Here’s my friend’s prediction of what the show will be like:

I bet every whitey will be bald, fat, or super nerdy. It will be like…”I told you whites suck.”

And, “So kimchee so hot right?”

“So you have the Korean girlfriend…ok. Next topic…Why foreign men so fat and inferior to the ajussi?”

Uh huh. Of course, ‘denying personhood’ sorta presupposes a basis upon which personhood should be granted in the first place. And of course, this gets into the sticky quagmire of morality and philosophy and all that — which I just won’t get into. A fetus might have a greater claim to personhood than a tree or a whale, but that doesn’t necessarily mean much.

I don’t know about the lice thing… It’s probably true, but that was before I was even born ^^. We chased it around because it was fun… for some unknown reason.

We’d always get yelled at by our parents and the guys spraying the stuff though… YEAH, that’s gonna stop us… ^^

I may have been misinformed, but I’ve been told that, back when Korea was economically weaker, parents used to send their children out to chase those trucks as a way to stave off head lice.

Anyway, this video was fikken hillarious. I recall someone here- perhaps bumfromkorea- talking about it.

Hillarious. At the same time kind of sad. I can sit back and enjoy the wacky innocence and laugh but - the health risks and the ignorance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TS6fqwIR18

I just don’t think this is one of those cases — fetuses not being, y’know, “people”.

A lot of atrocities against a lot of people have been justified in just this way over the years—by denying personhood to the victims.

“bum, you’re no cancer expert.”
…
Yeah, you’re right. That’s why I’m not citing my own peer-reviewed research papers as sources of information. But I do think I have the ability to learn from a molecular geneticist (and, technically, a cell biologist/biochemist (different professor)) and convey the information to others as arguments.

“bum, women’s mortality is NOT increased for grand multiparity.”

The research paper you cite is talking about post-labor labor complications:

“In this study, 59% of all maternal deaths occur within the first 42 days of delivery, two thirds of them having direct and indirect obstetric causes”

“Among these women, 1 237 were dead within one year after delivery.”

When they say ‘maternal mortality’, they mean from a complication. I’m talking about the adverse health effects that pregnancy have on women, and how deadly it can be when it accumulates due to multiparity.

Once again, research papers are easily misinterpreted due to the fact that most scientists are horrible writers (or, their grad students are ^^).