Femonomics reads the internet so you don't have to: Bad research, transgender discrimination, racism, and PowerPoint strategy!

You ask why we're so obsessed with correlation not equaling causation?  Because real researchers whose work impacts real policies are still convinced that it does.  Business Week is reporting that watching R-rated movies causes early drinking.  The researchers surveyed kids on how often they were allowed to watch R-rated movies, and then followed them to see when they (if) they started drinking.  They found that kids who were more frequently allowed to watch R-rated movies were more likely to start drinking early.  Their conclusion?  "We think seeing the adult content actually changes their personality."  Note, that's a quote from the actual researcher, not just a journalist misinterpreting the findings.  Interestingly, they note that R-rated movies have also been tied to "early smoking, sex at a young age, and violent behavior," but it doesn't occur to them that some third factor, such as parental involvement or peer group, could be driving all those relationships.

Elsewhere, some actual decent research, thank god.  Blog Her has a post on new research finding that those who report a "colorblind" ideology are less likely to be bothered by racist images.  The researcher, Brendesha Tynes, showed participants images that depicted racist stereotypes, and asked them to respond as though seeing the images on a friend's facebook page.  Those who considered themselves "colorblind" were less likely to express disapproval of the images and more likely to offer positive or supportive comments.  Additionally, white students were less likely to be bothered by the images.  Tynes believes her research provides evidence that "colorblindness" masks racial differences, and may prevent people from having meaningful conversations about race.

A transgendered veteran who chained herself to the White House fence to protest Don't Ask Don't Tell has reported deplorable treatment at the hands of federal law enforcement.  Autumn Sandeen reports she was called an "impersonator," "shim," and "it," and was accused of lying about her gender, despite being honest the entire time, and imprisoned in a male cell block, putting her safety at risk.  [I am linking to Pandagon because it has the best coverage of this incident. It is a blog run by Amanda Marcotte, who has previously exhibited exceedingly poor judgment.]

Femonomics reads the internet so you don't have to: Don't ask please tell, Sandy's tale of woe, and reality TV roundup

The NYTimes has a piece on a new book featuring photographs of gay men and women in the armed forces, posed with their faces obscured.  Go check out the author's website to see the moving, poignant pictures yourself.  The idea of our nation's soldiers having to cover their faces instead of hold them high (for fear of being discharged, dishonored, and stripped of benefits) just emphasizes to me how much this policy is not at all acceptable.  An Iraq war vet recently chained himself to the White House fence (and was later arrested) to make just that point.

As you've probably heard, a woman has come forward claiming Sandra Bullock's husband, Jesse James, had an affair with her.  Normally I wouldn't rush to believe the rumors, but given that Sandy canceled her scheduled European appearances for "personal reasons" and James has issued an apology, it seems likely at least some portion of the accusations are true. This really kills me, not just because Sandra seems like such a genuinely nice person who was so grateful for the recent accolades coming her way (and issued a heartfelt thank you to her husband each time) and who I just wish could have the chance to savor her little slice of happiness, but also because I know about the inevitable media storyline to follow: "Sanrdra Bullock's marriage collapses as her career reaches new heights.  Maybe there's just no way to have it all," I can already here the press cackling.  For some reason, journalists seem to delight in this arc of public success and private failure, especially when it comes to women who seem to be playing in the big leagues career-wise.  At least on these pages, we won't be drawing any conclusions about how her busy work schedule drove him to seek attention and comfort in another woman's (tattoo-covered) arms.  We'll just say that we're sorry, and hey, she'll always have Oscar.

And in other news two new interesting reality shows are arriving on VH1.  One featuring Jessica Simpson going around the world to try other cultures' beauty rituals, and the other featuring a transsexual makeover squad.  Check out feministing's deconstruction of both here and here.  I know these shows are far from perfect, and will probably end up using their constructs (foreign people doing crazy things!  Ladies who used to be men!) as gimmicks more than once, but nonetheless I find these two shows at least intriguing, as opposed to most of what VH1 and other purveyors of "reality" fare put out.  I say, bravo for pushing the envelope; now try to toe the line. 

Femonomics reads the internet so you don't have to

It turns out, the government could be storing your baby's DNA.  Without asking you.  Apparently most hospitals are required to do routine genetic testing (for certain treatable conditions) on all babies, and then they keep the samples.  Kinda makes the case for home birth, doesn't it?

I am not big on the whole "let's make fun of Republicans" thing, because I don't think it solves anything.  The Daily Kos has no such inhibitions.  They present a poll (done by them) of what self-identified Republicans think on a variety of things.  There are some scary things in there, like the 34% who say they believe birth control is abortion (which they think is murder, and they believe in the death penalty...), but you have to wonder how much of this is simple misinformation.  I'd like to see a breakdown by socioeconomic status and education.  538 breaks down the poll by age, gender, race, and region and finds very few differences, but he doesn't look at socioeconomic status or education.

The NYTimes has a neat Q&A about the coming of 3D TV.  Apparently, your existing set could show 3D, but that wouldn't get you to spend any money, so the companies have a $5000 solution for you instead.  For now, I'll stick with my $18 movie ticket twice a year.

Apparently being a man driving a hot car makes you hotter, but being a woman driving a hot car doesn't matter.  I'm wondering if the problem here is that they tested this with people of average attractiveness?  I know a lot of guys who get bowled over by an already hot woman in a killer ride.

And finally, in DADT (don't ask, don't tell) news, Colin Powell has come out in favor of repealing the policy he helped enact, saying that the culture has changed in the 17 years since the DADT compromise.  Elsewhere, McCain is railing against it, which must be awwwwk-ward for him and Megan, a vocal marriage equality supporter (though I don't know if she's commented specifically on DADT) and Cindy, who recently posed for NoH8.

[Hat tips to Steph and Woodstock]