2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

Both NPR and OPB say they support higher education. They both devote considerable time. However, both NPR and OPB are currently engaging in a practice that does subtly damage higher education. Within the last year or two there has been a nation wide "movement" in the media to not address Ph.D.s EEd, Psy Ds etc with the traditional honorific of "Doctor." Supposedly, some national media "style guide service" is suggesting this. The reasons given are bogus really. The term "Doctor" Smith is a sign of respect for the education that that person has gone through and the expertise they have acquired. It is an acknowledgement by the media and the public that we do care about education and reaching its highest levels. Just using it once in an interview or a story can make a significant impact. Not using it also has a significant impact on undermining the achievement of highest degrees.
The physicians and medical doctors have plenty of words that clarify what their area of knowledge is. (for example; "physician" and "medical doctor.")
It is not surprising that the AMA attempted to push for the word "doctor" be limited to physicians so that the poor ignorant public wasn't confused into thinking that a Doctor of English Literature could help somebody after a car crash. This is absurd but very political and effective. NPR and OPB should know better. We need all the PhD types we can get in almost every field. US schools are having trouble getting PhDs in fields from nursing to engineering. Foreign schools are producing many more. Taking away a very powerful word and symbol of respect does have an impact on children, society, government, etc.
Nobody is going to convince me that stripping Doctor from Einstein, doesn't have an insidious negative impact. Don't you agree Mr. Einstein. We are helping nobody by doing this. We are causing cultural damage. We are damaging higher education by doing this. Words and names do make a difference. The human brain reacts at a deep level to such symbols. If your son or daughter used to be called Dr. Smith because they received a Ph.D. in Art History, don't tell me that it doesn't feel differnt when NPR says they won't use that term any more. It does have an impact. It does matter.
David

posted 4 years, 5 months ago
view in context

During the time of Prohibition of alcohol the criminal element ran the business of production, distribution and sale of alcohol. There was a great deal of violence and criminal harmful behavior engaged in because the criminal element was running the show. We hardly have the same problems coming from your local brew pub or winery. By making sex trade illegal we bring the harmful elements that we say are associated with it. This includes shame, embarrassment, low self esteem, violence, drugs, etc. However, just like Prohibition, its not the activity itself, sex for money, its the illegality and what that brings that is the problem.

If trading sex for money was seen as similar to cars for money or therapeutic massage or entertainment for money we would see some problems which happen in any trade but drastically less problems. Furthermore, if sex for money was seen as a very respectable, loving, nurturing, healthy, health improving activity which is one of the highest activities that people can trade money for, then the field would be very different.

I would frankly enjoying living in a culture where sexuality and sensuality were seen as the loftiest of activities and the market of those was seen as the most ethical and moral of trades. And where it was conducted with the greatest of mutual respect and admiration.

I have been with professional ladies who both respected what they did and who they did it with. They demanded respect of themselves and what they did. They wouldn't be with a guy who thought that what they were doing was so evil and wrong. A big part of the problem is men engaging in the sex for money at the same time they look down at it as something evil.

An example I often give is that if we had the Mother Teresa House of Sensual Love, we would not be talking about it as a dirty harmful violent activity. It would be a place of spiritual healing for both provider and receiver.
In some other world sex for money could be seen as one of the highest occupations and most wise of purchases. How crazy is it to make purchase of loving touch and sharing illegal? How crazy is it that our culture makes nurturing either criminal or makes it a violent and ugly activity and demeaning activity.

Money for sex is not bad by itself. Its what we make it that is the problem. Why do we make sex a dirty thing, an area of violence or disrespect? Our culture making sex a "dirty" thing is part of the reason that prostitution is so contaminated. Our culture would make "love" for hire also illegal? If we accepted sexuality as something which is good and spiritual and healthy then it wouldn't sink to the gutter. If we make it a dirty evil thing, then is it any wonder that it sinks to the gutter? And to say its only a good thing if it happens under special circumstances such as marriage, and is evil otherwise, then we are condemning it to the gutter and gutter like things.

Why is buying an $80,000 car on 82nd street considered a good thing while two people exchanging money for nurturing and sensuality and loving touch criminal? If car buying became connected with violence and criminality then would we say car buying is evil?

Another thing that doesn't get said is that sex for money is wrong but all the other trades for sex are alright? Sex is on of the greatest "currency" being exchanged in our culture. That is a problem. People are too often exchanging sex for security, permanent homes, children, etc etc. So called prostitutes are the most honest of women who are at least being clear that they are exchanging sex for money. Most other women are offering sex in exchange for many things without being honest about it. If I give up half of my worldly possessions then maybe I can have some sexuality?

Another unsaid issue is that if our culture made sexuality much more accessible then people would be less motivated to purchase it. Our culture does not provide enough sexuality for the nature of our species. Sex is healthy and the world needs more of it. Not just talk about it and using it to market stuff. Humans are fundamentally sexual.

Making sex for money a crime or a sin is a terrible flaw in our culture and our minds and hearts.

But such thoughts step on lots of toes................ and step on lots of power and control issues and money...
David

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context