Jon Rowe’s recent post on homosexuality in the context of the DSM has been deservedly linked by everyone (via Ex-Gay Watch for me). Mike notes that the implications cut both ways: “Those who would today classify homophobia as a mental disorder might want to reconsider.” He’s tacitly referring to this paragraph of Jon’s:

The “regrettable tendency” to which I refer is the (mis)use of the concept of “mental illness” to enforce moral or social norms. Back in Socarides’s day, it was the 1950s style social conservative morality which was “medicalized.” Today it’s PC. Previously, homosexuality and other behaviors which violated “traditional morality” were “mental illnesses.” Today “racism” and “homophobia” are mental illnesses (or at least, some folks within the profession seriously advance this notion). As Pete Townshend put it: “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

On a related but slightly different topic, I always get a charge out of the social conservatives who believe homosexuality is caused by abuse during childhood and/or that gays should go in for “reparative” therapy. These are often the same sorts of people who in general–and, in my view, quite correctly–are highly suspicious of Oprah-style recovered memories of molestation and who in any case believe that adults should get a grip on themselves, stop foisting responsibility for their own character development off on their parents, and carve out a life with the resources they have.

If you’re gay, though–well, then to some people, you must have been sexually abused as a child (even if you have no such memories and know your parents and other elders would never do any such thing). And you’re supposed to consult a helpful therapist to help you riffle through your inner filing cabinet looking for, you know, some incident when you were three and Dad took away your Tonka truck in a fashion that made him seem to be withdrawing from you emotionally (or worse). It’s all very odd.

For those keeping count out of ghoulishness, the number of buildings affected by the Aneha scandal has reached 89:

The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport announced on 30 December that a hotel in Kirishima City, Kagoshima Prefecture, had been newly confirmed as a structure for which architect Hidetsugu Aneha had falsified structural calculations. The number of problem buildings has now reached 89 in 18 prefectures.

This was the first building confirmed as fraudulently certified in Kagoshima Prefecture. The prefectural government had at first reported that there was no falsification, but a new examination demonstrated that the structural calculation documents contained falsifications.

The hotel, the Sun Hotel Kokubun, received its architectural confirmation in November 1999 and has 52% of the minimum standard earthquake resistance. It was reported to be closed for business on 27 December.

A woman and her two children have died at a hot spring resort, likely from inhaling noxious gas:

On 29 December, University of Tokyo tutor Yasushi Matsui (47) of Toshima Ward, Tokyo, was in critical condition and his wife and two sons died at the Doroyu Hot Springs in Yuzawa City, Akita Prefecture; on 30 December, the Yuzawa Station of the Akita Prefectural Police began an investigation into the circumstances of the accident near the Okuyama Inn, where the four were found collapsed close to a snow-covered basin [as in a depression in the ground, not as in a birdbath–SRK].

The Yuzawa Station considers it possible that the family of four inhaled sulfur oxide hydrogen sulfide [Bad transation my fault, sorry; the article did, indeed, say 硫化水素.–SRK] gas that had accumulated in the basin and been poisoned; it is hurrying to establish the cause of death through autopsies of the dead woman and boys.

According to the investigation, the basin has a diameter of 2 meters and a depth of 1.5 meters; it is located about 10 meters from one side of the inn’s parking lot.

I’ve somehow never managed to get to Yellowstone, but I’m assuming toxic gases are a problem at some of its fumaroles and things, too. In Japan when you go to see steam vents and the like in hot spring areas, there are often purposefully scary signs posted that warn you to leave the area immediately if you start feeling funny. They also warn that people with heart conditions and the like should stay away. Unfortunately, the ground has lots of cracks, some small and unnoticeable.

Damn. Atsushi’s sick. In Japan, they use the same word colloquially for what we’d call a cold and for what we’d call the flu, so when someone says 風邪をひく (kaze wo hiku: “catch cold”), you don’t know how serious it actually is until you find out more about the symptoms. Last night on the phone, he said he had a 風邪–which was a warning sign right there. Atsushi always downplays his ailments, in typical Japanese fashion, so he refers to a regular cold as 風邪気味 (kaze-gimi: “a bit of a cold”) rather than 風邪 (“a [full-fledged] cold”), even if he’s pretty stuffed-up and lethargic. In any case, he caught it from his immediate boss, who is apparently in the hospital with an IV drip, so we are not talking about a hot-water-and-lemon-and-brandy-and-try-to-avoid-going-outdoors cold this time around. I hope Atsushi doesn’t get quite that sick, but it’s the end of the year and they’ve been working him to death. His resistance is obviously down, and tomorrow he’s going to be flying in and then joining the crush on the train to get to his parents’ place in his hometown for New Year’s Eve. Great for picking up more germs.

So we’ve laid in plenty of fluids and electrolytes. I’ve also made sure we’re not out of…what’s it called, that iodine gargle stuff? People who live in Japan will know what I mean–it’s really great when you have a sore throat. And thanks to that nice Paul Smith, I am now the owner of three more pairs of insolently sexy boxers than I was on waking this morning. If Atsushi’s going to have to spend most of the break in bed anyway….

Joel at Far Outliers–gentleman, scholar, and (as I learned a few months ago) great drinking buddy–has put up his thousandth post. He provides links to several of his posts that have been most accessed by readers. Congratulations to him on his second blogging anniversary.

Powerblogs had server problems, which means that the site was inaccessible for nearly twenty-four hours and that one or two comments have disappeared (sorry). Also, I’ve lost two relatively inconsequential posts that may or may not be restored. They were both links to good things at other blogs, so I’ll just give them here without much commentary, which I’m not really of the mind to reproduce:

Simon posted a few days ago about a South China Morning Post article headlined “Still an inspirational leader.” It’s China we’re talking about, so if you’re now thinking, No, it couldn’t be about…, well, yes, it is. The first paragraph of the article (which must have been in the print edition, since Simon doesn’t link to it, goes like this:

Almost 30 years after the death of Mao Zedong, many are still trying to define the controversial leader. But, like China, Mao defies simple classification. And his name still evokes deep respect amonst many Chinese.

After all, there’s nothing more important than being free from labels, even at the expense of a few lives. Simon says:

The latest estimate is Mao was responsible for more than 73 million deaths. In case you’re wondering, that’s a record.

Simon suspects that many of those people would fail to have respect for Mao if they were alive now.

The other post was by Gaijin Biker, who reports that the United Nations has–you’ll want to be sitting down for this–been discovered to be guilty of bureaucratic waste. The story he cites is from UPI:

Up to about a third of the $590 million U.N. fund spent for the Indian Ocean tsunami relief may have gone to pay for overhead.

The Financial Times says its two-month investigation showed the money appears to have been spent on administration, staff and related costs. The $590 million was part of the United Nation’s $1.1 billion disaster flash appeal.

…

The newspaper said details of that appeal it obtained from U.N. agencies such as the World Health Organization and the World Food Program showed 18 percent to 32 percent of the expenditure related to staff, administration and other costs.

A natural disaster that affects multiple Third World countries is just the sort of thing that the UN is supposed to be more suited than any other entity to deal with.

Oh, and I guess I could also mention here that I got a very perky e-mail notifying me that somewhere called Red Orbit, which apparently covers tech stuff and is not a site Michael uses as an outlet for any closet communist tendencies, named White Peril as one of its blogs of the day. That’s very kind, though kind of bewildering, since I hardly ever talk about tech stuff. The post that was linked as a sample was this one complaining about the process of getting Toshiba to replace my CD-ROM drive. I was thinking of writing another post complaining about the user-unfriendly iPod remote control, too. Otherwise, the only time technology is a topic here is when Japan is making a deal with the US military to develop cool stuff. But Red Orbit looks as if it may be a good aggregator, so there‘s the link again.

Exactly one year ago today, I posted this:

Fat lot of good that did, huh? So I figure, as we go from the Year of the Cock to the Year of the Dog–stop that sniggering, you bitches in the back!–I may as well solicit resolutions from even more people this year. If the elements are going to dash your dreams, make ’em work at it, I say.

In 2006, I would like liberals to decide whether they believe in protecting (1) assertive individuality, even when it has sharp edges and raises uncomfortable questions or (2) the right of the government to adjudicate every potentially offensive manifestation of religious beliefs, sexuality, and even dietary choices. I don’t really care which one they pick–though I’m hoping they go with (1), of course. They just need to knock it off with the cynical, opportunistic toggling back and forth between the two, depending on which tack happens to suit the finger-wagging point they’re making at a given moment.

In 2006, I would like conservatives to decide whether they believe America’s material prosperity and staggering array of consumer products are (1) evidence that our way of life is the best in the world or (2) evidence that we’ve lost our spirituality and are hung up on the trivial at the expense of the transcendent. I don’t really care which one they pick–though I’m hoping they go with (1), of course. They just need to knock it off with the cynical, opportunistic toggling back and forth between the two, depending on which tack happens to suit the finger-wagging point they’re making at a given moment.

In 2006, I would like everyone to forgo the opportunity to be an asshole sometimes. Say, every third opportunity to be an asshole. Yes, I know–your opponents don’t make or respond to arguments, they just parrot the same empty talking points over and over and they ignore counterarguments and they suck and you’re not going to put up with it anymore and you’re willing to be a nice person but they force you to play offense all the time. I know, I know, I KNOW. I know because you’ve told us that about a million times. What I don’t know is what you think you’re accomplishing by adding one more uncharitable jerk to the din. Fearlessly offensive, gusty expressions of free thought can be a bracing corrective to namby-pambiness in the public discourse–within reason. When they become the public discourse, we’re in trouble. If you want people to be respectful, rational, and fair-minded, you might want to get the ball rolling by setting them an example.

Best to everyone in the new year.

Yesterday’s train derailment was very unfortunate, but unlike the disaster in Amagasaki in April, it doesn’t seem to indicate any problems with JR. Cars were swept off the tracks by strong wind as the train went over a bridge; four people were killed and over thirty injured. The driver was going within the speed limit:

At the moment of the derailment, the train was estimated to be running at about 100 kph, well below the speed limit for that section, police said.

…

JR East officials said a wind meter was positioned about 1 kilometer north of the disaster site.

If the meter detects winds of 72 kph or faster, a warning is sent to an anti-disaster information system installed at JR East’s Niigata branch, which is in charge of the Uetsu Line. An alarm will also sound at the branch, but drivers are not required to reduce their speeds in these conditions.

However, trains are obliged to slow down to 25 kph when wind speeds exceeding 90 kph are registered.

Train operations are suspended in areas with winds reaching 108 kph, the officials said.

But the wind meter near the accident site only recorded a maximum speed of 72 kph at 7:16 p.m., the officials said.

For that reason, the driver of the Inaho No. 14 was allowed to operate at the maximum speed of 120 kph in that section, according to the officials.

So it looks as if any human error that contributed was involved in the design of the bridge.

It’s almost time for the New Year vacation. That means Atsushi and I will be entertaining–we’re two of the party-throwers among our friends. It also means it’s time for the yearly Great Gay Veuve Clicquot Exchange. (My theory is that there are actually only five bottles of Champagne Veuve Clicquot in existence in any given year, and they get passed back and forth in a sort of Chinese fire drill as host gifts at fag parties from mid-December to the first week of January. No one ever seems to open them.) Maybe I’ll make stew or something. The weather’s been unseasonably cold in Japan as in the States, so we’re ready for the sort of warming food you normally don’t need until the approach of February.

Of course, Atsushi and I already set a precedent for food randomness over the weekend. Usually, I make dinner on Christmas Eve; last year, I even roused myself to start preparing a week ahead of time and made sauerbraten and dumplings. This year, my flight landed on the 22nd, and Atsushi arrived on the 23rd (the banks were closed for the emperor’s birthday). Between jet lag and general tiredness, I didn’t make a single dinner while he was here. Christmas Eve we went to a tempura restaurant. Atsushi chose it because I love vegetable tempura and because Western-style restaurants tend to be packed on Christmas Eve. Tempura isn’t quite as traditional as, say, goose, but…uh, you know…tempura was brought to Japan by the Portuguese. And Portugal’s a Catholic country. So you can find a Christmas connection in there somewhere, especially if you’re on your third glass of wine.

Hope everyone else enjoyed Christmas (or just the weekend).

Added at 22:30: This guy (via Gay News) obviously moves in very different circles from me. A Ten Commandments of cocktail parties that doesn’t start talking about the drinks until Commandment #9? Whatever. I also like these:

Commandment #4:
[…] And don’t forget the bathroom! Scented candles, an elegant bottle of hand soap, extra toilet paper, and a basket of high-quality napkins or paper towels make guests feel pampered.

I’m sorry, honey, if you’re hanging out with the sort of people who can made to feel pampered by a pile of paper towels dumped in a basket, you need to find new friends. (My Crabtree & Evelyn guest towels, embroidered in saucy botanical patterns and housed next to the brushed-metal soap dispenser, are a big joke among our buddies.)

As for scented candles, this guy has dispatched them handily so I don’t have to. I will only add that having tall, fat candles lit in an enclosed space in which tipsy people are unattended and desperately fumbling with their clothes is not the brightest idea.

Commandment #7:
Keep ’em moving! The entire point of a cocktail party is to mingle. To encourage that behavior, set up your bar and your buffet table on opposite ends of the room (or in different rooms altogether). That way you don’t end up with traffic jams and a huge cluster of people in one spot. Also, sitting down is a no-no! To keep the energy up and the party moving, only provide half as many seats as you have guests. Besides, we all look thinner and more elongated when we stand.

In my experience, people who don’t want to stand will not stand. If you’ve removed every stick of furniture from the room except the drinks table, they will stretch themselves out on your floor. They will close the lid of your garbage can and perch on it. If they know where the bedroom is and you’ve locked it, they will find your utility drawer, get a screwdriver, jimmy the lock, and sprawl on the bed.

And this David Lawrence character has also forgotten in their entirety two indispensable party ingredients: salt and club soda. Someone will inevitably spill red wine. If you’re lucky, it’ll be a few drops on one of your patterned throw pillows. If you’re not lucky, as one of our friends wasn’t a few years ago, it’ll be a full glass that gets knocked over the edge of a table by someone who’s getting a little over-enthusiastic about hitting on one of the other guests. (Three guesses what color the carpet was.)

Joe thinks I’m being too dismissive of That Movie . He’s seen it and has posted about it. Here’s (to me) the important part:

Homosexual and gay are not synonymous; all homosexuals are not gay. Homosexual acts may be circumstantial–a man in prison, a drunken evening–or experimental and do not mean an individual is homosexual by nature. But experimentation can lead to the discovery of a homosexual inclination.

Once that inclination is realized, how it is addressed matters to all of us. Because then there is a choice to be made: to accept homosexuality or to resist and fight it. To embrace it is to become gay. To resist it leads to all kinds of trouble.

…

Urbanization and mobilization–particularly World War II which brought women into the workforce and men together as it took them around the world–brought with it the beginnings of a gay identity. That identity is rooted in the collective experience of those who have gone through the difficult process of making the choice to embrace their homsexuality.

The nuclearization of the family has had a major effect, too. When you bring people up to choose their own spouses, and when they know that the bulk of their emotional sustenance and support through life’s obstacles will be channeled through a partnership of two, it becomes far more urgent that their partnerships are based on not only duty but also compatibility. Extended family societies impinge more on individual identity–and they tend not to make the pursuit of happiness a high priority, let alone enshrine it in their founding documents–but they also provide a constellation of relationships with in-laws that makes difficulties with any one person easier to manage: you may not get along very well with your husband and mother-in-law, but your helpful sister-in-law and slyly sympathetic father-in-law can always be close at hand to keep you from losing your mind.

Getting back to what Joe writes, the “collective experience” part is a little on the Richard Goldstein side for me, but in a major sense, he’s right. Those of us you see publicly calling ourselves gay are working culturally, both for better and for worse, off a framework developed by men and women after World War II, especially through the 60s and 70s.

That doesn’t mean, of course, that our elders have turned their mind rays on us and turned us all into zombies. Poor Eric, practically tearing his hair out as usual to get people to remember that they’re in charge of their own lives, notes the reactions to Brokeback Mountain in a splashy Inquirer article:

From what I’ve read, the film targets the mainstream heterosexual market, but that doesn’t guarantee that they’ll be lining up to see it in large numbers. Hype won’t persuade people to see a film with which they can’t identify, nor will a good scolding. (It’s a real stretch to blame “heterosexual bigotry” for the failure of people to see a film.)

If only there’d been a major coordinated attack on the film by social conservatives with massive boycotts and picket lines in front of every theater! That might have triggered a Brokeback Mountain backlash [Say that five times fast–SRK], but the social conservatives seem to be learning what not to do. (I guess I should keep my trap shut about such things….)

MORE: I think, however, that it would be a mistake to misread this strategic silence as an indication of tolerance or an embrace of a live-and-let-live philosophy.

That’s because the hard core opposition to the film arises from a moral collectivist belief that people are not responsible for their own actions:

“If [Brokeback Mountain] encourages even one confused boy to engage in sex with another male, that makes it an instrument of corruption, not one of enlightenment.”

I may be in a minority, but I can’t think of a single time–at any point in my life–where sex resulted from confusion.

I haven’t read the short story for a while, but if the movie is faithful to it, the message it sends would seem to be that if you fall in love with another man, you end up living alone in a drafty trailer or murdered with a tire iron. Neither sounds all that encouraging, though naysayers can always work the angle of supposedly endless teenage impressionability.

In any case, I’m not sure what real, wide-ranging effect Joe expects the movie to have. Most of the public positions people are taking in response to it don’t seem to deviate much from those they were already taking anyway, though I’m sure there will be at least some cases in which people are moved by it to think more sympathetically about gays. He ends this way:

What we must see, all of us gay and straight alike, is that it’s in our interest to help open the closet door. We must make the choice to come out of the closet and become gay an easier one; the obvious one. Because that’s the right choice, the good choice, the healthy choice, for our society and for all of us living in it.

I agree, obviously; I just don’t know that a movie like Brokeback Mountain helps much. I can only speak authoritatively about my own experience, but what made the difference for me was a conversation with my soon-to-be first boyfriend. I don’t remember it verbatim, which is kind of odd considering how it affected the way my life has gone since then, but what he said was basically this: “I’m not forcing you into anything. I couldn’t if I wanted to. You want to take the line that you’re just kind of feeling experimental and stuff, you go ahead. But let me tell you what I see: I’m offering you a relationship, and you’re responding. If you want me to go away, you can tell me decisively to get lost, and you’ll never hear from me again. But you won’t.” And I didn’t, because he was right. He was just naming what I already knew I was, and it mattered because he was an actual person that I knew. I don’t think even the most seductive pop culture artifacts would have really made up for the fact that the few stray gays I’d known until then (such as my high school homeroom teacher and the squalling brats in the college LGBA) were 180 degrees opposite from the kind of person I wanted to become. Cultural acceptance is important; it matters. But it can’t do the most pressing job of getting people to own what they are and decide whether they’re going to use it for good or ill.

Added at 16:27: Joe has also commented on the Christianity Today review.