Archive for the ‘biology sex’ Category

Should American Military Employ “Comfort Women”?

June 11, 2017

“Make love not war” was a popular slogan in the late sixties.   Soldiers in many wars  have found that “making love” is a way to forget the realities of war.

Sex and war have been connected since the first time men from one village attacked another village to kidnap women.    Invading armies often have a problem with soldiers sexually assaulting local  women.
American military forces have an ongoing problem with male personnel sexually assaulting female personnel.

Although genes don’t control human behavior the way genes control the behavior of other animals,  genes do influence human behavior.    It may be significant that in species in which  males may fight each other to the death, the fighting is over acquisition of females.

During World  War II Japan decided to try to  prevent the rape problem by hiring women  to serve as “comfort women” who would provide sexual services for Japanese soldiers.   The size of the Japanese military hampered the effort to have an all volunteer unit.  Japan dealt with this situation by conscripting  women in the countries Japan conquered.  The controversy over the practice continues to  hamper relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea.

Although I would not advocate the use of “comfort women”, I recognize “comfort women”  could provide an option for reducing rapes by male personnel.

Women providing sexual services would probably have a military job title like “personal therapist”.  The men they provide services to would be officially listed as “patients” and the “treatment” they receive would have the same privacy protection as other medical treatment.  Patients would have to pass some basic physical exam to make sure they don’t have contagious diseases or medical conditions that sexual activity might affect.   Therapists  would inform patients that a doctor or nurse might monitor their treatment by video.  Any monitoring  would be for quality control as well as to protect the therapists.   There are rare cases in which even young seemingly healthy athletes have heart attacks during strenuous activity because of undetected heart conditions.

Therapists  would receive  training as counselors and be expected  to watch for problems like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder so men could  receive treatment as early as possible.
.
Outside  the building where the services are provided therapists would wear the same uniforms as other female personnel during the time when they are expected to be in uniform.     To guarantee personal privacy their living quarters would be separate from where the work area even if the living quarters are in the same building.    Therapists would receive hazardous duty pay because of the disease risk.   They would have a clothing allowance for their “work clothes”.

I realize that some people will question  having the military encourage what they consider an immoral practice.   I would ask these people if they  consider war a more moral activity than making love.   What many ignore is that prostitution is a business relationship rather than a personal relationship.   Although some prostitutes enjoy their work,  they don’t become involved with their clients.  The “personal therapists” I’m proposing would be providing a therapeutic service to those who are asked to risk their lives for their fellow Americans.  How can that be immoral?

Part of the rape problem is the failure of   American culture to teach men that they should learn to control their sexual nature.  Instead American culture encourages men to expect women to serve their sexual desires.   Unfortunately it isn’t practical for the military to change men’s sexual attitudes.   The most practical alternative is to employ women whose profession involves serving men’s sexual needs.

Reactionary Justices Resurrect Plessy v. Ferguson Attitude

July 28, 2016

On June 27, in the worst ruling since Plessy v. Ferguson five white Supreme Court Justices told the State of Texas it had to ignore the 14th Amendment requirement to provide “equal protection of the laws”.

The ruling was even worse than Plessy. Plessy merely allowed states to enact Jim Crow segregation laws. Justice Stephen Breyer’s opinion in Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt requires the state of Texas to allow continued operation of Jane Crow health facilities. A Jane Crow facility provides health care to black women but doesn’t have to meet the same high standards as facilities that treat white men.

Abortion surgery involves the removal of a significant sized biomass from deep inside a woman’s body much like cancer surgery does. The Texas law requires facilities performing abortion surgery on women to meet standards for surgical facilities that treat white men. Women occasionally die from carelessly performed abortion surgery including Tanya Reaves who bled to death after an abortion at an unlicensed Jane Crow facility in Chicago or Cree Erwin who recently died in Battle Creek, Michigan, after an abortion at an as yet unidentified facility.

Justice Breyer’s reasoning is consistent with the type of reasoning used by justices in the late 19th Century. He falsely claims that the law places a burden on those seeking abortions. The law doesn’t restrict patients from seeking abortions. The law merely forces those organizations that want to get money from performing abortions to spend enough money to maximize patient safety. The law requires abortion facilities to function like 21st Century medical facilities instead of mid-20th Century abortion mills. The law doesn’t restrict anyone’s “right” to an abortion. The law merely forces organizations performing abortions to spend more money on patient safety even if that reduces the amount of money available for the salaries of doctors and patients.

Breyer’s reasoning is comparable to late 19th Century Court rulings that prevented states from protecting workers from predatory employers. The Court claimed that such laws interfered with workers’ freedom of contract.

The justices who agreed with Breyer are similar to the justices who allowed Jim Crow segregation laws to remain in effect for 60 years. The justices during the Jim Crow era simply ignored the fact that the facilities provided for blacks were inferior. I don’t know whether they intended to be racists, but for all practical purposes they were. I don’t know if the justices who overturned the Texas law which would have eliminated substandard Jane Crow facilities intend to be racists, but they are.

Wolves in Women’s Clothing

June 1, 2016

A recent “Charlotte Observer” editorial repeats  common ignorance about efforts to protect the sexual privacy of women.    “Yes, the thought of male genitalia in girls’ locker rooms – and vice versa – might be distressing to some. But the battle for equality has always been in part about overcoming discomfort – with blacks sharing facilities, with gays sharing marriage – then realizing that it was not nearly so awful as some people imagined.”

The “Observer’s” editorial board apparently views the facts of life as they might be resented on  the “Brady Bunch” instead of on a cop show.   A woman has as much a right to be distressed if a male stranger exposes his genitals to her as a black man would if a white man showed him a hangman’s noose.

We human males are sexual predators by our animal nature.  Most of us learn when we are young that females have the right to decide if they want a physical relationship.  A man cannot knock a woman in the head with a club and drag her into his cave.  If he wants a physical relationship with a woman he must woo her with words, candy, flowers, etc.. Or, he can purchase a temporary relationship with a member of the world’s “oldest profession”.

Unfortunately, some men never learn this.   Like wolves they think any female is a potential sexual conquest.   These animals use their “junk” [to borrow David Letterman’s term] as a sexual assault weapon much like  others use a knife or a gun.  Doctors can sometimes  heal the physical scars caused by a knife or gun, but the psychological scars caused by a sexual assault can last a lifetime.    A man who shows his junk to a woman who hasn’t agreed to a physical relationship is threatening her well being  just like someone who threatens her with a knife or gun.

Women  cannot read men’s minds.  A woman in a restroom has no way of knowing in  advance if a man dressed as a woman is a harmless transsexual or a vicious wolf in women’s clothing.

Contrary to the opinion   to the opinion of the “Observer” editorial, differences in skin color are not the same as sexual differences.   A white person cannot get black skin by touching a black person, but a man can force his DNA into a woman and possibly get her  pregnant.

Do Heterosexuals Have Any Rights?

May 22, 2016

The current assault on women’s right to privacy in public restrooms implies that only those born with Gender Identity Disorder have any personal rights. GIDites believe that people with male anatomies who are dressed as women should be able to use restrooms designated for people with female anatomies. Women are justifiably concerned that sexual predators can take advantage of this situation and dress as women to gain access to women’s restrooms. Depriving women of their right to sexual privacy to accommodate men with a mental abnormality makes women second class citizens.

The GIDites claim to be harmless, but are actually Trojan horses who are creating opportunities for sexual predators who wish to deprive women of their sexual privacy.

Psychologists first used the term “Gender Identity Disorder” to describe persons who believed they had a brain of one sex trapped in the body of the other (transsexuals). Recent research using functional
MRI’s indicates that transsexuals really do have a brain of one sex in the body of the other sex. This research indicates that those who consider themselves “homosexuals” have this same birth defect but don’t recognize their condition. “Transvestites” are males who like to dress as females. It’s unclear if this desire involves a brain defect. I’m not aware of a term for females who like to dress as males.

GIDites claim that transsexuals and transvestites might be attacked if they used a men’s restroom while dressed as women. GIDites seem incapable of understanding that sexual predators occasionally dress as women and enter women’s restrooms in search of prey. If GIDites can enter women’s restrooms dressed as women then so can sexual predators. Doctors can use an MRI to determine if a person is a transsexual, but there is no test to determine if someone is a transvestite. Some sexual predators have taken advantage of this situation to gain access to potential victims.

GIDites reject a compromise that would provide the option of individual user restrooms for men dressed as women who don’t want to use a men’s restroom. Single user, or family, restrooms would help solve other problems. Parents are sometimes concerned about having a child of the opposite sex use a public restroom because they cannot be sure who will be in there.

A single user restroom would provide a safe place for a child to go. Public schools should switch to single user restrooms for all students. A poll indicates 43% of students fear harassment in restrooms.

Some adults might welcome the possibility of using a “private” restroom. For example, some have medical conditions that require them to use diapers or similar products. The women’s restrooms I used to clean had small trash receptacles for feminine hygiene products but I don’t know if all women’s restrooms have them. Men’s restrooms generally don’t have them so there is the potential for embarrassment when disposing of such products. The availability of single user restrooms would allow government to prohibit sexual predators, particularly those who prey on children, from using communal restrooms.

Government could eliminate the problem for transsexuals by having Obamacare cover sex change operations. Being born with a brain of one sex and the body of the other is a birth defect and surgery to put the body on the same sexual page as the brain is corrective surgery.

There can be no justification for increasing the risk of rape so that some men can dress up as women. Alternatives are available so such men can access a restroom. The potential cost to rape victims is too great to provide such men access to the same restrooms as women.

Rape can be an extremely traumatic event for women 31% of rape survivors have problems with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which is sometimes a problem for men who have been in extreme military combat. 13% of rape survivors attempt suicide and many turn to drugs or alcohol to escape the memory. 26.6% of women with bulimia nervosa reported they had been raped.

Those who want men dressed as women to have access to women’s restrooms obviously have no respect for a woman’s right to sexual privacy or safety. Congress should impeach any federal official who attempts to deprive women of their right to sexual privacy and increase the risk of sexual assault.

Donald Trump’s Abortion Answer Wasn’t Wrong, the Question Was

April 7, 2016

Donald Trump was correct when he said a woman who had an outlawed abortion would likely be punished. However, the most likely way of ending abortions would be through regulation of those providing medical treatment. Chris Matthews question implied that abortion would become a criminal offense. In that case the woman as a participant in the “crime” would be subject to prosecution probably as an accessory, an accomplice or a “co-conspirator”. The courts might not allow prosecution unless the woman was potentially subject to prosecution. In such a legal environment prosecutors might use the offering of immunity from prosecution to abortion recipients in exchange for testimony against the abortion provider.

In American medicine medical procedures that can pose a treat to health generally have to be approved by government. The most likely way to prohibit abortions would be through prohibiting specific medical procedures. This approach at the federal level wouldn’t necessarily require congressional action because the executive branch has authority to prohibit medical procedures.

The deaths associated with the most popular form of abortion in which the doctor basically pokes around in the woman to pull out the baby, sometimes in pieces, could justify prohibiting the procedures on the grounds that it poses too significant a threat to the woman’s health. The procedure sometimes causes fatal bleeding because the doctor cannot tell if he has caused bleeding. There is an alternative procedure available for late term pregnancies which poses less of a threat. Removing the baby using a cesarean section allows the doctor to easily monitor the situation and catch any source of bleeding. Requiring use of this procedure for premature ending of a pregnancy would have the benefit of the child being removed alive. This approach to ending a late term pregnancy should give both sides what they want. The woman would be allowed to end her pregnancy and the child would be born alive.

Powerful Women Have Babies – Powerless Women Get Abortions

March 11, 2016

Contrary to the claim of abortion advocates, abortions don’t empower women.  Abortions disempower women.

Humans are the most powerful creatures on earth.   The most powerful humans are the ones who can make new humans.   A pregnant woman is demonstrating her  power to make a human being.  An abortion stops that power from continuing.

Some people think they are being powerful when they kill others or destroy property.   However,  those actions don’t require much power.  It doesn’t take much power to pull a trigger or throw a rock through a window.  The real power is making [giving birth to] the person who is killed or making or installing a window.

It takes power to finish a job.  Quitting doesn’t require any power, but may be an admission that the person lacks the necessary power to complete the task.

People often resort to violence when they lack the mental “power”, or ability, to deal with personal conflicts.   If their world starts to collapse, they start shooting people.  Women who choose abortions are indicating they lack the mental strength or power to continue a pregnancy.  They are saying they are powerless rather than powerful.

Taliban Like Attitudes in American South

January 13, 2016

The world cringed when the Taliban destroyed ancient <a href=”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1326063/After-1700-years-Buddhas-fall-to-Taliban-dynamite.html”>Buddhist Statues</a> in Afghanistan.  The Taliban destroyed the historic artifacts because Buddhist statues represented something the Taliban considered immoral.  They didn’t want people to be reminded that people in the region had at one time been involved in something that was no longer considered morally acceptable.   Buddhist statues were not “politically correct” under the Taliban’s view of the Muslim religion.  Allowing the statues to stay advertised that Afghans had once behaved in what the Taliban regarded as an immoral fashion.  Recent reports claim that <a href=”http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/world/middleeast/isis-destroys-artifacts-palmyra-syria-iraq.html?_r=0″>ISIS</a&gt; may be doing the same thing to historic artifacts where they are operating.

People in New Orleans, La., and other southern cities want to remove <a href=”http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/01/city_preparing_to_remove_confe.html”>statues of men</a> who had the audacity to not have the same moral values people have today.   Many southerners prior to the Civil War accepted the African and Muslim moral value that it was acceptable for one person  to own others.   Africans had been  buying, selling and owning each other for thousands of years and they had no problem with selling their fellow  Africans to Europeans like they had been selling their fellow Africans to people in the Middle East.

The men whose statues are the subject of controversy in New Orleans were born into a society that had long accepted slavery.   They thought they had no other option for recruiting workers for their plantations because people wouldn’t voluntarily do such work.   As far as they knew, plantations had always been worked by slaves.  They were not evil men.  They simply lacked the ability to “think outside the box” of slavery.

Instead of trying to censor history, southern cities should use the Civil War as an example of what can happen when politicians cannot find ways to resolve their differences.  Slavery had caused the United States to become two different nations with different economic needs and perspectives.   Politicians from the north and the south were so stuck in their own little worlds that they couldn’t consider the  needs of the other part of the country.

About the only thing the white people who controlled both the northern and southern states could agree on was that they both supported the myth that black people were inferior to white people.   Northern whites didn’t want slavery in their states because they were bigots who hated the people who were held as slaves.

As the great grandson of a Union soldier I have never really understood why southerners would want to erect statues of losers.   I doubt that the statues were erected because without the actions of men like Jefferson Davis and Gen. Robert E. Lee slavery would likely have continued for decades. The decision by the southern states to leave the Union provoked northern politicians into acting against slavery.  Gen. Lee’s ability to prolong the war even convinced northern politicians to guarantee the freed slaves and other blacks equal rights that many northern states denied to their black residents

Homosexuality Involves a Treatable Birth Defect

May 2, 2015

Various studies in the last decade by Dr. Ivanka Savic of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, indicate that people who consider themselves homosexuals actually have the body of one sex and the brain of the other which is the definition of transsexuals. Thus homosexuals have a treatable birth defect.

Changing the body’s anatomical sex would put the brain and the body on the same sexual page and allow individuals to lead a relatively normal life instead of having to live in a kind of sexual purgatory. .It may come as a surprise to some Christians that the Bible approves of sex change operations. Jesus said in Matthew 18: 9 “If thine eye offend thee pluck it out….” Or in other words if a defect in the body causes behavior that might be considered sinful the body should be changed so it won’t cause “sin”.

The only difference between homosexuals and transsexuals is that transsexuals are perceptive enough to understand their situation. Homosexuals apparently don’t understand that the brain, rather than the body, determines human sexuality. The brain is the most important human sex organ. Male bodies aren’t attracted to female bodies. Male brains are. Female brains are attracted to male bodies. If the brain of a person with a male body is attracted to male bodies it’s because the brain is female.

Sexual chemicals called pheromones control the sexual behavior of other animals. Genetic programming may control how or when an animal responds sexually. A male dog who smells a female dog in heat will try to get to her.

Humans respond to visual and audio cues which are compared in the brain to what the individual considers sexually attractive. Some humans are primarily interested in physical characteristics. Others may be more interested in intelligence or having similar interests in music or food. What is considered attractive varies from one person to another. For example, some men like slender women. Other men prefer women who are extra large and will purchase pornography featuring such women.

Scientists have known for many years that men’s and women’s brains have different structures and deal with some situations differently. A growing body of research indicates that homosexuals have a brain of one sex and a body of the other.

Chemicals called pheromones govern the sexual behavior of most animals. Pheromones may be necessary for some animals to know when to have sex and which other members of their species are the opposite sex. The existence of these chemicals in humans has been a controversial subject for years. Humans don’t need pheromones to activate their sexual programming. Humans can learn about sex and be sexually aroused by reading books or watching tv. Even if humans don’t need pheromones they can be affected by them.

One study that tracked blood flow in the brain indicates that two suspected human pheromones have a different impact on the brain activity of men and women and there is a difference between the way heterosexual and homosexual men respond. Scientists say that a stimulus “lights up” the area of the brain responds to the stimulus. The study indicated that an estrogen like chemical from women’s urine lighted up an area of hypothalamus in heterosexual men, but lighted up the general smell interpreting regions of the brains of women and homosexual men.

A testosterone derivative from men’s sweat had the opposite effect. It lighted up the hypothalamus in women and homosexual men, but the smell related region of heterosexual men A subsequent study of homosexual woman indicated their responses measured by PET scans were similar, but not identical to heterosexual men.

A study
of the structure of brains using PET scans and MRI’s indicated the brains of heterosexual women were the same as those of homosexual men. The brains of homosexual women and heterosexual men were the same.

Most of us were told in school that if a baby gets a “Y” chromosome from its father it will develop as a male. If the baby gets an “X” chromosome from its father it will develop as a female.

However, reality isn’t that simple. In about 1 in 30,000 births a baby with an “XY” combination of chromosomes will develop a female anatomy in what is called Swyer syndrome. Individuals with this condition have external female genitalia along with a normal uterus and Fallopian tubes, but lack functional gonads (ovaries or testes). They cannot produce eggs, but may become pregnant with an implanted embryo. The development occurs because a defective gene fails to produce a functioning version of the protein that is needed for development of male characteristics

In about 1 in 20,000 – 25,000 births a baby with an “XX” combination will develop a male anatomy. Individuals with this condition can have normal sexual relations, but do not produce viable sperm.

The genes that control the development of the brain differ from the genes that control the development of other parts of the body. It shouldn’t be surprising that a defect in one or more genes that affect development of the brain could cause the brain to develop according to a different sexual “blueprint” from the one that controls development of the body.

Scientific research indicates that the sexual differentiation of the brain begins before sex hormones play a role in development. A rare naturally occurring zebra finch is half male and half female. One side of the body has male plumage, sex organs and brains and the other has female plumage sex organs and brains. This dual development cannot be explained by sex hormones.

Doctors don’t know how to change the sexual functioning of the brain, but they can change anatomical sex characteristics. Currently the operation to transform a man into a woman is more effective than the operation to change a woman into a man. Most homosexuals would need some psychological assistance because they don’t understand they are transsexuals. Psychological treatments alone cannot turn a transsexual/homosexual into a heterosexual. The body has to be changed.

The fact that sex change operations correct a birth defect means that such operations are corrective surgery which should possibly be covered by health insurance particularly in children. It would seem that both the British and American health insurance programs should cover this corrective operation. Having the brain and the body on the same sexual page would seem to have major mental health benefits.

NBA Action More Racist than Sterling’s Statements

May 28, 2014

\
The NBA has criticized L.A. Clipper owner Donald Sterling for his statements that many regard as racist. However, shortly after the recording of his conversation became public the NBA took an action that was a racist insult to the black players of the L.A. Clippers. The NBA offered to make a “grief counselor” available to the Clippers.

Grief counselors are often provided to children to help them cope with the death of a classmate. The NBA commissioner’s office essentially was indicating that it believed the Clippers were such immature children that a minor questionable statement was the emotional equivalent of a death. I can understand the black players being upset by Sterling’s statement, but not grieving about the statement.

Discussion of Sterling’s comment to V. Stiviano about attending games with black athletes has focused on what was said and ignored the situation itself. His decision to order her not to attend games with black athletes is consistent with the behavior of a man who is having trouble getting a daughter or granddaughter to follow his advice.

He doesn’t explain his reasoning very well, a common occurrence when a man tries to offer dating advice to someone young enough to be his granddaughter. He appears have been attempting to warn her of the sexist stereotype image of NBA players, especially black players, that comics have encouraged with jokes about NBA players leaving children all over the country. I don’t know the attitudes of L.A. residents, but, putting it bluntly, Sterling is suggesting that people will think she’s just some kind of a sex toy if she attends a game with black athletes, especially admitted lothario Magic Johnson. He seems to have been attempting to warn her of the attitudes of others rather than talking about his own attitudes.

Johnson along with the late Wilt Chamberlain are largely responsible for creating the [probably exaggerated] image that NBA players are frogs rather than princes. A frog jumps from bed to bed. A prince is devoted to his princess. Chamberlain claimed to have sex with over 20,000 women. Johnson claimed he once had 300- 500 sex partners per year.

A passage from a book by Jerry West says: “That November, as a new season was set to open, Magic Johnson announced to the world that he was HIV positive, a stunning event that brought revelations about the climate of sexual frivolity around the Lakers. Johnson admitted he had been sleeping with 300-500 people a year. The team’s locker room, and its sauna, had been a place where the star and other players had entertained women, even right after games. Johnson would retire to the sauna after a game, have sex, then put on a robe and return to the locker room for his post-game media interviews. How far had the team gone in condoning such questionable behavior? ‘I cared,’ West said in his interviews for this book. ‘I did things for those guys. It was ridiculous, some of the things I did for those guys. If the public knew they’d be outraged. It was a pretty crazy period for us.’”

If NBA teams, including the Clippers, still allow this behavior it would have provided part of the motivation for Sterling’s warning to Stiviano.

a href=”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobe_Bryant_sexual_assault_case”>Kobe Bryant was arrested for rape in 2003 when he misinterpreted a visit by a female hotel employee and thought she was there for sex like the other women he normally attracted.

After my first post on this s subject I received an email about Rev. Russ Weaver’s sermon titled “Easily Offended” that he delivered that week on Cowboy Church. Weaver’s most important point is that a person can choose to be a “Victim” who lets himself be offended or a “Victor” who doesn’t allow someone to control him with mere words. I’ll remind readers that I’m a Vietnam Vet so I know what it’s like to be called names.

NBA and Media Beat Up Man Fighting Cancer

May 7, 2014

Did the NBA in effect punish L.A. Clippers 80 year old owner Donald Sterling because he is fighting prostate cancer?

The NBA has voted to force L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling to sell his team because of a secret recording in which he told his black girl friend he didn’t want her to be seen in public, such as at Clippers games, with black men such as former basketball star Magic Johnson. He said he didn’t mind her going to bed with such men. He just didn’t want her to be in public with them.
I don’t know the specifics of the current status of Sterling’s prostate cancer, but it is possible his condition or treatment caused his comments to his girl friend V. Stiviano. I don’t know if Sterling was undergoing chemotherapy at the time of his comments or whether the condition known as “chemo brain” might have affected his statement.

Prostate cancer can adversely affect a man’s sexual abilities which could be particularly frustrating for a man who associates with an attractive young woman. NBA players have a reputation, at least among some comics, of being very sexually active. This reputation is due in part to former players such as Magic Johnson bragging about their sexual activities. I suspect that the reputation is exaggerated and based in part on racist beliefs about black men, but Sterling could have been especially frustrated seeing Stiviano with men whom he believed could easily do what he might be unable to do because of his cancer.

We aren’t always consciously aware of why we feel a certain way or say certain things. The reasons may be locked in our subconscious. People sometimes hire professionals like tv’s Dr. Phil to learn why they feel the way they do. Sterling may not have been consciously aware of why he said what he did to Stiviano and may have a mental block that prevents him from understanding why some people are upset by the statement.

Sterling’s statement to Stiviano sounds more like frustration and jealousy than racism. He said he didn’t mind her being with black men so long as he didn’t see her with them. He was saying he didn’t want her reminding him that someone else might be able to satisfy her in ways he would like to but cannot because of his cancer. He was probably too embarrassed to talk about his frustration to Stiviano directly. He was asking her in an intimate conversation to not do something that hurt him without explaining why that action hurt him.

The NBA’s action against Sterling might be justifiable if he had made a public statement. However, the NBA had no business punishing Sterling for an intimate statement made to a close personal friend that may have been misrepresented by sensation seeking journalists who think everybody is as motivated by so-called “racial” differences as they are. It is the media that continues to push the myth that differences in skin color constitute racial differences by referring to Americans of different complexions as being of different races.

Stress can cause all of us to say things we don’t really mean. We may even say things that hurt those we would not think of hurting in normal circumstances. Fighting cancer can be an extremely stressful situation.

Many of us were raised to believe that you shouldn’t kick a man when he is down. America’s media sharks seem to believe that is the best time to attack because the victim is less able to defend himself.

It would serve the NBA right if cancer survivors and those currently fighting cancer would boycott the NBA for mistreating a cancer patient.