Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 189 posts

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#131

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

cheschire wrote: post #75
voxl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it communicates maliciousness not idiocy

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

I've never understood why this is taken seriously. Law has clear concepts of bad faith and mens rea, and this implies they're irrelevant.

Of course it's unproductive to start from assumptions of bad faith, which is a fair point. Bad faith requires evidence of intent, stupidity doesn't.

But there are still situations where bad faith is a reasonable hypothesis to test. And some negative actors are clever enough to operate deliberately inside a zone of plausible deniability.

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#132

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

bobthepanda wrote: post #24
wahern wrote: post #17

> the clitoris did not even make it into standard anatomy textbooks until the 38th edition of Gray’s Anatomy was published in 1995. This seemed surprising, as it hews too close to an annoying meme in feminism and history generally, that people in prior eras were idiots. And it turns out to be wrong. The clitoris was in Gray's Anatomy until 1947, when it was removed by the editor Charles Goss for the 25th edition. See…

There's a fair amount of modern/modernist-era thinking about bending the chaos of humanity to meet rigid ideal social structures, from about the late nineteenth to late twentieth century. And to be clear, the chaos of the early industrial period led to marked declines in public health, sanitation and the like. Some of these innovations worked reasonably well (the standardization of healthcare and schooling), some of…

The left are accused of this far more often than the right are, even though the right own think tanks like Heritage, mega churches,mega news channels like Fox, large parts of academia (esp. economics and MBA culture), most of the lobbying machinery, and most of the bot farms.

While I think the suggestion - popular with left wing academics - that society can be engineered towards perfect fairness from a blank slate is obvious nonsense, it's also true there have been decades of active social engineering towards other ends which were deliberate, organised, and generously funded, and have become so pervasive they're experienced as constant background noise.

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#133

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

pfych wrote: post #110
pembrook wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> What the hell has happened to HN? Am I speaking with some Russian bot farm trying to breed political radicalization? Sadly not - check sentiment on X around these topics, heritage foundation etc are pushing all these topics right now

Hegseth has blocked the creation of four one star generals because the unfortunate candidates happen to be women and/or black.

This isn't a hypothetical or imaginary problem. At all.

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#134

Post by belorn »

Jarwain wrote: post #121
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, blacklist and whitelist are far superior because blacklist is a normal English word . It isn't even a term of art, programmers just adopted a word that already existed in the English language (and used whitelist by way of analogy). The argument that the new terms are better holds no water whatsoever. The old terms were superior.

How is "allowlist" or "denylist" not more clear to, say, someone for whom English is a second language? Sure blacklist was already an English word, but it's not necessarily _common_, and the distinction between blacklist and whitelist is kinda arbitrary. If you'd like to explain Why the word means what it does I'd love to hear it Allowlist and denylist are clearer, in that the meaning is in more clear alignment with…

To me (where English is a second language), Allowlist and denylist seem unclearer. Is it a block list, a exclude list, or a permission list? Allow/deny would lead me to the last one, as in authenticate users who has some permissions but not others.

Blacklist and whitelist would be closer to include/exclude, so the replacement would be a includelist and excludelist, or include/exclude as shorthand.

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#135

Post by [deleted] »

pembrook wrote: post #102
wahern wrote: post #17

> the clitoris did not even make it into standard anatomy textbooks until the 38th edition of Gray’s Anatomy was published in 1995. This seemed surprising, as it hews too close to an annoying meme in feminism and history generally, that people in prior eras were idiots. And it turns out to be wrong. The clitoris was in Gray's Anatomy until 1947, when it was removed by the editor Charles Goss for the 25th edition. See…

> The clitoris was in Gray's Anatomy until 1947, when it was removed by the editor Charles Gross for the 25th edition. This is also false [1]. One guy didn't wake up one day in 1947 and decide to remove all references to the clitoris in Gray's anatomy. It's yet another version of the same internet myth, the goal being to caricature people in the past as cartoonishly evil and misogynistic. Please never use Huffington…

[deleted]

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#136

Post by Mordisquitos »

Jean-Papoulos wrote: post #127
Mordisquitos wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a dumb question. The shortest (and at a glance unsatisfactory) answer is because it works, and therefore it evolved that way. Going in detail, first consider that for a feature to be evolutionarily selected for two things have to be true: 1. It must increase the fitness of the organism that carries it, i.e. the likelihood of its carrier having descendants as compared to non-carriers ( or be a side effect of anoth…

>1. It must increase the fitness of the organism that carries it, i.e. the likelihood of its carrier having descendants as compared to non-carriers This isn't necessarily true. If you map out changes through the history of species, you'll find no significant changes but a lot of diversity for long periods, followed by big changes and low diversity for a short period. That's because during "abundant" times, the popula…

What you say is correct, and that is why I was referring specifically for what's necessary for "features" (the term I used for "phenotypes" to make it more HN) to become ubiquitous. It is a general rule of thumb in evolutionary biology that the more diversity is observed in a given population for a particular phenotype (e.g. hair colour, height, blood group, etc.) the less relevant it is for fitness within its observed range. When a phenotype is strongly selected for in a given population (e.g. bipedalism, opposable thumbs, the ability to speak) it soon becomes dominant and there is much less diversity.

As to your example about, for instance, neck length during abundant times, that follows the same rule: during abundant times neck length simply does not matter for fitness, therefore (all else being equal) there can be phenotypic diversity in the population.

One caveat though as to how a given phenotype may become ubiquitous without favourable selection is of course genetic drift[0], given a small enough population which is isolated for a long enough timeframe. Eventually that phenotype may become selectively "advantageous" inasmuch as it is no longer compatible with alternatives, and individuals from the isolated population who this phenotype can no longer have successful offspring with individuals of a different phenotype, resulting in speciation. That's what I meant with regards to a "make nerves on important places generate more pleasure/pain in brain" genotype being incompatible with a "have more nerves on important places" one. A hypothetical hybrid creature would be a mess.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#137

Post by Jarwain »

belorn wrote: post #134
Jarwain wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is "allowlist" or "denylist" not more clear to, say, someone for whom English is a second language? Sure blacklist was already an English word, but it's not necessarily _common_, and the distinction between blacklist and whitelist is kinda arbitrary. If you'd like to explain Why the word means what it does I'd love to hear it Allowlist and denylist are clearer, in that the meaning is in more clear alignment with…

To me (where English is a second language), Allowlist and denylist seem unclearer. Is it a block list, a exclude list, or a permission list? Allow/deny would lead me to the last one, as in authenticate users who has some permissions but not others. Blacklist and whitelist would be closer to include/exclude, so the replacement would be a includelist and excludelist, or include/exclude as shorthand.

That's fair!

I feel like a permission list is kind of a superset of a block list and an exclude list. Or they're all different perspectives/solutions to the same kind of problem, that a permission list is the more generalizable solution for.

Or it's a way of framing the problem that doesn't embed the "exclusion" idea in the naming.

And it kinda bridges over to the idea of Access Control Lists a bit better?

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#138

Post by pron »

dotancohen wrote: post #115
pron wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhat on a tangent, but when people talk about offensive language in the context of cultural criticism they don't mean terms that cause the people who hear them to be offended but things that may diminish the value of some people in the eyes of the people who hear them. I.e. something is offensive, in this sense, to some group X not if people in group X are offended when they themselves are exposed to it but if pe…

My grandfather was a slave - he passed in 2007. I have no objection to the term master, nor have I heard anybody ever who was affected by actual slavery to take offence to the term. I remember much debate about this, and not once was an actual affected person mentioned who took offence.

1. My whole point was that it is not about anyone in the affected group taking offence. The question is whether other people can come to devalue people in the affected group. In this context "offensive" doesn't mean taking offence, but devaluing. To take and extreme and controved example, if I tell a subordinate that the women on our team were "diversity hires" who did not deserve to be hired, the harm is not in a woman hearing I said that. It is done even if none of the women on the team ever know I said that. Similarly, it doesn't matter if the women on our team all agreed with that statement and weren't offended by it.

2. I make absolutely no claim about the effectiveness of using or avoiding certain terms even in the relevant context. I'm only saying that people misunderstand what "offensive" means in this context. It means things that may make some people think less of others, whether or not those others know about it or are offended by it.

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#139

Post by pron »

austin-cheney wrote: post #106
pron wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhat on a tangent, but when people talk about offensive language in the context of cultural criticism they don't mean terms that cause the people who hear them to be offended but things that may diminish the value of some people in the eyes of the people who hear them. I.e. something is offensive, in this sense, to some group X not if people in group X are offended when they themselves are exposed to it but if pe…

I cannot own the perspectives and unspoken histories of other people, nor will I try. Trying to do so ultimately only results in shades of self-censorship or poor imitation. Instead I will do my best to balance my language between brevity and specificity while hoping my instructions are clear, direct, and honest for the audience. Everything else is left to chance. I have found over the years, the degree of my communi…

I wasn't trying to suggest how individuals should behave nor claim that language has a large impact on social dynamics in general. I'm merely saying that in the context of cultural criticism the thing that is sometimes referred to as "offensive language" doesn't mean language that may insult or offend the sensiblities of those who hear it but language that may seem to make those who hear it think less of others. I don't know if this is useful or silly, but that is what it means.

Re: Full network of clitoral nerves mapped out for first time

#140

Post by breakingcups »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #83
Shank wrote: post #12

Page 7 [0] of the report seems to indicate that FGM reconstruction actually seems to have negative outcomes post-surgery. I'm surprised by this. I'm also shocked to see how prolific FGM is too (230 million women?!). [0]: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.03.18.712572v1...

> I'm also shocked to see how prolific FGM is too (230 million women?!) And talk to any gyn doc in the west: it's happening among those communities in the west too (but on a lesser scale). In several EU western countries the most common gynelogical surgery act is re-building the hymen (so that the woman can pretend she's a virgin once she marries, often forcibly by her family). You may not have gyn doctors friend but…

> In several EU western countries the most common gynelogical surgery act is re-building the hymen (so that the woman can pretend she's a virgin once she marries, often forcibly by her family).

Can you source that claim?

Post reply on HN