Humanities desk
< November 5	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 7 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 6

Verify statement about 16th century Scots law case

High treason in the United Kingdom#Trial says:

In 1540, a Scottish court summoned Robert Leslie, who was deceased, for a trial for treason. The Estates-General declared the summons lawful; Leslie's body was exhumed, and his bones were presented at the bar of the court.

No citation is given. May I request one? 79.180.57.119 (talk) 17:23, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently goes back to the Encyclopædia Britannica 1904, although there seems to be a distinct lack of evidence of it actually happening [1]. Cheers ⌘ _hugarheimur 17:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Surely Encyclopædia Britannica is a valid and credible source? Thanks Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 18:09, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If it contradicts historical record without giving a source? I don’t think so. It’s certainly not enough to state this as fact. We could say something like "according to Encyclopædia Brit., Leslie was …". Cheers ⌘ _hugarheimur 19:26, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A skeptical reference, based also on the Enc.Brit. and noting the lack of corroboration from other sources, is here: [2]. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:57, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Something more substantial might be here: [3]. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:58, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the Declaration of Parliment[4].—eric 00:00, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the full text of Fut.Perf.'s books preview, citing Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, where there is no mention of any bones.—eric 04:33, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...he tuk the banes of Robert leslie and foirfaultit him for certaine crymes of leismajestiesis...

Lindsay, Robert of Pitscottie (1899). The historie and cronicles of Scotland. Edinburgh. I. p. 382. There's also a note in II. p.407.—eric 02:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The passage concerning Leslie and 12/3/1540 Parliament are only in one of Robert Lindsay's manuscripts. The judicial proceedings only state the heirs were summoned and did not appear. Here is the entry in Britannica[5] (1888 edition). The 1542 Act that "confined this revolting procedure to certain treasons of the more heinous kind" is i think from 3/12/1543(N.S.)[6] and again only refers to summoning the heirs.—eric 03:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A somewhat parallel case is that when Pedro I of Portugal came to the throne, he allegedly had the remains of Inês de Castro exhumed, and forced those who had snubbed and insulted her while she was alive to kiss the bones of her hands... AnonMoos (talk) 08:15, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Radical feminism and biotechnology

I've just read the The Dialectic of Sex, wich in turn led me to the articles of postgenderism and radical feminism. Those lectures (specially the "future technologies" part of the posgenderism article) made me wonder if there are radical feminist organizations funding or otherwise promoting biotechnology research to erase the burden of pregnancy, as this appears to be smnething aligned with their goals. Asking because feminist discussion in the press tend to focus in the sociology part of it, think (but I could be wrong)81.35.215.136 (talk) 18:38, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think you overestimate the economic impact of movements like radical feminism. The kind of scientific research you're speaking of requires levels of funding that only large corporations and national governments can provide. For whatever it can do to achieve its aims, radical feminism is not a single organization, and does not broadly have the funding or organization to do scientific research on that level. --Jayron 32 21:00, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you refer to an artificial womb ? SinisterLefty (talk) 03:13, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dont know much about these feminist or genderfocused movements and what they do but you may be interested in Michel Foucaults books Madness and Civilization and The History of Sexuality aswell as what he coined out as "Postsexualism". Very unfortunately he died much to young to write more of his ingenious philosophic analyses. --Kharon (talk) 05:22, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

81.35.215.136 -- One theme running through the Vorkosigan series by Lois McMaster Bujold (one of the most famous extended science-fiction series of the last 30 years) is the impact of "uterine replicators" on the societies of several planets. It's not really invented by radical feminists, though, and in Ethan of Athos it's embraced by a society founded by misogynists... AnonMoos (talk) 08:03, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

to erase the "burden of pregnancy" is just to erase womanhood, it is hard to imagine more misogynistic indeed. Since you mentioned science-fiction, Bene Tleilax seems in order. Gem fr (talk) 20:25, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was certainly the intent of the inhabitants of the planet Athos (named, fairly obviously, after the monastic communities of Mount Athos), which was founded exclusively by and for homosexual men who (after some generations) regarded women as mysterious, magically-powered 'agents of the devil' on quasi-religious grounds. However, equating "erasing the burden of pregnancy" with "erasing womanhood" seems to me to be extremely questionable. Do you also oppose any use of analgesics in the course of pregnancy and birth? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.179.237 (talk) 02:57, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"the burden of pregnancy" obviously referred to the pregnancy itself, not just the pains analgesics would alleviate Gem fr (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Their goals" are not monolithic. The last line of the article says that Valerie Solanas didn't like the book--if she didn't, that tells you all you need to know about the impossibility of feminists and/or gender-creative people ever agreeing on a platform. (I haven't read the book, but it sounds quite interesting, maybe I'll pick up a copy.) By the way, I will assure you that radical feminism is quite underfunded. Temerarius (talk) 03:48, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that's relevant to this: scientists are working on uterus transplants right now, so it might soon be possible to outsource pregnancy to people with male bodies. Oh, and one more thing: those of us discussing gender in science fiction would be encouraged to look at the Otherwise Award, formerly known as the Tiptree Award. Temerarius (talk) 03:54, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On a smaller scale: A_Cyborg_Manifesto. OldTimeNESter (talk) 20:26, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]