herald.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3F29C9A3.3030505@bigdogz.com>

> It's basically an IUD that releases a local dose of progesterone.
> Local, not systemic, and no estrogen, so doesn't get the side effects of
> the pill/Norplant. 
> 
> Similarities to Betan implant - it's not something you use, it's
> implanted and you forget about it.   It's listed as more than 99%
> effective.  (Hm, legal thought - I wonder if they'd EVER let anybody
> advertise something as 100%.  It's listed as "effective as
> sterilization)  It has a tendency to either really lighten periods, for
> some women, or turn them off altogether for others. 
> 
> (From Barrayar:)
> "I've had my implant since I was fourteen. I had a menstrual period once
> then, I remember. We turn them off till they're needed."

A girlfriend of mine used that method while married.  They have two very 
young kids now.  She has opted for effective method.... no more equipment.



--------________--------________--------

From CatMtn at aol.com  Fri Aug  1 03:08:25 2003
From: CatMtn at aol.com (CatMtn at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:08:25 EDT
Subject: [LMB] Re: OT: Female exploiters
Message-ID: <197.1de7822e.2c5b2599@aol.com>

Malfoy writes:

> If a man did that, they (hopefully) would hang him up by his
> b*lls to dry......

Yeah, and they should.  I don't know what they would hang this lady by, but 
surely there's something.  Possibly by her hair--like Absalom, although it was 
his father that did a simlar thing---

Mary, who is no biblical scholar but that story stuck for some reason.



--------________--------________--------

From bkemper at bigdogz.com  Fri Aug  1 03:15:33 2003
From: bkemper at bigdogz.com (Bart Kemper)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:15:33 -0500
Subject: [LMB] OT: Jawdrop
References: <200307312336.h6VNa5j6014720@lists.herald.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3F29CD45.3000909@bigdogz.com>

> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Bart Kemper wrote:
> 
> 
>> and I'm guessing the military is a bit shy about looking bad for "being
>> mean to females" after the LT Flynn debacle (the commissioned officer
>> who refused direct written orders to not sleep with an enlisted woman's
>> husband, who actually used her rank to tell the enlisted person to shut
>> up as an order, and then Flynn was made into the victim, not the Air
>> Force enlisted person.)
> 
> 
> *jawdrop*
> 
> If a man did that, they (hopefully) would hang him up by his
> b*lls to dry......
> 
> ~malfoy, who can still be shocked, apparently

You missed the Kelly Flynn flap?  She was a pilot and having sex with an 
enlisted woman's husband.  The officer would even come to the house to 
pick up the guy, with the troop wanting to yell and cuss her out but 
knew could be in trouble for that, but as it was told the officer to 
leave and the officer ignored her.  (This is why fraternization and 
adultery are UCMJ offenses...to deal with this kind of situation where 
rank constrains normal reaction... imagine a Vor lord coming by to pick 
up an Armsman's wife for sex).  The troop went to the chain of 
command...nothing happened.  She went to the next level up, that 
commander (colonel) issued a written counseling statement to cease all 
relations with that person.  The officer refused, she contined to do so 
(now violating frat, adultry, *and* disobeying a direct written order of 
a superior officer in your chain of command, among others), so they 
brought her up on an Article 15...and based on legal counsel, she 
(allegedly...several stories at this point) refused the Article 15 and 
with for the courtmartial, at which point it became a big media event 
and everyone pointed out how the chain of command was coming down on 
this poor helpless young female officer (she was a captain, so at least 
25 years old) when "eveyone else is doing it."

I don't think they brought forward a SINGLE case of a male officer 
having sex with a troop's spouse, having that troop bring it to the 
OFFICIAL attention of the chain of command, and not doing anything about 
it.  I never heard of it, but I've only been in the army for over 20 
years now.  But "guys always look out for guys"...so I guess there were 
no other female officers on post, and that young female enlisted doesn't 
count in this issue.

 From my own experience, males officers caught having sex with enlisted 
wives are bounced out so fast the doors at Central Issue Facility spin, 
usually just by giving them a General Letter of Reprimand, which is in 
their permanent file and kills their career...will NOT be promoted. 
Yeah, some officers screw around...but if you do it with other officers 
or with civilians, its one thing...doing to a troop or (much worse) 
their spouse is a Bad Thing for the unit and tears at the entire 
discipline structure unless the chain of command acts decisively and 
slams that officer into the stone age. The reason for the "career 
killer" technique is there is no appeal and no official proceeding if 
the person doesn't want to fight it...they can chose to fight it and 
bring it to a court, but most take their lumps and leave.  Flynn got an 
official warning....thats a second chance most never get and really 
isn't deserved.  THEN she went against the direct written (and verbal) 
order....and became the victim.  Poor Flynn.



--------________--------________--------

From CatMtn at aol.com  Fri Aug  1 03:25:54 2003
From: CatMtn at aol.com (CatMtn at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:25:54 EDT
Subject: [LMB] Re: OT: Children
Message-ID: <1e0.e429535.2c5b29b2@aol.com>

Sara A.  writes:

> Um, where are you getting **that**?  What I have said that if someone IS 
> the father, he's responsible.  Regardless of what he "meant" to do, or says 
> he meant, or b/c failure, or whatever.

I've got no quarrel with that.  I just misunderstood the emphasis you were 
putting on _somebody_ other than the state paying for kids of doubtful 
paternity.  With HIV, hepatitis, etc., around, anyway, any man who doesn't take 
precautions of his own ought to be _out_ of the gene pool, instead of the other way 
around.  

Speaking as a former paralegal, though, the ones that made me want to reach 
for the dull knife were the ones who said "Rape? H*ll no!  That (13-year-old) 
wanted it as bad as I did."

Mary



--------________--------________--------

From adkinslawfirm at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 04:16:48 2003
From: adkinslawfirm at mindspring.com (Marty L. Adkins)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:16:48 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Mrs. Bradley mysteries
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20030731231559.009f6300@pop3.norton.antivirus>

I've been enjoying these on PBS with Diana Rigg, based on Gladys Mitchell's 
novels and have thought about trying out the novels.  Has anyone read 
them?  Are they any good?

Thanks!

Jerrie



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 04:28:38 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:28:38 -0400
Subject: [LMB] comment on "Falling Free"...
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731231303.027ee400@pop.mindspring.com>

Almost halfway through "Falling Free"  (I read fast)....

Leo reminds me of my father, who was a civil engineer for the Ga D.O.T.  
There was no "do it right or don't do it at all"....just "do it right".  
His reputation for making people meet specs was such that whenever the
contractors found out he was going to be the supervising engineer or a
project, they'd all raise their bids.  If the pit tests he did on the
concrete found that they'd put too much sand in (favored way to cut
corners, but would make the concrete crack later), he'd make them tear it
out and do it over.   If you find yourself driving along I-75, I-85, or
I-575, you may do so in the knowledge that those bridges will **never**
collapse because of faults in construction.  Ragnarok might induce
temperature fluctuations outside their design specifications such that
the concrete might crack and crumble; but until then I expect them to be
there.

Reputedly someone offered $5000 to anyone who could get him fired.  (My
father retired in 1980, to give some perspective).  Nobody took
it...either because nobody was willing to do him harm, or because nobody
would believe any accusations of incompetence.

Anyway, I find it wholly believable that Leo would get involved in the
quaddies' situation.  A certain type of engineer believes far more firmly
in Right than any moralist...

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From marna at marna.ca  Fri Aug  1 04:26:21 2003
From: marna at marna.ca (Marna Nightingale)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:26:21 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
Message-ID: <3F29DF32.29A7916E@marna.ca>

Bart Kemper wrote:

> > As far as I can tell, that's not a very good example, simply because
> > almost everyone I have ever spoken to who would agree that men and
> > women ought to be equally eligible for conscription is a pretty strong
> > supporter of MEN becoming INeligible for conscription.  Which is ALSO
> > equality.
> >
> 
> Totally different issues.  

Um, nope. Unless you're aware of vast pools of support for mandatory
registration for the draft *among people who are also pro-equality*. 

I'm not aware of any such.  

> One is the actual call up.  The other is
> registration.  Registration for the draft in the US is mandatory for all
> males, regardless of health or other status.  If a US male does not
> register, he cannot get federal student loans, federal jobs, etc. etc.

I know this. 

> Women are not required to do so.  As such, males must bear the burden of
> being eligible for the draft as a price of citizenship, women are not.

I'm still not following why you think that people who wish to see
mandatory registration for the draft go the way of the dodo ought to
simultaneously be working to add more people to the list required to
register for the draft they wish to end.  Or why you consider that the
only REAL pro-equality position. 

Especially since the political climate is such that getting rid of
mandatory registration is liable to be the shorter fight. 

And further, as you point out, currently, nobody is in any actual
danger of being called up. 

Which leads back to the point I was making in the first place: for
people in favour of conscription, it's a low priority. For people,
opposed to it, it is still a low priority, and self-defeating to boot.
 
 
> Yes, I am fully aware groups like NOW state "we are against registration
> at all, therefore we are not being sexist"...but the reality is that the
> males do have to register and the law was already in place makes the
> assertation "we want the same for both genders" rather convenient..and
> weak.  

Oh. That's why. Because you are impugning my motives and those of
several hundred thousand other people most of whom you have not met:
we aren't REALLY opposed to compulsory registration for the draft at
all.  We just say that. 

A person as jealous about his personal honour (apparently with every
reason, you've given every indication of having a lot of it) as you
appear to be should probably be more careful about impugning that of
others. 

Really, Bart, Kiri and I are both over 30 and somewhat disabled, and
on top of that I've got Conscientious Objector pretty much tattooed on
my bum. 

What POSSIBLE personal benefit do you think we're going to derive from
opposing conscription?  Except for fewer draft-dodgers to help smuggle
if it comes to it. 

(I don't mean to speak for you, Twin; I do note that you and i are not
on exactly the same place on the continuum.) 

> Eh...register everyone or register no one.  

OK, just in case up until now I've been typing in Ancient Akkadian: 

No one. 
No one. 
No one. 
No one. 

Not men, not women, not children, not anyone should ever be forced to
serve in an army. 

Yeah, I set priorities: the only one of those I'm currently actually
INVOLVED in working against is child conscription. A person only has
so much time. 

But, whatever. Arguing with people who reserve the right to 'win' by
claiming I'm not being honest about my motives is invariably a waste
of time, I find. 

Marna.



--------________--------________--------

From debsabriel at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 01:36:47 2003
From: debsabriel at earthlink.net (Debra Cebulski)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:36:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [LMB] List business
Message-ID: <3651023.1059709008720.JavaMail.nobody@skeeter.psp.pas.earth
 link.net>

Quoth Pete:
> One wishes to know:

(1) what makes a discussion of the legal ramifications of fatherhood On Topic?
Not sure

(2) what makes a discussion of diabetes On Topic?
Because Herself stated that Orico was diabetic - the information that he had the disease explains why he failed so rapidly after the destruction of the miracle.  

JMHO

Deb Cebulski



--------________--------________--------

From selene at earthlink.net  Fri Aug  1 04:52:45 2003
From: selene at earthlink.net (Susan Fox-Davis)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 20:52:45 -0700
Subject: [LMB] OT: Can't stand it any more
Message-ID: <3F29E40D.7050601@earthlink.net>

Sara opines:

 >Personally, I'd like to see it be possible to expand the legal 
definition of "parent";
 >it would benefit my weird little family group immensely.  
 >And, incidentally, if more people who aren't the biological parents
 >(same-sex partners of one parent, for example)
 >could gain legal status in a child's life, it would do a lot
 >to take the burden off of people who really **don't** want to be parents.

This, as I see it, is the moral of the story in "La Cage Aux Folles" 
a.k.a. "The Bird Cage."  Albin was very much a loving step-parent to 
Georges' son, more of a "mother"to the lad than his biological mother 
ever had been.  

Susan Fox-Davis/Ma Foxti
selene at earthlink.net 



--------________--------________--------

From rgmolpus at sff.net  Fri Aug  1 05:03:25 2003
From: rgmolpus at sff.net (Richard Molpus)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 23:03:25 -0500
Subject: OT: Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.
In-Reply-To: <3F298B59.58264E8A@marna.ca>
Message-ID: <M0E9746E@smtp.sff.net>

P
I
Z
Z
A
!!!!!!!!!!!!!

)i hear the winds of a*o*t*o*n whispering in the trees...(



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 05:04:16 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:04:16 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <3F29DF32.29A7916E@marna.ca>
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731234752.027df1e0@pop.mindspring.com>

>  As such, males must bear the burden of
> > being eligible for the draft as a price of citizenship, women are not.


Men aren't either; this statement is melodramatic at best.

Registering for the draft isn't a "price of citizenship"; it is illegal not 
to register, but your citizenship can't be taken from you if you don't.  At 
any rate, what other people have said is perfectly true:  No one who 
supports equality supports draft registration.  I certainly don't.

Other than being against it on principle, I have specific personal reasons 
to be against conscription, both historical and future.

Four of my five brothers were in Vietnam.  Drafted one...right after the 
other...

I have one other reason.  He's nine, and his name is Raven.  I have no 
intention of offering him up as a blood sacrifice.

Anyway, you clearly have a big fat misogynistic chip on your shoulder; this 
appears to cause sloppiness of thought.

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From adkinslawfirm at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 05:28:17 2003
From: adkinslawfirm at mindspring.com (Marty L. Adkins)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:28:17 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Filk plug
Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.1.20030801002326.009fb490@pop3.norton.antivirus>

Jim Parish modestly mentions:

>A couple of years ago, I wrote a filk, "I'm Going to Set Them Free", to
>the tune of "Takin' It to the Streets", by the Doobie Brothers.

and then plugs an opportunity to hear the original tune.

Jim, you're a superlative Birthday Tixie, but need to learn to toot your 
own horn a bit more.  Iow, when you mention writing a filk [an activity 
heartily to be encouraged], you need to either post the song or at least a 
link thereto.  Filk can add lots of insight and greatly enrich our 
experience of The Author, but only if we have access to it.  And you know 
we definitely want to hear from *you*!

Jerrie, fan of filk in general and listie filk in particular

P. S.  Speaking of which, Joyeuse, where's the link to your really cool 
Bothari song?  Since we're tangentially discussing him again, this might be 
a good time for folks to discover it.



--------________--------________--------

From marna at marna.ca  Fri Aug  1 05:34:51 2003
From: marna at marna.ca (Marna Nightingale)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 00:34:51 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731234752.027df1e0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <3F29EF3E.65FCD339@marna.ca>

"Sara A." wrote:
 
> Anyway, you clearly have a big fat misogynistic chip on your shoulder; this
> appears to cause sloppiness of thought.

Um. I'm pretty spectacularly racked at Bart myself at the moment, for
the exact same post, but... no, not that I've ever noticed, he
doesn't, certainly not in any malicious sort of way. 

Can you rephrase your point in some fashion which *doesn't* involve an
ad hominem?  

Marna.



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 05:54:31 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:54:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: OT blaming the parents  Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731205436.027e8010@pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731153344.027d8a60@pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <5.2.1.1.0.20030731125824.02df44b0@mail.ev1.net>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731153344.027d8a60@pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731205436.027e8010@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20030731215358.W47107@shell.rawbw.com>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Sara A. wrote:

> At 01:23 PM 7/31/03 -0700, you wrote:
> >"If you didn't have the parents and parenting you were entitled
> >to, none of your subsequent problems are your own fault, and you
> >should be able to get away with any fool thing you do."
>
> I think you know me well enough to know what I think of THAT.
>
'course I do.  I'm your unseelie.

But I wasn't just talking about you!

~malfoy :)
**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From shadow_rose at hotmail.com  Fri Aug  1 06:04:39 2003
From: shadow_rose at hotmail.com (Joanie (Azure))
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:04:39 -0700
Subject: [LMB] Re: Clones
Message-ID: <BAY1-DAV310z6xCrbq300012212@hotmail.com>

I'm not sure yet if anyone's asked, but could the discussion of parental
rights/responsibilities please be kept in the Vorkosoverse? Please?

--JL/Azz-the-Younger



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 06:04:19 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:04:19 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <3F29EF3E.65FCD339@marna.ca>
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731234752.027df1e0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801004823.027e83d0@pop.mindspring.com>

At 12:34 AM 8/1/03 -0400, you wrote:

>Can you rephrase your point in some fashion which *doesn't* involve an
>ad hominem?

Let's see...not just restricted to the discussion of conscription, but the 
whole other thread as well...

slippery slope:  That expecting men under ordinary circumstances to take 
responsibility for their offspring leads to women lying about birth control 
and rape

appeal to motives in place of support, straw man, non-support:   how we got 
to the argument that somehow the same people who are opposed to 
conscription for everyone are responsible for the fact that it only applies 
to some people.  I'm not quite sure how to characterize that one; what DO 
you call holding someone responsible for something that they not only 
oppose, but didn't do?

At any rate, I was objecting to a set of arguments and their apparent 
motive, not a person.  Too fine a distinction perhaps.

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 06:13:18 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:13:18 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <3F29EF3E.65FCD339@marna.ca>
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731234752.027df1e0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801010731.027eeb10@pop.mindspring.com>

At 12:34 AM 8/1/03 -0400, you wrote:
>Can you rephrase your point in some fashion which *doesn't* involve an
>ad hominem?

To clarify:  The general theme of his remarks seems to be "Women are 
EEEEEVIIIL creatures who have nothing better to do than delude poor 
defenseless men, force them to support **gasp**  THEIR OWN children, don't 
take responsibility for themselves, and are also a bunch of hypocrites 
because they SAY they support equal rights but aren't signing up for the 
draft!  And if they say it's because they don't think anyone should be 
drafted, they're lying!"

That's pretty much the substance of what I was talking about.  I fear my 
rephrasing may not be much of an improvement.

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From mike at dendarii.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 07:15:34 2003
From: mike at dendarii.co.uk (Michael Bernardi)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 06:15:34 BST
Subject: [LMB] Lois McMaster Bujold Mailing List Weekly FAQ FAQ
Message-ID: <32348@dendarii.co.uk>

Last-Modified: 4 July 2003
Version: 2.0.4

Being a Pointer to where to find Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
======================================================================

This document was compiled by Michael Bernardi, to allow subscribers to
the Lois-Bujold mailing list to easily find where the FAQs are. Having
this FAQ posted weekly to the list then allows the posting of the OTHER
FAQs to be every two months and thus reduce list traffic.

Three FAQs have been developed since this list was created in October
1994. The Bio FAQ has been deleted, as all the information previously
given here, can be found at "The Bujold Nexus" in the "Author Info" and
"Book Info" sections. This document was originally created in December 1998.

The FAQs
========

Lois McMaster Bujold Mailing List Administrivia FAQ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.dendarii.com/bujold_admin.html
Last Updated: 28 October 2002
Explains how to join and use the Lois-Bujold mailing list, hosted
at http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold

Lois McMaster Bujold Mailing List FAQ 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.dendarii.com/bujold_lst.html
Last Updated: 18 May 2003
This document attempts to answer Frequently Asked Questions which
occur on the Mailing List about Lois McMaster Bujold and her work.
These are the questions that occur on list regularly like 
"Where can I get "Dreamweaver's Dilemma"?
Now includes the Off-topic Discussions and Excessive Quoting FAQ.

Lois McMaster Bujold List PLOT Frequently Asked Questions
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.dendarii.com/bujold_faq.html
Last Updated: 30 June 2003
This document attempts to answer Frequently Asked Questions which
occur on the Mailing List about Plot lines that occur in the work
of Lois McMaster Bujold. This includes answers from Lois herself.

The Bujold Nexus: The Lois McMaster Bujold Homepage
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.dendarii.com
Last Updated: 4 July 2003
This is the Official site to find information about Lois McMaster
Bujold on the Web. Lois has provided some information herself, and
other material has come from other fans.

The Bujold Nexus Overflow Site
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.dendarii.co.uk/Bujold.html
Last Updated: 1 June 2003
This contains all the stuff that isn't really appropriate at the main
site. ie fan fiction, fan art, photos, and filk. Please send details of
any material such material to the address indicated.

Note I am not responsible for the mail server hardware OR software.
Both these are under the control of Mel Harper <mel_at_herald.co.uk>.

Any feedback on this post cheerfully received by Michael Bernardi
<lmb-faq_at_dendarii.com>.
-- 
Michael Bernardi                              mike_at_dendarii.co.uk



--------________--------________--------

From megj at nwlink.com  Fri Aug  1 00:46:46 2003
From: megj at nwlink.com (MegJ)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 16:46:46 -0700
Subject: [LMB] OT: Listies in Seattle/Tacoma/Ft Lewis WA area
References: <000001c35777$c6f510e0$6402a8c0@double>
Message-ID: <001501c357ed$3141b000$92cb4b43@meg>

Paul, about Danielle:
> Nice to hear you're coming our way up here in the PNW.  When in August and
> how many have contacted you?  There is at least one listee down your way.
> Meg Justus (megj at nwlink.com).

I am, however, going to be out of town from Aug. 17th to the 28th.  I did
email Danielle (and Susan Profit, who contacted me about a possible
gathering), so they know, too.

Megaera



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 06:27:55 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:27:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <3F29DF32.29A7916E@marna.ca>
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com> <3F29DF32.29A7916E@marna.ca>
Message-ID: <20030731221629.R47107@shell.rawbw.com>

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003, Marna Nightingale wrote:

> Bart Kemper wrote:
>
> > > As far as I can tell, that's not a very good example, simply because
> > > almost everyone I have ever spoken to who would agree that men and
> > > women ought to be equally eligible for conscription is a pretty strong
> > > supporter of MEN becoming INeligible for conscription.  Which is ALSO
> > > equality.
> >
> > Totally different issues.
>
> Um, nope. Unless you're aware of vast pools of support for mandatory
> registration for the draft *among people who are also pro-equality*.
>
> I'm not aware of any such.

Let me be very clear.  I think that if we are going to have
conscription it should be for both genders.  But I think we
should not have it, unless there is real reason to think we are
going to be fighting to defend our own home turf in the next,
like, week.  And if that happens there's going to be such a rush
of volunteers it won't be necessary, so basically, I think it
should not exist.

I demonstrated against conscription when I was 16 and it WAS an
imminent possibility.

> I'm still not following why you think that people who wish to
> see mandatory registration for the draft go the way of the dodo
> ought to simultaneously be working to add more people to the
> list required to register for the draft they wish to end.  Or
> why you consider that the only REAL pro-equality position.

Well, I can see both sides--if there must be conscription, let us
all share the risk.  But when it comes to organizing on this
issue, I'm organizing to end it.

> Really, Bart, Kiri and I are both over 30 and somewhat
> disabled, and on top of that I've got Conscientious Objector
> pretty much tattooed on my bum.
>
> What POSSIBLE personal benefit do you think we're going to
> derive from opposing conscription?  Except for fewer
> draft-dodgers to help smuggle if it comes to it.

Right on.

> (I don't mean to speak for you, Twin; I do note that you and i
> are not on exactly the same place on the continuum.)

No, we're not.  But both libertarians and pacifists tend to agree
on the topic of conscription even if they don't agree on the
reasons.  I believe there are wars we just have to have.  But I
don't notice any shortage of willing people to fight those wars.
I mean, in WWII there were kids lying about their ages to get in.

If a government can't find enough people who are willing to fight
in a given war...perhaps it's a war that government shouldn't be
having.

I would personally have been more than happy to help get rid of
the Taliban had I been younger and healthier.  And if the tanks
were rolling up Market Street I'd be doing whatever I COULD do.

> > Eh...register everyone or register no one.
>
> OK, just in case up until now I've been typing in Ancient Akkadian:
>
> No one.
> No one.
> No one.
> No one.
>
> Not men, not women, not children, not anyone should ever be forced to
> serve in an army.

I pretty much agree with that, actually.

I do think that IF there is going to be conscription it should be
fair; but I want to stop conscription.

~malfoy :)
**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From d_reykova at juno.com  Fri Aug  1 06:30:59 2003
From: d_reykova at juno.com (Danielle N. Hart)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 05:30:59 GMT
Subject: [LMB] OT: In defense of Bart/Can't stand it anymore...
Message-ID: <20030801.013146.15272.544599@webmail05.nyc.untd.com>

 Despite the fact that he did sound a little...off in the post, enough us can vouch that the good Captain Kemper does not, in fact, have a "big fat misogynistic chip on his shoulder".

 < SPC Hart nods respectfully to CPT Kemper before getting back down with her M60 > I'd salute, but that might be a *bit* dangerous now... :)

 Speaking as a military person, the actual process of drafting is *not* something we'd like to bring back.  It's much more fun to work with volunteers.

 On the procreation/responsibility, it's not bad in here until the arguments get repeated by the same people, but *please* do not bring that over into the Star Creche - I have the place tied up enough with the on-going saga of in-laws from "warmer climates" for a polite term.  Anyway, the Creche seems to be more of a practical forum than a debate circle.  I think of it as an advice column to which I occasionally contribute.

 Danielle

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



--------________--------________--------

From d_reykova at juno.com  Fri Aug  1 06:32:51 2003
From: d_reykova at juno.com (Danielle N. Hart)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 05:32:51 GMT
Subject: [LMB] OT: Listies in Seattle/Tacoma/Ft Lewis WA area
Message-ID: <20030801.013351.15272.544614@webmail05.nyc.untd.com>

 I'll be up there from 10 Aug - 30 Aug.

 Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure I'll miss Meg.  I do have to work while I'm up there.

 Anyone (besides Susan, who's already contacted me) who's interested can email me off-list at cmdr_d_reykova at yahoo.com

 Danielle

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 06:32:51 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:32:51 -0400
Subject: [LMB] comment on "Falling Free"...
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731231303.027ee400@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801012324.027df5c0@pop.mindspring.com>

Hmmm.

Exactly what were people interested in, in the way of comments, etc?  It's 
easier to form answers when I know the questions...

And, like I said, I read fast.  So, how I construct the story in my head 
goes by pretty fast, also.

Some of it is problem-solving.  I take the bits I'm given and ask, what 
**has** to happen next? or I should say, how will this play out?  But I 
don't form expectations, generally; I do however take note of the answers 
when they come along.  I notice consistencies; I'm more attentive to 
personality, what you might call motivational consistency, rather than 
continuity, but that's my personal bent.  I really notice when people do 
things that are out of character.  And I notice when something logically 
can't happen, but (like most people, I think) I accept the "rules" of the 
world I'm presented at face value more or less.  Not that I'm noticing 
inconsistencies in what I'm reading now; I was thinking in general.  But 
motive does matter to me, and Leo's view of the situation as "an 
engineering problem after all" does ring true :)

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From tiamat at tsoft.com  Fri Aug  1 06:38:44 2003
From: tiamat at tsoft.com (Azalais Malfoy)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801004823.027e83d0@pop.mindspring.com>
References: <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731234752.027df1e0@pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030801004823.027e83d0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20030731222826.G47107@shell.rawbw.com>

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Sara A. wrote:

> At 12:34 AM 8/1/03 -0400, you wrote:
>
> >Can you rephrase your point in some fashion which *doesn't* involve an
> >ad hominem?
>
> Let's see...not just restricted to the discussion of conscription, but the
> whole other thread as well...
>
> slippery slope:  That expecting men under ordinary circumstances to take
> responsibility for their offspring leads to women lying about birth control
> and rape

I don't think that's what Bart was trying to say.  I've known him
online for a while, though not quite as long as I've known you.
That's really not the way he thinks.

What he did was give examples of situations in which the laws
which are currently on the books were used in ways that a)
probably weren't what the authors of the laws had in mind and b)
were abusive to the unwitting/unwilling sperm donors.

I can also think of ways those laws hurt women and kids, but we
had a pizza call, so I am not going there.

> appeal to motives in place of support, straw man, non-support:
> how we got to the argument that somehow the same people who are
> opposed to conscription for everyone are responsible for the
> fact that it only applies to some people.

I think the position is that all risks of this sort should be
equally shared.  I agree with that.  But I'd rather abolish
conscription for men than extend it to women.

> At any rate, I was objecting to a set of arguments and their
> apparent motive, not a person.  Too fine a distinction perhaps.

Yes, but I've made a very similar set of arguments (with the
caveat that I'm opposed to conscription).  And yet you don't see
me as a misogynist.  I suspect this is 'cause you know me.

I don't think he holds you, or me, or Marna, responsible for the
fact that women are not required to register for the draft.  None
of us is a politician and Marna's not an American.  I will agree
with him that both genders should be treated equally with respect
to conscription.  But I personally wish to extend freedom from
conscription to both genders.

~malfoy :)

**************************************************************************
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect
and love your darkest side, disposing only of what is obsolete or
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission." --Jack Darkhand

"It is better to be cruel for love than for hate." --Thomas Burnett Swann



--------________--------________--------

From Lathia at nwlink.com  Fri Aug  1 06:44:44 2003
From: Lathia at nwlink.com (Lathia)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:44:44 -0700
Subject: [LMB] OT: Listies in Seattle/Tacoma/Ft Lewis WA area
References: <000001c35777$c6f510e0$6402a8c0@double>
 <001501c357ed$3141b000$92cb4b43@meg>
Message-ID: <005f01c357f0$02903a80$0300a8c0@susan>

I'm here.  Is something going on?  I don't read the list consistantly ( I
have 11191 unread messages) so I may have missed something.

I'll be out of town aug 9 to the 14th tho.

Susan in Bellevue


> Paul, about Danielle:
> > Nice to hear you're coming our way up here in the PNW.  When in August
and
> > how many have contacted you?  There is at least one listee down your
way.
> > Meg Justus (megj at nwlink.com).
>
> I am, however, going to be out of town from Aug. 17th to the 28th.  I did
> email Danielle (and Susan Profit, who contacted me about a possible
> gathering), so they know, too.
>
> Megaera
> --
> Lois-Bujold mailing list
> Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
>



--------________--------________--------

From d_reykova at juno.com  Fri Aug  1 06:40:17 2003
From: d_reykova at juno.com (Danielle N. Hart)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 05:40:17 GMT
Subject: [LMB] Paladin of Souls - No Spoilers
Message-ID: <20030801.014107.15272.544653@webmail05.nyc.untd.com>

 I just finished tearing through the ARC so it can get shipped back to Nancy tomorrow.  

 I spent a very entertaining six hours in Chalion.  

 You must read this book!!  I think I like it better than Chalion.  I look forward to putting a hardcover of it on my shelf.  I wish I could send a copy to my husband, but he'll be back before it hits paperback (thankfully).  

 I think this one actually has better quotable lines than CoC.

 I think part of the reason I like this one better is the character with shades of Aral.  

 It took me a little bit of time to get into the world again, but once I was in, there was no getting me out until I got to the (very excellent) end of the book.  

 For the people who really liked the Caz/Betriz angle of CoC, you will not be disappointed in this one, either.

 Danielle

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 06:47:37 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:47:37 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <20030731222826.G47107@shell.rawbw.com>
References: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801004823.027e83d0@pop.mindspring.com>
 <200307312215.h6VMFCj6014016@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <3F29A57C.8080801@bigdogz.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030731234752.027df1e0@pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030801004823.027e83d0@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801014607.027f0600@pop.mindspring.com>

At 10:38 PM 7/31/03 -0700, you wrote:
>I don't think that's what Bart was trying to say.

Maybe so, but it sure sounded that way to me.  **shrug**  I've said what I 
have to say on the subject, and given a clarification because it was asked 
for, though as I say I'm not sure it was an improvement.  I'm not going to 
discuss it any more.

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From Lathia at nwlink.com  Fri Aug  1 06:58:51 2003
From: Lathia at nwlink.com (Lathia)
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:58:51 -0700
Subject: [LMB] Re: OT:birth control
References: <200307310344.h6V3iHj6009163@lists.herald.co.uk>
 <5.2.0.9.2.20030731114336.01dc2b10@pop.east.cox.net>
 <20030731100735.N17887@shell.rawbw.com> <3F298054.3B483D62@marna.ca>
 <20030731140339.F17887@shell.rawbw.com> <3F298B59.58264E8A@marna.ca>
Message-ID: <009201c357f1$fc005180$0300a8c0@susan>

I believe it.  I got my tubes tied because I dreamt for three nights running
that I was pregnant (shortly after I had acquired a new boyfriend).  I
decided my mind or body was trying to tell me something.  Since I didn't
want kids and he didn't want kids ...
>
> ISTR reading that actually, a woman is MORE likely to get pregnant
> from a new male partner -- apparently fresh pheremones trigger a whole
> slew of pro-baby body changes.
>
 and btw he had his taken care of as well later.

Susan kidless in bellevue

(yes the kids have moved out. they left the Bujold books, but took the Tom
Lehrer CDs.  Oh well.)



--------________--------________--------

From zafaran at sff.net  Fri Aug  1 07:06:20 2003
From: zafaran at sff.net (Patricia A. Swan)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:06:20 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Blood pressure, was Host mothers
In-Reply-To: <002401c357bd$be1839c0$b6432904@earthlink.net>
References: <p05200f0fbb4f36a95f8b@[10.0.1.4]>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030801015331.04438008@pop3.sff.net>

At 04:44 PM 7/31/2003 -0700, Laura Gallagher wrote:

>Heh, I have to watch out and convince them that really, my blood
>pressure is FINE.  Because it tends to get misdiagnosed, as I'm a large
>lady.

{snip bulk of post about pressure artifacts from using the wrong sized 
blood pressure cuff

>Laura Gallagher

And it's not just on the large end of the scale {Hey, Laura, you did 
know that you can use a normal sized cuff around a large lady's 
*forearm* and get a proper pressure reading.}

I had a client I was doing a physical on when I was doing Insurance 
physicals for money, and she commented while taking her history that 
she always showed *extremely* low blood pressure.  When I started to 
take her pressure I found out why.  Her upper arm was smaller than my 
*wrist*.  This woman was a *doctor* and knew nothing about the fact 
that if you're using the wrong sized cuff you get an error in the 
pressure reading.  I asked her if she was the one who took her son to 
the pediatrician's office, and she said yes.  I told her that what she 
really needed to do the next time she was there was to get the 
pediatrician to take her blood pressure with a pedi cuff that was 
actually sized for an arm that small, and find out what her real, true 
pressure was.

Pat in North Carolina


-- 
* Patricia A. Swan     zafaran at eskimo.com              *
* Six Swans Design     http://www.eskimo.com/~zafaran/ *



--------________--------________--------

From mabonwy at mindspring.com  Fri Aug  1 08:26:39 2003
From: mabonwy at mindspring.com (Sara A.)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 03:26:39 -0400
Subject: [LMB] comment on "Falling Free"...
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20030731231303.027ee400@pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.0.20030801031643.027e86f0@pop.mindspring.com>

Done.

Er.  I'm afraid my immediate reaction was "Oooh, I should throw more monkey 
wrenches into my characters' lives."

I like that there's conflict, but precious little fighting.  And people 
don't just coolly shoot somebody or wallop them over the head, but get 
upset about it and/or do it in a fit of pique.  And that Van Atta's 
character flaws were what did him in.

Sara



--------________--------________--------

From carosue at centurytel.net  Fri Aug  1 08:58:20 2003
From: carosue at centurytel.net (House of Unruly Fish)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:58:20 -0600
Subject: [LMB] Poor Simon's Almanack - Aug 1
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.2.20030731002928.00bd1ae8@mail.so.centurytel.net>

This Day In Listory:

2002 - Jim Parish certifies seven select listees as official Geeks. 
Assorted helpful ideas and suggestions about weddings per Danielle's 
request. CoC chat continues to flourish.
2001 - (Digests 4413-5) More and more listees check in with the news they 
have found a copy of CoC.  Word is passed along that Poul Anderson has 
died, at home, from cancer.
2000 - (Digests 3502-6) An astute observation by Pat Mathews, "Except that 
for all the Heinlein characters who pulled their phones out of their 
pockets, not ONE of them ever did so while driving!"  Automotive 
experiences still a big topic today.
1999 - (Digests 2600-2) The Great Spoiler Debate actually derails ACC 
discussion for a while!  Until ACC 9.1 goes up!!
1998 - (Digests 1775-6) Dogs and engineers some more.  Nice long post by 
Pouncer sharing his speculations on the background of the Ceta's bombing 
Vorkosigan Vashnoi. Then a very nice Miles and Elli filk by Amanda Marlowe.
1997 - (Digests 798-9) More on the Vors and Salic law.
1996 - (Digest 325) Chapter 1-3 of Memory posted to the Baen site!
1995 - (Digests 37-8) Sharon Casteel reports Lois's birthday is November 
2.  Robert Woodward reports the August Locus has a 2 page interview with Lois.

Respectfully submitted by,

Susan the Neon Nurse

All the above info collected from:

http://lists.herald.co.uk/old-archives/lois-bujold/

and the New List archives at

<http://lists.herald.co.uk/pipermail/lois-bujold/>http://lists.herald.co.uk/pipermail/lois-bujold/

Additions, corrections or um thingie... may be sent to carosue at 
centurytel.net



--------________--------________--------

From mike at g8ifu.f9.co.uk  Fri Aug  1 09:13:48 2003
From: mike at g8ifu.f9.co.uk (Mike Allen)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 09:13:48 +0100
Subject: [LMB] Re:OT Can't stand it any more.
Message-ID: <000e01c35804$ed56ad60$2a259fd4@mikealle>

>can't imagine an ongoing relationship where "what if X gets
>pregnant?" hasn't been discussed.  Except a gay or lesbian
>one of course.
I would have thought it *doubly* important for lesbians . And I
do remember a 1970-ish  Analog story about militant femanists
- not yet , but I expect someones working on it .

> (Unless people get in the habit of signing paperwork before
> each one-night stand, which I understand some people do.)
Hopefully specifying that non-use of safe sex techniques will
void their immunities and their partners responsabilities
(Grammar note - this is what I meant about using their for a
hypothetical person of unspecified sex)

>Those seventeen replicators from Escobar ought, in my opinion,
>to have been turned over to loving and financially capable families.

Agreed . The intent seems to have been to "punish" the fathers ,
but the main result was punishing the children .

>> A person who has sex with someone whom he never sees
>>again is not a 'father'.  I can't stop you from using that word,
>>but don't

>Consequences -- the person did NOT have to engage in sex.

But as they say , it takes two to tango , and so many of these
arguements seem to ignore this .

>I would like to call Pizza on this thread please.

It works for me , unless someone has something both new and
on topic .

Mike Allen



--------________--------________--------

From jparish at siue.edu  Fri Aug  1 09:25:33 2003
From: jparish at siue.edu (jparish at siue.edu)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 03:25:33 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Filk plug
In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.1.20030801002326.009fb490@pop3.norton.antivirus>
Message-ID: <3F29DDAD.15455.12AE3A@localhost>

Marty L. Adkins wrote:

> Jim, <snip> when you mention writing a filk [an
> activity heartily to be encouraged], you need to either post the song
> or at least a link thereto.

Sorry, sorry. I posted it when I wrote it, way back when. It can be found 
in the filk archive of the Nexus. Try
http://www.dendarii.co.uk/Filk/misc3#free .

Jim Parish



--------________--------________--------

From sir-talen at comcast.net  Fri Aug  1 10:41:01 2003
From: sir-talen at comcast.net (Royce Day)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 05:41:01 -0400
Subject: [LMB] OT: Wierd Link of the Day (8/01)
Message-ID: <3F2A35AD.1040200@comcast.net>

Summary: Oh, sure.  You thought being kidnapped by aliens only happens 
to farmers driving their trucks down deserted roads.  For God's sake, 
think of the children!

http://aliensandchildren.org/

-Royce in MD



--------________--------________--------

From jbryant at iee.org  Fri Aug  1 11:03:39 2003
From: jbryant at iee.org (James M. BRYANT, G4CLF)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 11:03:39 +0100
Subject: [LMB] EXCESSIVE QUOTES - PIZZA
In-Reply-To: <200307312336.h6VNa3j6014717@lists.herald.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5.1.1.6.2.20030801110157.00afbb48@pop.luna.co.uk>

I have not pixied anyone for this BUT
there is no need to quote pizza calls
and responses in full.

James - too d*mn busy in run-up to
the TorCon Curry



--------________--------________--------

From mduhon at bluemarble.net  Fri Aug  1 13:43:15 2003
From: mduhon at bluemarble.net (Marvant Duhon)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 07:43:15 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Re:OT Can't stand it any more.
In-Reply-To: <000e01c35804$ed56ad60$2a259fd4@mikealle>
Message-ID: <BB4FCA93.C2A1%mduhon@bluemarble.net>

Pizza. 

> From: "Mike Allen" <mike at g8ifu.f9.co.uk>
> Reply-To: lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 09:13:48 +0100
> To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
> Subject: [LMB] Re:OT Can't stand it any more.
> 
>> can't imagine an ongoing relationship where "what if X gets
>> pregnant?" hasn't been discussed.  Except a gay or lesbian
>> one of course.
> I would have thought it *doubly* important for lesbians . And I
> do remember a 1970-ish  Analog story about militant femanists
> - not yet , but I expect someones working on it .
> 
>> (Unless people get in the habit of signing paperwork before
>> each one-night stand, which I understand some people do.)
> Hopefully specifying that non-use of safe sex techniques will
> void their immunities and their partners responsabilities
> (Grammar note - this is what I meant about using their for a
> hypothetical person of unspecified sex)
> 
>> Those seventeen replicators from Escobar ought, in my opinion,
>> to have been turned over to loving and financially capable families.
> 
> Agreed . The intent seems to have been to "punish" the fathers ,
> but the main result was punishing the children .
> 
>>> A person who has sex with someone whom he never sees
>>> again is not a 'father'.  I can't stop you from using that word,
>>> but don't
> 
>> Consequences -- the person did NOT have to engage in sex.
> 
> But as they say , it takes two to tango , and so many of these
> arguements seem to ignore this .
> 
>> I would like to call Pizza on this thread please.
> 
> It works for me , unless someone has something both new and
> on topic .
> 
> Mike Allen
> -- 
> Lois-Bujold mailing list
> Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold



--------________--------________--------

From m.dolbear at lineone.net  Fri Aug  1 14:36:02 2003
From: m.dolbear at lineone.net (Michael R N Dolbear)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 14:36:02 +0100
Subject: [LMB] P i z z a  rules KO - Mostly offtopic not all,
 Polarization/flammable    warning, was Can't stand it any more.
Message-ID: <E19iaqq-000FKs-AW@mk-smarthost-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com>

> From: pam <pam at gotcher.us>
> Date: 01 August 2003 00:14
> 
> Since we've had 3 pizza calls, this is not an option.


Since "pizza" has not appeared in any subject line, all such calls were
ineffectual.

"A post which includes a pizza call should be so noted in the subject line,
in addition to the current subject."


Little Egret



--------________--------________--------

From Tom_Vinson at mpsisys.com  Fri Aug  1 15:32:16 2003
From: Tom_Vinson at mpsisys.com (Tom Vinson)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 09:32:16 -0500
Subject: [LMB] List behaviour (was Re:OT Can't stand it any more.)
Message-ID: <E00A5AFD6EB5D611834200105A994B3D0F074E@Exchmail>

(Yes I know that's not the off-topic marker--this is related
to the list itself.)
Marna commented:
> Compared to where these threads used to go, this one's been
> pretty darned civil and more than a little interesting, has if
> not stayed on topic at least visited it frequently, and so
> forth.

This whole area of discussion is one that arouses strong feelings
in many people and can easily turn a civilized argument into a
brawl.  I started reading this thread with a bit of trepidation,
but so far have not met with anything that looks like getting out
of hand.  Everyone involved, including those calling pizza, is
at least projecting an image of civility--a welcome change from
the way discussions on this topic develop elsewhere.

I'm glad this topic came up.  I feel I have become better acquainted
with some list members through their comments, as well as becoming
more aware of the complexity of the topic itself.  

I'm also glad the topic is finished so we can get back to the books.

Tom



--------________--------________--------

From swartell at cas.org  Fri Aug  1 15:43:30 2003
From: swartell at cas.org (Sue Wartell)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:43:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [LMB] Pizza call on OT: Can't stand it any more.
Message-ID: <200308011443.h71EhUx3018924@srv01.cas.org>

Subject line says it all.



--------________--------________--------

From nlbarber at mac.com  Fri Aug  1 16:36:06 2003
From: nlbarber at mac.com (Nancy L. Barber)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 11:36:06 -0400
Subject: [LMB] Filk plug
In-Reply-To: <3F29DDAD.15455.12AE3A@localhost>
References: <3F29DDAD.15455.12AE3A@localhost>
Message-ID: <p05111701bb5035ebac28@[10.0.1.2]>

At 3:25 AM -0500 8/1/03, jparish at siue.edu wrote, about "I'm
going to set them free":

>  It can be found
>in the filk archive of the Nexus. Try
>http://www.dendarii.co.uk/Filk/misc3#free .
>

That's
http://www.dendarii.force9.co.uk/Filk/misc3.html#free

    Nancy Barber



--------________--------________--------

From Tom_Vinson at mpsisys.com  Fri Aug  1 16:49:14 2003
From: Tom_Vinson at mpsisys.com (Tom Vinson)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:49:14 -0500
Subject: [LMB] List abbreviations
Message-ID: <E00A5AFD6EB5D611834200105A994B3D0F0751@Exchmail>

Please remember that the off-topic marker is case-sensitive
and _must_ include the colon:  "OT:".  Filtering
software is very literal.  Double-check the subject line when
replying to a message; some mail programs strip "extra" xx:
sequences when adding "Re:".

Thanks,
Tom



--------________--------________--------

From nancy at dendarii.com  Fri Aug  1 17:01:31 2003
From: nancy at dendarii.com (Nancy Barber)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 12:01:31 -0400
Subject: [LMB] The Pizza Rule, was Re: List behaviour
In-Reply-To: <E00A5AFD6EB5D611834200105A994B3D0F074E@Exchmail>
References: <E00A5AFD6EB5D611834200105A994B3D0F074E@Exchmail>
Message-ID: <p05111702bb503bda101f@[10.0.1.2]>

>This whole area of discussion is one that arouses strong feelings
>in many people and can easily turn a civilized argument into a
>brawl.  I started reading this thread with a bit of trepidation,
>but so far have not met with anything that looks like getting out
>of hand. ...

Ah, good place to repeat the Pizza Rule, as we try to get
everyone to absorb it into their psyche.  Note that I'm not
trying to reverse the current pizza call, just trying to get
the correct rule noted for next time.

The pizza calls, at the time they started being issued, were
all out of line.  Why? Because, as was noted above, the exchange
had remained courteous.  The rule states:
"A call of "Pizza?" indicates that the caller felt the language
in a post was becoming inflammatory."

Shortly after several pizza calls started, I saw a post which, in
my opinion, "was becoming inflammatory"--but that was a little later.

The rule emphasizes the "becoming inflammatory" with:
"Note that pizza is not to be called on a subject preemptively--the
actual language being used must be getting heated, or loaded so
that a heated exchange seems likely, or headed flameward."

So, calling pizza because "this subject often leads to flames"
is not valid.  Wait until a post crosses the line (and yes, we know
that "the line" is in different places for different people), or
wait until the thread can be called for OT3.

As others noted, a pizza call must also be so noted in the subject
line, and should be snipped to meet the quote guidelines.

See the exact wording in the List FAQ for more details:
http://www.dendarii.com/bujold_lst.html#pizza


-- 
Nancy Barber
Send FAQ comments and suggestions to lmb-faq at dendarii.com



--------________--------________--------

From lqmiller at ev1.net  Fri Aug  1 13:35:24 2003
From: lqmiller at ev1.net (Louann Miller)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 07:35:24 -0500
Subject: [LMB] OT: now uninformed doctors
In-Reply-To: <000001c357c1$40c9d6a0$91c9d380@banker>
References: <3F2964B7.21545.1AF250@localhost>
Message-ID: <5.2.1.1.0.20030801072426.02dfc850@mail.ev1.net>

At 07:10 PM 7/31/2003 -0500, Samantha Banker wrote:
>.)  Though I get many of my
>prescriptions mail order, I still give those drug names to my pharmacy (I
>use only one, if I can help it.) so they can properly monitor for drug
>interactions when filling a prescription.

That's supposed to be one of the main functions of pharmacists, knowing 
what all the drugs do and checking that a given patient doesn't get kicked 
in the tush by an interaction. The function that justifies requiring them 
to have professional credentials (a bachelor's degree laden with hard 
science that takes five years not four) and paying them a professional salary.

Not being able to pick the right bottle off the shelf and count pills up to 
30. That can be (and in states where it's legal often is) done by a clerk 
who's a high school kid making a fast-food sort of hourly wage. The 
pharmacist is supposed to be an information resource for the patient and 
even for the doctor about how drugs work. Unfortunately too few patients 
know that and too few pharmacists sell themselves that way.

Louann, ex pharmacy clerk and (for one incredibly difficult semester) ex 
pharmacy major.



--------________--------________--------

From rgmolpus at sff.net  Fri Aug  1 18:12:08 2003
From: rgmolpus at sff.net (Richard Molpus)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 12:12:08 -0500
Subject: [LMB] Pizza call on OT: Can't stand it any more.( redux)
In-Reply-To: <200308011443.h71EhUx3018924@srv01.cas.org>
Message-ID: <M0E9AA8F@smtp.sff.net>

Reissue with a fancy cover and a new introduction by the author of my
initial "PIZZA!!!" call.

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 10:43:30 -0400 (EDT), Sue Wartell wrote:

>Subject line says it all.
>-- 



--------________--------________--------

From paal at gis.net  Fri Aug  1 18:13:16 2003
From: paal at gis.net (Paula Lieberman)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:13:16 -0400
Subject: [LMB]  The Replicators, was  Can't stand it any more.
References: <000e01c35804$ed56ad60$2a259fd4@mikealle>
Message-ID: <046201c35850$338889c0$0100a8c0@LAPTOP>

-- Paula Lieberman
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Allen" <mike at g8ifu.f9.co.uk>



> >Those seventeen replicators from Escobar ought, in my opinion,
> >to have been turned over to loving and financially capable families.
>
> Agreed . The intent seems to have been to "punish" the fathers ,
> but the main result was punishing the children .
>

When Cordelia said, "All wealth is biological" could that have had a thread
of genetics tied in, though?   The replicators went to the genetic
contributors.  Were there more than 17 conceptions that occurred, which
additional ones, the women or families of the women or friends of them,
chose parenthood of?   How much have we seen of adoption in the Nexus? Mark
genetically is Cordelia's and Aral's son.  Some cultures, full legal
"adoption" with full inheritance rights is limited to biological relatives.
Other cultures allow adoptions with full inheritance rights where there is
no genetic tie.  Still others have inheritance rules where inheritance is
strictly by a hierarchy of genetics, or by married ties and then genetics.
E.g., looking at medieval Europe's trade guilds, the wife of a guild member
inherited the business and assets, absolutely.   Often a former apprentice
of the late guild member would marry the guild member's widow, to become the
JUNIOR partner in the business -- again, the widow inherited and owned the
business outright, and the new husband's only legal rights to it, were what
the widow the new husband married, had written up in the marriage contract.
Inheritance laws of the nobility, applied to the nobility and not the rest
of the population....  fiction based on applying the nobility's inheritances
laws, to non-nobles, is way off from historical accuracy.

Going back further in time,  ancient Roman adoption practices allowed
adoption of non-biological relatives as heirs, not just biological
relatives --  while Octavius/Augustus Caesar was a great-nephew of Julius
Caeser, Julius Caeser legally adopted Octavius as his son and heir.
Various Roman emperors adopted non-relatived to be their heirs, e.g. Marcus
Aurelius was adopted by the preceding emperor as son and heir, to be the
heir to the Imperial throne.   A couple of Claudia J. Edwards' fantasy
novels used that as a minor point, with a character commenting something to
the effect that "the emperor succeeds to the throne and spends most of his
reign looking for a worthy heir to adopt for a successor."

But getting back to the Nexus, the uterine replicators sent to Barrayar,
represented fetuses which weren't to be destroyed, but which the biological
mothers didn't want not only in their lives, but not anywhere on their
planet and culture growing up as reminders of trauma.

How much do we know about the social culture(s) the women came from?   What
are the cultural attitudes towards reproduction, child-rearing, and social
strictures about conception, etc.? What are the prescriptions regarding
selection of genetic father, relationship with the genetic father, rights of
the genetic father, etc.?   What are the social places of women rearing
children of rape, and is this something that could be figured out from the
situation of timing, etc.?

What are the social attitudes regarding adoption, and what are the rules?
Are there requirements that both biological parents be citizens, for
citizenship? Ancient Greece required that citizens be the son of a citizen
and his legal, free-born wife. Sons of slaves or freed slaves, were not
eligible for citizenship, and women who weren't freeborn daughters of
citizens, were ineligible to be legal wives....

Different societies have different values, and different reasons for those
values.  In _Darkover Landfall_ the colony's rules -after- crashlanding
included avoiding saving sickly children and terminating problem
pregnancies, on the basis that the colony was in marginal living conditions,
and couldn't afford the extra effort and care for members who looked
unlikely to be able to contribute more resources to the colony, than they
required in care and attention trying to keep them alive.  The colony needed
the labor and effort of the able-bodied to provide the food and shelter and
clothing and resources for the continuing existence of the colony, and put
effort and resources and attention into children on the basis of the
expectation that after a few short years of infancy and helplesness would
become able-bodied members of the community, contributing more resources of
food, shelter, clothing, etc., to the community, than they consumed, and not
requiring attention and care of members who thereby would be taken away from
production of food, shelter, clothing, fuel, etc.    Prior to arriving on
Darkover, the colonists had had a different set of rules -- considerable
medical care for the non-able bodies, special care for problem pregnancies,
etc.

We haven't seen any stories set when the attitudes about "muties" became set
on Barrayar; the situation there might be much the same as in Darkover
Landfall.   By Miles' time, however, Barrayar's level of medical technology
and wealth and ability to "fix" the defects and damage had enormously
advanced  enormously. The old rules reflected a different reality and
different social order and different society capabilities, and it was past
time for them to be retired and replaced.



--------________--------________--------

From RayLists at quixnet.net  Fri Aug  1 18:22:47 2003
From: RayLists at quixnet.net (Ray)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:22:47 -0400
Subject: OT: Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.
References: <M0E9746E@smtp.sff.net>
Message-ID: <003201c35851$8725c2e0$6e9f68d1@RDrouill>

It has been mentioned.  Those of us who feel strongly about it failed to
take the bait.

Relax.


Ray


----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Molpus" <rgmolpus at sff.net>
To: <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.


> P
> I
> Z
> Z
> A
> !!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> )i hear the winds of a*o*t*o*n whispering in the trees...(
> --
> Lois-Bujold mailing list
> Lois-Bujold at lists.herald.co.uk
> http://lists.herald.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/lois-bujold
>



--------________--------________--------

From marna at marna.ca  Fri Aug  1 18:34:06 2003
From: marna at marna.ca (Marna Nightingale)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 13:34:06 -0400
Subject: OT: Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.
References: <M0E9746E@smtp.sff.net>
 <003201c35851$8725c2e0$6e9f68d1@RDrouill>
Message-ID: <3F2AA48C.77E7DA9B@marna.ca>

> > )i hear the winds of a*o*t*o*n whispering in the trees...(

Disemvowling is easier to read than deconsonanting, though I did
figure it out after some staring and head-scratching. 

Ray wrote:
 
> It has been mentioned.  Those of us who feel strongly about it failed to
> take the bait.

Which I thank you for. Given that it will, if we're going to talk
about Lois' writing, come up every so often, I find it most effective
to treat *PASSING* or *PERSONAL* references to ab*rtion or to
particular ab*rtions as asides rather than bait.  

I'd have to be pretty much 100 percent sure that it was being
deliberately brought up *as a topic for debate* before I would invoke
that rule. 

Certainly in the second. If mentioning when it is appropriate to a
discussion I am having that I have in fact had one is going to be
taken as either bait or a discussion for people who weren't there
holding my head to enquire into and judge my motives and actions, I
for one am liable to get pretty cranky. OTOH, I don't expect people to
praise or validate me all over the place for it either.  

Yes, it's a touchy debate. But for some of us, it's also a fact of our
lives and an occasionally relevant part of where we're coming from. 

Marna.



--------________--------________--------

From kat.morrison at juno.com  Fri Aug  1 18:46:24 2003
From: kat.morrison at juno.com (kat.morrison at juno.com)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 13:46:24 -0400
Subject: OT: Re: [LMB] Can't stand it any more.
Message-ID: <20030801.134624.1884.1.kat.morrison@juno.com>

On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 13:34:06 -0400 Marna Nightingale <marna at marna.ca>
writes:
> people who weren't there
> holding my head to enquire into and judge my motives and actions

        Now, *there's* an image I didn't need.  Various people holding
Marna's head and looking at what's inside.  
Kathleen



--------________--------________--------

From mathews55 at msn.com  Fri Aug  1 18:56:32 2003
From: mathews55 at msn.com (PAT MATHEWS)
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 11:56:32 -0600
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
Message-ID: <BAY4-F364awhQ4AaFUo000183bb@hotmail.com>

>From: Azalais Malfoy <tiamat at tsoft.com>
>I don't think he holds you, or me, or Marna, responsible for the
>fact that women are not required to register for the draft.  None
>of us is a politician and Marna's not an American.  I will agree
>with him that both genders should be treated equally with respect
>to conscription.  But I personally wish to extend freedom from
>conscription to both genders.
>

I also think both genders should be free from any sort of draft: military, 
public service, etc. For the rest of the now-pizza'ed argument, is it any 
news to anyone on this list that both genders have members who are quite 
capable of cheating when it's to their advantage? OR even just from 
carelessness & sloppy thinking? Both genders, all races & nations & 
religions, and many species.

Just my $0.02

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail



--------________--------________--------

From alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca  Fri Aug  1 19:16:26 2003
From: alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca (alayne at twobikes.ottawa.on.ca)
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 14:16:26 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [LMB] OT: Conscription
In-Reply-To: <BAY4-F364awhQ4AaFUo000183bb@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0308011409570.31741-100000@pannier.cfsc.ottaw
 a.on.ca>

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, PAT MATHEWS wrote:
> I also think both genders should be free from any sort of draft: military,
> public service, etc.

Up here in Ontario, the provincial government mandates 40 hours of public
service in order for a student to graduate from high sc