MDC 7,425 Posted June 7, 2007 Do Not Insert Knitting Needles!by hilzoy Dr. James W. Holsinger is George W. Bush's nominee to be Surgeon General. He has already come under fire for anti-gay bias, founding a church that ministers to "people who no longer wish to be gay or lesbian", and other things. (Details below the fold.) But now comes the coup de grace: a report (pdf) he wrote for the Methodist's Committee to Study Homosexuality in 1991, called 'Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality'. Holsinger's basic argument is that (a) the ###### was designed to fit into the vagina -- witness the fact "that it has entered our vocabulary in the form of naming pipe fittings either the male fitting or the female fitting depending upon which one interlocks within the other" -- while the ###### and rectum are not, um, meant for one another in the same way; and ( one way to see this is to note how many, many, many bad things can happen to a rectum when it is used in this unnatural way. (Yet, oddly enough, "Few anorectal problems and no evidence of anal-sphincter dysfunction are found in heterosexual women who have anal-receptive intercourse." Does Holsinger take this to show that God designed the female rectum to accommodate anal sex? Inquiring minds want to know.) Holsinger concludes: "when dealing with the complementarity of the human sexes, one can simply say, Res ipsa loquitur - the thing speaks for itself!" There are long lists of sexually transmitted diseases that accompany homosexual sex, all presented without the comparison set of diseases transmitted via heterosexual sex, not to mention the various potential complications of pregnancy. There is a lengthy discussion of the nature and perils of fisting. But to my mind, the oddest part of all is this alleged piece of evidence that the rectum is not designed for sex: "The structure and function of the male and female human reproductive systems are fully complementary. Anatomically the vagina is designed to receive the ######. It is lined with squamous epithelium and is surrounded by a muscular tube intended for penile intromission. The rectum, on the other hand, is lined with a delicate mucosal surface and a single layer of columnar epithelium intenuea primarily for the reabsorption of water and electrolytes. The rectum is incapable of mechanical protection against abrasion and severe damage to the colonic mucosa can result if objects that are large, sharp, or pointed are inserted into the rectum (Agnew, 1986)." Perhaps Dr. Holsinger doesn't have any first-hand experience of actual vaginas, though this seems unlikely, since he has four children. Possibly his wife just didn't have the heart to tell him, and has been suffering all these years in silence. However, as someone who has an actual vagina of my very own, I can assure him that if one were to put a sharp or pointed object into one, "severe damage" would, in fact, result. It would be a very, very, very bad idea to insert, say, a poker, or a carving knife, or a pair of scissors, into a vagina. Just as bad as doing any of these things to a rectum. Really. Maybe, on the other hand, he thinks that penises are sharp and pointed. Who can say? Do we really want someone who doesn't know these things to be our Surgeon General? I don't. More about Dr. Holsinger below the fold. From the Lexington Herald-Leader: "Holsinger (...) is being challenged for his role in decisions by the United Methodist Judicial Council. That highest "court" rules on disputes involving church doctrine and policies in the nation's second-largest Protestant denomination. In his role on the nine-member Judicial Council, Holsinger has opposed a decision to allow a practicing lesbian to be an associate pastor, and he supported a pastor who would not permit an openly gay man to join the church. In both instances, Holsinger's supporters say, he was correctly interpreting and applying church policy. (The church's bishops voted later to allow the gay man to become a member.)" Time (from 1991) reports on his resignation from a Methodist panel on whether homosexuality violates Christian teaching: "James Holsinger, medical director of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, quit the study committee last February because he felt certain its conclusions would follow liberal lines. (...) Holsinger thinks Methodism could lose millions of members if an upheaval in church policy is ever approved." The Lexington Herald-Leader informs us that he started church with a gay recovery ministry: "Hope Springs also ministers to people who no longer wish to be gay or lesbian, Calhoun said. "We see that as an issue not of orientation but of lifestyle," he said. "We have people who seek to walk out of that lifestyle."" And here's a passage from a statement by a group he's on the board of, about a Methodist trial of a clergyman (Rev. Creech) who performed a same-sex union: "Classical biblical Christians in the Wesleyan tradition, within The United Methodist Church, have been long-suffering and patient in facing the repeated attempts of the radical homosexual/lesbian lobby to force the Church and the General Conference to grant approval to the practice of homosexuality and of homosexual unions. These actions, culminating in the Creech trial and the declaration by 92 United Methodist pastors that they will now openly and publicly officiate at same-sex unions, has precipitated a crisis in the United Methodist Church. We believe that this crisis is so severe that it threatens the connection and the ties that bind us together in worship and ministry." But what, you ask, of his medical career? A quick Nexis search reveals that he was the medical director at the VA under George H. W. Bush. That, as you might recall, was the period during which the VA was in dreadful shape. Curiously, almost all the articles I turned up were about problems of one sort or another. There's this: "The Government says six men who died at a large veterans' hospital in suburban Chicago were the victims of inadequate care. (..) After an extensive review of 15 deaths between June 1989 and March 1990, the agency acknowledged blame in six, said Dr. James Holsinger Jr., the agency's chief medical officer." And this, from the Washington Post, 3/1/1993: "Veterans Affairs Secretary Jesse Brown, reacting to charges that VA officials ignored a decade of sexual harassment by top officials at the Atlanta veterans hospital, yesterday ordered major changes in the way his department handles harassment complaints and directed all 259,549 VA employees to attend four hours of sexual harassment lectures. Brown's directives were announced two hours after Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) condemned VA administrators for remaining silent over the Atlanta situation. (...) Mikulski aimed her most critical remarks at James W. Holsinger Jr., the VA's undersecretary for health and the official who oversees the hospital system. "I really think he should leave the VA," she said." And, from the Washington Post, 9/20/1993, after Holsinger had been replaced as VA medical director: "Capitol Hill was so outraged that James W. Holsinger Jr., the top doctor at the Department of Veterans Affairs, was about to land a $ 160,000-a-year job as a VA "distinguished physician" that the department abolished all such positions." All in all, not very inspiring. Link Bush's choice for SG is an incompetent Christianist wingnut crony? I'm shocked!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snoopy1 0 Posted June 7, 2007 Link Bush's choice for SG is an incompetent Christianist wingnut crony? I'm shocked!!! I think he's Gocolts personal phsycian. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hoytdwow 202 Posted June 7, 2007 He should nominate Paul Wolfowitz. He needs a job. He wasn't qualified to run a bank either, so never mind that he has no medical background. He could start right after his Medal of Freedom ceremony. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
30 Fat, Bald & Texan 5 Posted June 7, 2007 Gawd forbid someone sticks to a principal he believes in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,790 Posted June 7, 2007 Let me get this straight, we fire a competent SG because she says Masterbation is okay, but we want to hire THIS guy for the gig? Focking Fundies. Focking Bush for tongue-kissing these crazy focks. Thank God Our Boys are fighting Radical Religous Extremists over there - So Radical Religous Extremists can be free to take over the government here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted June 7, 2007 Link Bush's choice for SG is an incompetent Christianist wingnut crony? I'm shocked!!! In all fairness, his first choice, 'House', was not available. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snoopy1 0 Posted June 7, 2007 In all fairness, his first choice, 'House', was not available. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,425 Posted June 7, 2007 Gawd forbid someone sticks to a principal he believes in. It's not that his choice has principles he believes in. That's super. It's the part about being selected for the Surgeon General's job on the basis of his voodoo witchdoctor beliefs and Christianist pseudoscience that bugs me. But it is keeping in line with the cronyism that's been a hallmark of this administration. Mike Brown, Harriet Miers, etc. etc. etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites