Massacres and sympathy

Everyone has heard of the tragedy that happened at Virginia Tech this week. Most of the country felt and expressed sympathy to the murdered students and their friends and family. What most people probably did not hear about was the 170 people killed in Baghdad today. Little, if any, sorrow or sympathy was extended to the victims and their families in Baghdad by the rest of the world. Why is this the case? I'm not attempting to make people feel guilty about their sorrow for one tragedy over another, I'm simply curious as to why one event evokes emotions instead of another. Are we simply desensitized to the murders in Iraq? Is it because what happens in Iraq effects us less then what happens on a campus in Virginia? I don't remember much public condolences to the victims of the 2006 Mumbia train bombings yet the train bombings in Madrid in 2004 generated much sympathy. The number of dead were about the same, what caused the different responses? Is it because America has more shared cultural traits with Spain than India? One thing that I can be certain of is that when children are killed, emotions will be raised. The Columbine and Beslan school massacres both received much media attention and public condolences.

Sex, condoms and reproduction rights.

First, an interesting article in the NYTimes about sexuality and sexual desire. There's also another one that is, to put it frankly, about old peoples libidos. I found it refreshing that a major newspaper like the Times was pretty open about this kind of thing.

Even more surprising is New York City's new condom distribution plan. Basically, New York City has been giving out free condoms. Five million have been distributed so far. They've even got two short animations about the condoms (don't worry, the link is safe for work). The best part about the whole thing? Their slogan: "New York, we've got you covered." A major newspaper being explicit about sex and sexuality is one thing, a government agency being explicit and risque about it is even more amazing!

This isn't to say that all inhibitions about sex are bad. These inhibitions were sorely missed in the case where four middle school children had sex in a classroom while the teacher was out of the room. I'm not sure how something like this could happen. Is it glorification of sex in pop culture? Bad parenting? Declining sexual inhibitions?

Finally there is the case of an infertile woman* in Britain who is not allowed to use her frozen embryos that were inseminated by her partner. The man withdrew his consent to use the embryos because he did not want the emotional or financial burden of having someone raise his child. I feel sympathetic toward this woman, but I do think the court made the right decision.

Thoughts? Opinions? Comments?

*You might need a subscription to The Economist to read that article.

Silly movies

After a month of no posts (I was sick, had a play, had work), I know I should have something more meaningful than a link to a trailer for the new Die Hard movie and I actually did until I saw this. I'm very happy that at least one eighties action star looks like he can still be cool. Good ol' Bruce Willis. Unfortunately, Harrison Ford and Sylvester Stallone failed to do remain awesome in action movies. Do we really need another Indiana Jones movie with Harrison Ford*? Do we really need another Rambo movie? Did we need the first Rambo movie? I believe the answer to be no. Judging by the trailer, it looks like we do need another Die Hard movie.

I'll try to post something meaningful and intellectual tomorrow.

*What we really need is a new Indiana Jones movie with Nathan Fillion.