The Dish

John Homans reports on how the man and canine relationship has changed:

[James Serpell, head of the Center for the Interaction of Animals and Society at UPenn,] is most excited about new studies on oxytocin and dog ownership. Oxytocin is the most important social-bonding hormone, present notably between mother and child but also in just about any interaction involving pair bonding, social affiliation, and trust. More specifically, it’s involved with the gaze between infants and mothers. Researchers at Azabu University in Japan found last year that the dog’s gaze at its owner increases the owner’s oxytocin level.

No one believes, in his conscious mind, that the dog is a person. But that may not matter. The oxytocin study, while providing the key to understanding the myriad health benefits of dog ownership—oxytocin is a serious stress reducer—also makes scientifically clear what’s obvious anecdotally: The dog is an honorary human, accorded many of the same considerations. It can be a surrogate child, brother in arms, solace of otherwise lonely urban lives. Serpell’s central insight is that these kinds of social functions are at the center of the relationship of dogs and people.

A reader writes:

If that's what you call feminist, then what you Christians call the "Old Testament" beat you to it. 

Early in Genesis, Sarah tells Abraham that Ishmael must go.  Abraham, the archetype of hospitality hesitates and asks G-d.  G-d tells Abraham: listen to Sarah in all that she says.  Note, not listen to Sarah in this instance, but in "all" that she says.

Next generation: Rebecca is pregnant with twins; G-d tells her that the younger will serve the older.  In the meantime, Isaac can't figure this out and attempts to bless the older.  Rebecca who is wiser, pulls the switcheroo on him.

Two generations later: the story of Judah and his daughter-in-law Tamar — the latter's subterfuge ends up with Judah declaring "she is more in the right than I", and their union produces the line from which will come King David, the David line, and Messiah. Later, during the rebellion at the Golden Calf — only the men were involved.  The women knew better (and get their own holiday for their non-participation).

In case after case , the women are right — centuries, nay, millennia, before the New Testament. This is no big revelation — any school kid who's gone to private Jewish day school knows the above.

Another writes:

Interesting stuff, Andrew, but this won't fly:

when she brings it up he dismisses her, calling her “woman”

In addition to making Jesus dismissive of his own mother, it is a misunderstanding of the word translated as woman. gynai, the vocative of gyne, is not dismissive. In Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, F. Wilbur Gingrich says it "is by no means disrespectful, but there is no satisfactory English equivalent for it, and it is best to omit the word in translation." (something which Bible translators, believing that every word is from God, are reluctant to do)

The Liddell & Scott Greek–English Lexicon (ninth edition) cites Euripides, Medea 290, where Creon addresses Medea, and it says the vocative is a term of respect or affection. Certainly, no one in his right mind would be dismissive of Medea. And in fact Creon says here that he fears her and her threats and is taking precautions.

Apart from that, the Cana story has a delightfully understated insight into Mary and her relationship with her son. After he appears to put her off (John 2: 3–5), she simply turns to the waiters and says, "Do whatever he tells you." She knew him better than anyone else ever has.

Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry disagrees with my characterization of his post:

I’m not even sure what Mr Sullivan is referring to here. Women in the priesthood? Contraception? Abortion?

Suffice it to say that while I appreciate that Mr Sullivan apparently thinks he is more qualified to decide what is “un-Christian” than the Catholic Church I don’t believe the Church is pernicious or not Christian. And I don’t want anyone (if there is a single person alive who cares) to infer otherwise from Mr Sullivan’s post.

He continues in the comment section:

I think most non-Catholic Christians would agree that, even though they do not accept its authority, the Catholic Church is Christian, and even would agree that, in fact, even if they may disagree with it about a bunch of stuff, it knows more about what Christianity means than Andrew Sullivan. I think most Orthodox Christians would agree with that, as well as most high-church Protestants, and a good chunk of Evangelicals — while acknowledging that they think the Church’s magisterium is wrong about this, that and the other thing.

I’m not asserting that the Catholic Church is the only authority on deciding what is or isn’t Christian (the Church itself doesn’t think that non-Catholic Christians aren’t Christians), only that it’s a bigger authority than Andrew Sullivan.

Which seems pretty straightforward to me.

Once again, an argument not on the merits of the case but from mere authority. In my view, the Catholic church's subjugation of women by an all-male caste of powerful figures deeply distorts the message and actions of Jesus.

(Painting: Rebecca and Eliezer by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo, 17th century.)

Kevin Drum can barely believe what he's reading:

Harkin said “we had an agreement, with the House, the White House and the Senate. We sent it to [the Congressional Budget Office] to get scored and then Tuesday happened and we didn’t get it back.” He said negotiators had an agreement in hand on Friday, Jan. 15. Harkin made clear that negotiators had reached a final deal on the entire bill, not just the excise plans, which had been reported the previous day, Jan. 14.

So why isn't the blueprint for a reconciliation package relatively easy now? Or are they simply waiting for tempers to cool, for an outreach to Republicans to show the public that nothing is being rammed through, for an exposure of the paltry nature of the GOP's plans, a re-establishment of the focus on jobs and the economy … and then HCR through reconciliation? Without the drama. Outside the framework of the Massachusetts victory. I dunno; Kevin is mystified. But one cannot help wonder.

Meep, meep?

Jonah Lehrer describes the neurological mechanism:

Once we become socially isolated, we stop simulating the feelings of other people.* As a result, our inner Machiavelli takes over, and our sense of sympathy is squashed by selfishness. The UC Berkeley psychologist Dacher Keltner has found that, in many social situations, people with power act just like patients with severe brain damage. "The experience of power might be thought of as having someone open up your skull and take out that part of your brain so critical to empathy and socially-appropriate behavior," he writes. "You become very impulsive and insensitive, which is a bad combination."

Of course, we live in an age when our most powerful people – they tend to also have lots of money – are also the most isolated. They live in gated communities with private drivers. They eat at different restaurants and stay at different resorts. They wear different clothes and skip the security lines at airports, before sitting at the front of the plane. We shouldn't be surprised that they're also assholes.

*I think this helps explain the public preference for politicians with ordinary preferences, or why Scott Brown kept on talking about his truck. And it also justifies Obama insistence on not becoming informationally isolated, whether that's by reading ten letters from constituents every day or following a variety of blogs.

(Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty.)

Geek Week gathers 20 of the best extended takes in film history. This one is particularly good: My favorite is the pool scene from Boogie Nights, but the death of Little Bill, starring William H Macy, is also astonishing:

Maybe carpal tunnel is from something more fun than typing:

The etiology of non-occupational carpal tunnel syndrome is not well understood. It is proposed that carpal tunnel syndrome can develop during sexual intercourse when the hands become repeatedly extended while under pressure from the weight of the upper body. Of the eight risk factors associated with non-occupational carpal tunnel syndrome, age, marital status, pregnancy and use of hormonal agents can be explained by changes in the frequency of sexual intercourse.

On the other hand, obesity, macromastia and large chest circumference can be explained by the increased pressure imposed on the wrists by the heavier upper body associated with such conditions. The bilaterality of carpal tunnel syndrome can be explained by the fact that both hands are needed to support the upper body during sexual intercourse. A parallel decrease in the frequency of sexual intercourse and the incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome between the sixth and the seventh decades of life suggests a possible cause and effect relationship between sexual intercourse and carpal tunnel syndrome.

Mind Hacks flags a study:

Research has now established that certain police interrogation techniques can lead to false confessions, and it is not only through intimidated suspects confessing even though they know they're innocent. In some cases, categorised as 'coerced-internalized' false confessions, the person starts to doubt their own memory and actually comes to believe that they did commit the crime.

Nerve compiles webby venn diagrams. Yet more here. Some of them are genius, if you like that kind of thing.

A new study published in the current Journal of the American Dietetic Association found that companies could be fibbing on their food labeling:

The authors of a new study said in a news release they measured 29 fast food and sit-down restaurant meals and found they averaged 18 percent more calories than stated. Ten frozen meals bought at grocery stores averaged 8 percent more calories than their labels said. [Lead author Susan B. Roberts] noted that an extra 5 percent in calories could lead to a 10-pound weight gain in a year for a typical person.