In the wake of the Charleston tragedy, how should we define what happened? As a hate crime? As terrorism? Also, men, too, may be able to be on the pill for contraception. Then, with the release of "Infintely Polar Bear," which films help or hurt our understanding of various mental disorders?
Charleston shooting: Domestic terrorism? Hate crime? Both? None of the above?
Thursday night, a normally jocular Jon Stewart had no jokes to tell during his opening monologue on “The Daily Show.”
Instead, he was stoic and almost dejected as he went off script to talk about the shooting at a black church in Charleston, South Carolina that left nine dead. “This is a terrorist attack,” he said. “I heard someone on the news say ‘tragedy has visited this church.’ This wasn’t a tornado. This was a racist.”
Poignant and timely as Stewart’s speech was, he took a very hard line in labeling what happened on Wednesday night an act of terrorism. Others see it differently, as a hate crime committed by a troubled, racist young man who targeted a very specific group of people that he didn’t like. “By calling the Charleston shooter a terrorist, by using and dignifying this buzzword of our day, by being hyperbolic in the news media, we dehumanize the act,” a Gizmodo writer says in an article posted yesterday.
How should we define what happened in Charleston? As a hate crime? As terrorism? Does it even matter how it’s labeled? Does this incident imply that a closer look is necessary at how we define the words ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist?’
Guests:
Bryan Burrough, special correspondent for Vanity Fair. His latest book is called “Days of Rage: America’s Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence
Deepa Iyer, is a senior fellow at The Center for Social Inclusion. Her book, “We Too Sing America; South Asian, Arab, Muslim and Sikh Immigrants Shape Our Multiracial Future,” is forthcoming in November from The New Press. Read her Al Jazeera piece on domestic terrorism.
SCOTUS decision: Teacher testimony allowed in child abuse case
(AP) Statements that children make to teachers about possible abuse can be used as evidence, even if the child does not testify in court, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously on Thursday.
The ruling is expected to make it easier for prosecutors to convict people accused of domestic violence. The justices said that defendants don't have a constitutional right to cross-examine child accusers unless their statements to school officials were made for the primary purpose of creating evidence for prosecution.
The case involves Darius Clark, a Cleveland man convicted of beating his girlfriend's 3-year-old son. Clark says the trial court denied him the constitutional right to confront his accuser when it said the boy didn't have to testify, but still considered statements he made to preschool teachers describing abuse.
The Supreme Court reversed a lower court and upheld Clark's conviction.
Guests:
Joan Meier, Professor of Clinical Law at the George Washington University in D.C., with expertise on domestic violence and the law. She co-authored an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in the case
Richard Friedman, Professor of Law at the University of Michigan who wrote an amicus brief in support of the the respondent in the case
Birth control for men? New male contraceptive ‘Vasalgel’ nears approval for sale
In just a few years, men, too, could be on the pill.
Vasalgel is a reversible contraceptive for men being developed by The Parsemus Foundation, a nonprofit whose website says it “works to advance innovative and neglected medical research,” is developing the drug and says it has had success in animal testing. Human testing is expected to start next year and, assuming all goes to plan, could be on the market as early as 2018.
Vasalgel is used via injection and creates a polymer gel barrier in the vas deferens (the tube in the male genitalia through which sperm pass). It is similar to a vasectomy, a surgical procedure in which the vas deferens is snipped, but the idea is that Vasalgel could be reversed with another injection, if the user wanted to do so.
If you’re a man, would you ever consider using this drug? If you’re a woman, does this bring up trust issues for you (for example, believing a guy when he says he’s using Vasalgel or a similar male contraceptive)? What other male contraception options are being developed? How close are we to seeing some of these products for sale? How does this change the conversation and rhetoric around birth control, now that options exist for male contraceptives beyond condoms?
For more information on how Vasalgel works, take a look at this FAQ from The Parsemus Foundation. You can also learn more about the fundraising effort for male contraception here.
Guests:
Elaine Lissner, executive director of the Parsemus Foundation, which is developing Vasalgel, a male contraceptive that is designed to be similar to a vasectomy, but would be reversible.
Aaron Hamlin, executive director of the Male Contraception Initiative. He’s also a licensed attorney who has worked extensively in the nonprofit sector.
Filmweek: ‘Inside Out,’ ‘Dope,’ ‘Infinitely Polar Bear,’ and more
Patt Morrison and KPCC film critics Lael Loewenstein, Andy Klein, and Charles Solomon review this week’s new releases including Pixar’s highly anticipated animated feature “Inside Out,” another Sundance darling, “Dope,” Mark Ruffalo as a father struggling with mental illness in “Infinitely Polar Bear,” and more. TGI-Filmweek!
Guests:
Andy Klein, film critic for KPCC and L.A. Times Community Paper Chain
Lael Loewenstein, film critic for KPCC and Variety
Charles Solomon, film critic for KPCC and Animation Scoop and Animation Magazine
Psychologist examines how films such as ‘Infinitely Polar Bear’ increase understanding of mental illness
The new film "Infinitely Polar Bear" starring Mark Ruffalo and Zoe Saldana has nothing to do with polar bears, but a lot to do with bipolar disorder.
It's a heart-warming memoir with edge based on the filmmakers' experience growing up with a dad diagnosed as manic-depressive (as it was labelled when we meet the character in the 1960s.)
It's the latest film this year to hone in closely on mental illness. Last month, Kristin Wiig was cast as lottery winner diagnosed with borderline personality disorder in the dramedy, "Welcome to Me." Plus "Love & Mercy," the biopic about the Beach Boys' Brian Wilson, was revelatory in its handling of Wilson's misdiagnoses, struggles with medication, the connections between art and madness, and his lifelong journey seeking solace.
Psychologist Danny Wedding has examined how Hollywood handles mental illness in four editions of his book, "Movies and Mental Illness: Using Films to Understand Psychopathology." Wedding says filmmakers are allowed to take artistic license, such as in "A Beautiful Mind" showing John Nash's hallucinations as visual rather than auditory, but that movies can benefit society's awareness.
Wedding perceives the trajectory of films moving in the right direction. What are his thoughts on the classic "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest?" What about absurdist comedies such as the Farrelly Brothers' "Me, Myself and Irene?" Which films do you think help or hurt our understanding of various mental disorders?
Guests:
Sylvester Amick-Alexis, Ambassador for Bring Change 2 Mind and lives with bipolar disorder
Mädchen Amick, Actress best known for her role as Shelly Johnson in the original Twin Peaks and in Showtime’s upcoming Twin Peaks; Ambassador for Bring Change 2 Mind - an advocacy group focused on eliminating stigmas about mental illness.
Danny Wedding, Psychologist and co-author of "Movies and Mental Illness: Using Films to Understand Psychopathology" in its fourth edition; and Chair of Behavioral Sciences at the American University of Antigua, a Caribbean medical school