My Blog

For the Sake of Auld Lang Syne....

cyn_thia — Sun, 01 Jan 2006 02:33:26 GMT

My favorite verse of the song as written by Bobby Burns And here's a hand, my trusty fiere, And gie's a hand o' thine; And we'll tak' a right gude-willy waught, For auld lang syne.

Speak-Easy, everybody!

cyn_thia — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 22:01:13 GMT

The more I think about Tribe's attempts to deal with the threat of the censors, the more I think of the Prohibition era Speak-easies. Somehow where to find booze was an open secret in the 20's. Wonder if we now on Tribe can't find a way to work with this more subversive model of civil disobedience....

What is obscene?

cyn_thia — Thu, 08 Dec 2005 04:03:07 GMT

Two excellent threads to view re: why Tribe had to make the current changes or risk being sued out of operation: http://bondageagogo.tribe.net/thread/6d0379a0-3001-45f6-b9e7-4cf0d46538c8 and http://tribes.tribe.net/2257sucks# ________________________________________________________ In addition, I thought I'd post the except below from an article on the Supreme Court standards for obscenity which can be found in full on Findlaw.com. Redacted from: http://library.findlaw.com/2003/May/15/132747.html for general discussion and not to be construed as legal advice... In 1973, in Miller v. California, the Supreme Court articulated the definition of obscenity, which, more or less, is still in effect today as follows: "(a) whether the 'average person, applying contemporary community standards' would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." This holding also held that community standards could be local rather than national. Tthe Court set forth examples of what was "hard core", or that which the Court considered obscene and illegal. The Court's list of illegal acts was as follows: "(a) Patently offensive representations or descriptions of ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated. (b) Patently offensive representations or descriptions of masturbation, excretory functions, and lewd exhibition of the genitals."[4] Since Miller, the Court has clarified and explained aspects of the Miller standard: Jurors are to apply the standards of the area "from which he comes for making the required " decision as the "community standards" for obscenity; [5] "[A]ppeals to the prurient interest" means that which appeals to "shameful or morbid interests" in sex, but not that which incites normal lust [6] and includes materials designed for and primarily disseminated to a deviant sexual group (for example, sadists) which appeals to the prurient interests of that group; [7] "[A]verage person " includes both sensitive and insensitive adult persons, but does not include children; [8] Serious artistic, political, or scientific value, using a national standard, is required for a finding that something is not obscene and a finding of some artistic, political or scientific value does not preclude a finding that a work is obscene.[9] Additionally the Court has created a sort of middle category of materials ?– "indecent" materials that are protected speech. Indecent materials are defined as those which show "nonconformance with accepted standards of morality."[10] After reviewing the above, most persons, including lawyers, remain confused about what is and is not legally permissible. In New York v. Ferber in 1982, the Court held that "the States are entitled to greater leeway in the regulation of pornographic depictions of children" because: "It is evident beyond the need for elaboration that a State's interest in 'safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor' is 'compelling'" and therefore that narrowly tailored government interests may restrict such speech as stated in the initial definitions of restricted speech above. "The distribution of photographs and films depicting sexual activity by juveniles is intrinsically related to the sexual abuse of children in at least two ways. First the materials produced are a permanent record of the children's participation and the harm to the child is exacerbated by their circulation. Second, the distribution network for child pornography must be closed if the production of material which requires the sexual exploitation of children is to be effectively controlled." "The advertising and selling of child pornography provide an economic motive for and are thus an integral part of the production of such materials, an activity illegal through the Nation." "The value of permitting live performances and photographic reproductions of children engaged in lewd sexual conduct is exceedingly modest, if not de minimis." "Recognizing and classifying child pornography as a category of material outside the protection of the First Amendment is not incompatible with our earlier decisions" The Court then declared a more conservative Miller standard applicable for child pornography: "A trier of fact need not find that the material appeals to the prurient interest of the average person; it is not required that sexual conduct portrayed be done so in a patently offensive manner; and the material at issue need not be considered as a whole."

The glass half full. Or, and then there is the dark side....

cyn_thia — Tue, 06 Dec 2005 22:21:24 GMT

of having that "not so special" someone.... _______________________________________________________ http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051206/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_marriage_1&printer=1;_ylt=AsCfEU1.RsTBmhzHKq8sgQ.ek3QF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE- Love hurts? So does a wounded marriage By Michael ConlonMon Dec 5, 8:39 PM ET There is even more proof that an unhappy marriage is bad for your health, researchers reported on Monday. The stress that comes from discord appears to slow the initial production of a blood protein that is key to healing wounds, the report from Ohio State University said. Quarreling couples studied in a laboratory setting had a slower wound healing process than when they were not arguing, as measured by how rapidly blisters healed. The blisters were deliberately inflicted on the test subjects by using a vacuum pump on the arm. "Couples who demonstrated consistently higher levels of hostile behaviours ... healed at 60 percent of the rate of low-hostile couples," said the report published in the December issue of the Archives of General Psychiatry. The authors said there is already a sizeable body of research showing that marital disagreement causes adverse health impacts ranging from high blood pressure and depression to the ability to cope with heart disease and heart failure. "Although loss of a spouse can provoke adverse mental and physical health changes, the simple presence of a spouse is not necessarily protective. A troubled marriage is itself a prime source of stress," the study said. The Ohio State study involved 42 married couples, aged 22 to 77. They were tested twice -- first in a social setting and then again when they were told to get into disagreements. The authors said stress appears to slow the local, wound-site production of proinflammatory cytokines -- protein molecules produced by white blood cells that play a key role in the early stages of healing. But the study also found that couples with high degrees of conflict had higher levels of the same cytokines generally in the bloodstream the morning after an argument, compared to those who were not in as much disagreement. While greater early production at wound sites is beneficial, the authors said, a higher systemic level is harmful. "Elevated levels of proinflammatory cytokines have been linked to a variety of age-related disease, including cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, arthritis ... certain cancers, and frailty and functional decline," the study said. "Moreover, inflammatory activation can enhance development of depressive symptoms."

I'm free! I'm free!

cyn_thia — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 17:31:58 GMT

For the first time in three years I don't have to think about passing the California Bar exam because I just passed it! So...can somebody remind me what people do for fun around this time of year? I could use some hands on tutoring on how to kick back and enjoy life again.

The veil between living and dying...

cyn_thia — Mon, 31 Oct 2005 05:01:12 GMT

Heard last week that a college friend had died. My world is still reconfiguring itself from the news.