From the Right to Life to the Right to Livability: Radically Re-approaching ‘Life’ in Human Rights Politics

This article critically reflects on current mainstream debate on abortion in international human rights discourse and the conception of life underpinning it. The public health focus on access to safe abortion which has dominated this discourse can be detected as committed to a fundamentally liberal idea of bounded and individual subjecthood which mirrors the commitments of the liberal right to life more generally. However, feminist challenges to this frame seeking to advance wider access to reproductive freedoms appear equally underpinned by a liberal conception of life. It is asserted that feminists may offer a more radical challenge to the current impasse in international debate on abortion by engaging with the concept of livability which foregrounds life as an interdependent and conditioned process. The trope of the ‘right to livability’ developed in this article presents a means to reposition the relation between rights and life and facilitate such radical engagement which better attends to the socio-political conditions shaping our interdependent living and being.

Studying Gender in Conference Talks -- data from the 223rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society

We present a study on the gender balance, in speakers and attendees, at the recent major astronomical conference, the American Astronomical Society meeting 223, in Washington, DC. We conducted an informal survey, yielding over 300 responses by volunteers at the meeting. Each response included gender data about a single talk given at the meeting, recording the gender of the speaker and all question-askers. In total, 225 individual AAS talks were sampled. We analyze basic statistical properties of this sample. We find that the gender ratio of the speakers closely matched the gender ratio of the conference attendees. The audience asked an average of 2.8 questions per talk. Talks given by women had a slightly higher number of questions asked (3.2$\pm$0.2) than talks given by men (2.6$\pm$0.1). The most significant result from this study is that while the gender ratio of speakers very closely mirrors that of conference attendees, women are under-represented in the question-asker category. We interpret this to be an age-effect, as senior scientists may be more likely to ask questions, and are more commonly men. A strong dependence on the gender of session chairs is found, whereby women ask disproportionately fewer questions in sessions chaired by men. While our results point to laudable progress in gender-balanced speaker selection, we believe future surveys of this kind would help ensure that collaboration at such meetings is as inclusive as possible.

To breathe or fight? Siamese fighting fish differ when facing a real opponent or mirror image.

Displays are a feature of animal contest behaviour and have been interpreted as a means of gathering information on opponent fighting ability, as well as signalling aggressive motivation. In fish, contest displays often include frontal and lateral elements, which in the latter involves contestants showing their flanks to an opponent. Previous work in a range of fish species has demonstrated population-level lateralization of these displays, preferentially showing one side to their opponent. Mirrors are commonly used in place of a real opponent to study aggression in fish, yet they may disrupt the normal pattern of display behaviour. Here, using Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens, we compare the aggressive behaviour of males to a mirror image and real opponent behind a transparent barrier. As this species is a facultative air-breather, we also quantify surface breathing, providing insights into underlying fight motivation. Consistent with previous work, we found evidence of population-level
lateralization, with a bias to present the left side and use the left eye when facing a real opponent. Contrary to expectations, there were no differences in the aggressive displays to a mirror and real opponent, with positive correlations between the behaviour in the two scenarios. However, there were important differences in surface breathing, which was more frequent and of longer duration in the mirror treatment. The reasons for these differences are discussed in relation to the repertoire of contest behaviour and motivation when facing a real opponent.

To breathe or fight? Siamese fighting fish differ when facing a real opponent or mirror image

Displays are a feature of animal contest behaviour and have been interpreted as a means of gathering information on opponent fighting ability, as well as signalling aggressive motivation. In fish, contest displays often include frontal and lateral elements, which in the latter involves contestants showing their flanks to an opponent. Previous work in a range of fish species has demonstrated population-level lateralization of these displays, preferentially showing one side to their opponent. Mirrors are commonly used in place of a real opponent to study aggression in fish, yet they may disrupt the normal pattern of display behaviour. Here, using Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens, we compare the aggressive behaviour of males to a mirror image and real opponent behind a transparent barrier. As this species is a facultative air-breather, we also quantify surface breathing, providing insights into underlying fight motivation. Consistent with previous work, we found evidence of population-level lateralization, with a bias to present the left side and use the left eye when facing a real opponent. Contrary to expectations, there were no differences in the aggressive displays to a mirror and real opponent, with positive correlations between the behaviour in the two scenarios. However, there were important differences in surface breathing, which was more frequent and of longer duration in the mirror treatment. The reasons for these differences are discussed in relation to the repertoire of contest behaviour and motivation when facing a real opponent.