I’m going to get in trouble for this post, but this Los Angeles Times story today caught my eye:
Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection has begun an extensive sampling of chemical contaminants in response to the discovery of intersex fish in three of the state’s rivers, a department spokeswoman said. . .
Now frankly, I’m disturbed by the blatant hetero-normativity of Pennsylvania’s Dept. of Environmental Protection. How do we know that these asexual fish haven’t simply decided to be gender neutral “intersex” after a period of questioning? After all, that covers three of the letters of the semi-standard LBGTQIA universe. Why do we assume that this in-between condition is the result of contamination? How typically judgmental of the conspiracy of hetero-patriarchal oppression.
Just what kind of fish, by the way? Is it in all species, or just college-aged fish?
The US Geological Survey research said that two fish species, smallmouth bass and white sucker [cue Jon Stewart here] were exhibiting intersex characteristics due to exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals — hormones and hormone-mimicking chemicals that caused the male fish to produce eggs.
Hmm. I wonder whether the seemingly sharp rise in the number of aspiring transsexuals and in-betweeners in our midst might have an environmental cause? After all, we do hear a lot of worry from the environmental community about endocrine hormone disrupters. Thought experiment: imagine the mayhem on the Left if there were to emerge a full-scale conflict between the doctrines of unlimited liberation and self-definition that depend on the denial of (human) nature, and an environmental crusade to defend nature against subtle chemical effects. Sounds far-fetched? Maybe so, but the growing evidence of the lead-crime link suggests maybe it isn’t as far-fetched as we might think. This could be fun to watch.