It's all in the blood...

I was tempted to dub this piece the title of "Coagulate, you bastard, coagulate!" in reference to my experiences with blood disorders but decided on a less aggressive name.  Nonetheless, I want to emphasise that blood disorders, especially the kind where your blood behaves like a stubborn child and refuses to clot appropriately can make life very difficult... to say the least.  The only way one can manage is to be just as much of a stubborn-son-of-a-bitch and refuse to let the various traumatising experiences of losing large quantities of blood deter you from living how you want to live. 

Given my preoccupation with blood (not exactly something I chose to have preoccupy me, I might add); a Christmas present I recieved last year wasn't as odd-seeming to me as it might have appeared to be had it been presented to a normal member of the population (ha...ha...). 


I recieved an Eldoncard Typing Test which is a 'do-it-yourself' kit for determining your blood type along with a book outlining a 'healthy nutrition plan for your blood type.'  I never carried out the DIY blood-test because I already know my blood-type and I also didn't want to piss off the doctor I had to see a week later by showing up with plastered fingers and then explain the injuries were self-inflicted.  The book on the other hand was something I did read through before determining it served a better function as a door-stop.  The book was later demoted to the position of 'spider-squisher' and after it's first day on the job, I decided it was... too gross to keep the book around.  It has now been recycled and lives a much nobler life as a medical dictionary or something. 
 
The book in question is something that should have agreed with the optimistic naturopathic in me but what it outlined was more 'pop science' than legitimate science and believe me when I say there is a vast difference.  The book is entitled 'Eat Right 4 Your Type' and is by Peter D'Adamo and basically claims that the best diet to be on is one that matches your blood type.  In theory, this sounds rather logical.  What better to put into your body than what it is made up of; you are what you eat after all, no?  How this all works in practise however is a whole other question that D'Adamo should not even claim to know an answer to.  Instead, that's exactly what he does.  He outlines different dietary requirements for different blood groups.   

D'Adamo's bold 'fact-based' dietary suggestions are rather fraudulent when you look at how he made his determinations.  He uses the 'lectin hypothesis' as the basis for his whole book.  This basically asserts that lectins (sugar-binding proteins found in food) can cause other molecules within humans to mesh together and create health problems for the individual unless one is getting the right kind of lectins.  The key fallacy here is the assumption D'Adamo makes about there being changes in blood cell morphology.  For example, you may see changes in intestinal villus morphology after a period of fasting but this is not mirrored by the blood.  Also, there is scientific evidence (from peer-reviewed journals, not published books which any monkey with a typewriter can get involved with these days) that reveals enzymes which work as protection systems against certain lectins and repair the damage they do (e.g. intestinal transglutaminase).  As well as this, it is impossible to microscopically observe any morphology changes the secretion of such protection enzymes may induce.  So, where on earth this whole idea of 'coagulating molecules caused by harmful lectins leads to unhealthiness' is coming from, I have no idea.  Did I mention there was also a lack of clinical trials for any of what he was saying? Yet, this book sold millions and I'm sure plenty of people are unquestioningly following the diet plans within it.  Do I have to remind you people: any. monkey. with. a. typewriter. Any. Monkey.  You wouldn't trust everything you read on the Internet, right?  You should treat books as the same.  They carry an air of legitimacy about them but they were written by humans. Flawed humans. 

 I should also add that D'Adamo has released a new book outlining a 'GenoType Diet.' I kid you not.  It's sitting on my desk just waiting for me to maul my way through it.

As a closing point, I'd like to say I love the individual who did give me those very thoughtful presents a great deal.  If we can re-visit the opening statements of this piece, I seem to recall I called myself a stubborn-son-of-a-bitch... I meant to also include a horribly arrogant, highly critical son-of-a-bitch. I guess it's a lump of coal this year then?

Give me a bacha posh, I'll give you the man....

 At the risk of sending everyone into a 'feminist-rant-on-a-rainy-Sunday-afternoon-induced-coma' I am going to start off with the following statement; yesterday was very much a man's world and today is no different.  If you disagree: blow me (and derive whatever insinuations of penis-envy you think I'm projecting with that command).

I don't personally think one gender is better than the other and it wouldn't be possible for me or any schmuck out there to objectively claim one was.  Nonetheless, there have been countless schmucks on both sides of the gender divide claiming superiority to one over the other and I'm sure it's not escaped anyone's attention that in history, one side of the schmuckage have been better at pushing their agenda than the other.  Today it's progressed so women are seemingly equal to or catching up to men but let's face it; that's not the case.  I'm not going to go into the sociological, political and all other variations of '-cal' here because that's besides the point and focus but I do just want to emphasize: the playing field is being levelled  but it is far from level.  This is an obvious observation but sometimes the obvious needs to be stated.... for obvious reasons.  If the obviousness is not obvious to you then you clearly needed the last paragraph worth of common-sense iterated... so good job there on the reading. Congratulations on making it this far.

Thoughts on gender and equality swirled into the little macadamia nut that is my head whilst I was browsing through a book by historian Nancy Dupree.  If you don't know who Dupree is then... well, actually, I can't blame you for not knowing who she is.  Her research focus for the last forty-plus years has kept her rooted in Afghanistan where she and her (late) husband conduct historical and archeological work as well as running the Afghanistan Center at Kabul University (well worth checking out the project over at the Dupree Foundation).  One of the  cultural phenomenons popping up in Dupree's written observations is that of the trend of the bacha posh child. 

'Bacha posh' is the Afghan term for 'girl masquerading as boy' and the trend is exactly that.  In the very male-driven culture of Aghanistan which precedes even the Taliban's regime, men are more valued and have greater freedoms then women.  This means having a girl born into the family is a literal burden not only for the parents but for the girl herself. Unlike females the men can be educated, can work and can wander relatively freely depending on their socioeconomic circumstances. For a woman, the family's relative wealth and attitudes towards equality for females is meaningless because it is overridden by the predominant cultural values of the society.

In much of Afghan culture and particularly in the rural areas, a household that has no sons is a shamed household.  A household where the man of the family is absent and there are no sons to support the mother or her daughters is even further down the social ladder.  The lower you are in terms of social hierarchy, the more vulnerable you are in terms of finances and security and this is especially heightened when a country is enduring the carnage and unrest that Afghanistan has been.   Bearing these issues in mind, one can see why a family with no sons or a woman without a husband or son may choose to pass a daughter off as a son for as long as is possible: sons can be educated, sons can go out and work, sons can just by their presence present a shield of safety for the family and so forth.  However, as this is understandably such a 'hush-hush' practice it is next to impossible to find any interviews or in-depth looks at families resorting to such measures. I did manage to find one interview with the mother of a six-year old girl who is living life as a bacha posh which those of you with peaked interests can read here.


Despite how underground the whole process is, there are known facts:
1) The bacha posh lives her life as a boy until the age of puberty and then adopts the female gender identity.  As births are rarely recorded in the more remote areas of Afghanistan and recent wars and political troubles have eradicted a lot of public order (and decreased the value of women with it I should add); it is not difficult for families to engage in this gender-swapping.
2) This practise has not been triggered by the Taliban's oppressive regime which is, well, particularly brutal when it comes to women.  The Taliban's rule may have seen a spike in the amount of bacha posh's but the activity was around long before.  In Dupree's book, there is a photograph from the early 1900s in which there are women dressed as male guards protecting the then reigning King Habibullah Khan's harem.  I'm sure many of us have heard the tales of the eunuch guards of Indian harems in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century but few have heard of this.
3) The shift from male to female has a psychological and emotional effect on the girl in question.  Unfortunately, there are all of zero studies or mentions of this in anthropological and social journals.  When I say zero, I mean zero.  This could change however if the wonderful Nancy Dupree by some brilliant stroke of chance sees my thirty or so badgering emails on the matter but I somehow doubt it.  I can appreciate that this is because of the difficult nature of conducting research or even establishing contact in that area of the world in today's political climate.  If any of you can prove me wrong and send me a link then.... well, proving an arrogant blogger wrong is reward enough in the twenty-first century.

I've just found the concept of bacha posh and the trials and tribulations of Aghani women fascinating (I don't fail to notice the vulgar scent of douche cascading off my person as I type that last sentence: my pompous self sitting quite comfortably behind a computer screen talking about the horrors against humanity fellow womankind are witnessing as being 'fascinating'... Yum).  My initial and somewhat misguided sense of fascination arises from my experience with marginalised hermaphrodites, eunuchs and gays in India and Pakistan.  They are known as the hijra community in South Asia and have no legal or civil rights and despite this; they're a flamboyant, boisterous and vocal bunch.  They live on the edge of society, they tend to be travellers and are often seen singing and dancing at local weddings or at the homes where a woman has returned with a newborn. Basically, despite the shit they're in... they're a joyful bunch and their joy is infectious.  However, despite people accepting them spreading good cheer at happy occasions, they are far from taken seriously.

The similarity between the hijras and the bacha posh is that they're both two incredible groups living in tough circumstances and yet there is something undoubtedly hopeful about them.  I would recommend you guys to check out the Channel 4 documentary 'Jihad for Love' and the Dupree Foundation for more on these two  groups of people dealing with difficult gender issues in difficult parts of the world.