Board Business, June 28 2011

Ongoing Board Business

A couple of weeks ago TBAT mentioned a piece about sexual assault and asked the community's opinion about publishing it. Since then, we have been working with the author trying to edit it into a condition where it would be, if not entirely trigger-free, as safe-feeling for the women and sexual assault survivors of the community as was realistically possible. For reasons we cannot disclose in order to preserve confidentiality, this proved more difficult than we had hoped.

We regret to announce that we have been unable to reach an agreement with the author as to the acceptable limits of safety, and hence, after discussion with the author, it has been agreed that the piece cannot be published on this board.

While we value free discussion in the comments, TBAT feels that a higher level of caution must be exercised when it comes to publishing posts, as their greater prominence and 'official' status seem liable to increase any risk of harm to community members they may cause: we are concerned that vulnerable members will feel marginalized and unsafe on a board that puts an official imprimatur on posts that jeopardize their wellbeing. For this reason we will not be linking to this post in the blogaround should it be published elsewhere.

We do not moderate comments, so the author is free to link to it should it be published elsewhere as long as appropriate trigger warnings are appended; if they are not, TBAT will add them, and reserve the right to comment as individuals. This event should not be taken as a sign that TBAT will automatically reject other pieces on the subject of sexual assault: we assess every piece on a case by case basis.

Collaborative Roundtables

TBAT is organizing a series of semi-regular "101 Wednesdays." These are days which will be set aside for question and answer sessions about issues and/or topics of special interest or concern to members of our community.

The first of these sessions has been scheduled to begin late in the afternoon (EDT) Wednesday June 29 2011. The purpose of the session will be to share knowledge on issues of web accessibility. We would like to make this site easy to negotiate for all of its community and thus hope for feedback on ease of navigation / use / loading for everyone.. Anyone who has questions, answers, or resources to share is encouraged to join the discussion. Since our goal is to remain as easy and user-friendly as possible, we ask that the technically experienced both avoid jargon and respect the different priorities of those who don't want to change their Internet habits. The purpose is to improve websites, not readers' tech skills. Answers, suggestions and links to resources will be collected and organized into a 101 guideline that will be permanently available here.

In order to organize future "101 Wednesdays" TBAT would appreciate some feedback from our community. A large number of the great ideas were suggested on the June 15 (Nearly) open-thread Wednesday thread. A list of these ideas was generated (ordered simply by which was mentioned first).

TBAT asks community members on which of the following topics they would feel comfortable facilitating discussions and answering questions. TBAT will contact volunteers and arrange the question/answer session dates. [Note: this is not an exhaustive list of the topic that were suggested on the thread in question it is merely a list things mentioned on the first page of comments. It will take some time to deal with all of the interesting topics that were suggested.]

Select which topics you would be willing to facilitate / answer questions about.

Transgender Issues
Atheism
Colour Blindness
Mormonism
Cultural Appropriation/Loss of voice
ASD/Asperger's
Paganism
Depression
ADHD

---

The Board Administration Team
(hapax, Kit Whitfield and mmy)



Comments

[Laiima]

I commend the would-be poster's courage in trying to make that post a reality. When I read the first feeler post, I thought about what it would mean if I did a post about my experiences, and I quickly realized that even with anonymity, I could not possibly feel safe enough to go forward. Even though my experience was more than half my life ago.

So I (think I) know how hard it is.

[Ruby]

Seconding the hat tip to the poster, and to TBAT for working so hard to find the elusive balance.

[LKE]

Um... a question for the lovely TBAT team. For the the question/answer sessions, would it be appropriate to speak as the daughter and sister of people with clinical depression?

I'd like to volunteer, but I can understand if you wish to reserve space to those with depression itself.

(If you can't see the e-mail address I use to log in, I'm willing to provide it in the comments.)

[Mmy]

@LKE: I think that we could probably develop a two-part 101 with one part dealing with the experience/reality of depression and another about the experience/reality living with someone who is clinically depressed.

You can email TBAT at slackmods at gmail dot com so we get your email address.

[LKE]

Thanks, Mmy.

[Leum]

Speaking as someone who has depression, I wouldn't mind a relative taking part (or a psychologist/psychiatrist taking part) as long as the relatives didn't outnumber the people who actually experience the illness.

[Deird, who can't email from this computer right now...]

I'm happy to answer questions about ADHD or Asperger's.

[Lonespark]

I could probably help out on the paganism or depression fronts. And I do think the voices of family members of the mentally ill are critical.

[Carrie]

So, I guess I'll leave this here.

Um... Would it be okay if we stopped saying Mormonism? I personally think that -isms are sometimes big old labels that obfuscate the fine and unique differences between individual practitioners and believers of said -isms. The word "liberalism" is a particularly good example of this, but I think that "Mormonism" works real well, too. There's this tremendous difference between FLDS and LDS churches, but they both practice "Mormonism." I think the distinction can be really important? I know I've used it before, myself, but as a blanket term, it makes me a little uncomfortable? I don't have a real solid alternative ("Mormon theology," or "mainstream Mormonism" or "The LDS church" might work?) and this isn't something I am angry or particularly virulent about, I just don't really like "Mormonism."

I'm still absolutely interested in doing a 101 for mainstream Mormonism, if y'all can't find anybody else. I also have experience with depression and with its lingering effects and can do my best to talk about what specifically psychotic depression feels like, but it seems like there are plenty of people who can talk about depression. I think family members are cool, too! It'd be neat if we could do both, a "this is what it feels like" and a "this is what it's like to be near to" segment.

[Mmy]

@Leum: Speaking as someone who has depression, I wouldn't mind a relative taking part (or a psychologist/psychiatrist taking part) as long as the relatives didn't outnumber the people who actually experience the illness.

Leum -- I agree it is important that the voices of the relatives don't overwhelm the voices of those depressed.

@Carrie: . There's this tremendous difference between FLDS and LDS churches, but they both practice "Mormonism." I think the distinction can be really important? I know I've used it before, myself, but as a blanket term, it makes me a little uncomfortable? I don't have a real solid alternative ("Mormon theology," or "mainstream Mormonism" or "The LDS church" might work?) and this isn't something I am angry or particularly virulent about, I just don't really like "Mormonism."

Good point Carrie. Making the effort to not just say "Mormons" can remind us not to make the assumption that every single Mormon one meets thinks and acts in the same way.

[Josh (Enigma32)]

I know I'm not a regular here, but I wouldn't have any problems fielding questions about Atheism, ADHD or Depression if anyone is curious.

[zigforas]

Just wanted to chime in--because I didn't on any of the earlier threads--and say that I really like the idea of 101 Wednesdays and that I'm excited for the first one.

(Can't sleep tonight--alas--but it's nice to be able to browse around the Slacktiverse and feel like it's time well spent until I'm finally drowsy enough to go to bed.)

[aravind]

I'm going to take a page from Carrie's book and just leave something here. I've run into a number of examples of either "gays don't reproduce" or "kids with same-sex parents have some horrible something or other" which quite literally deny that I exist or basically treat me like I'm some sort of irreparably broken person, respectively. As a cisgendered and white and USA-located guy, I'm obviously pretty damn privileged, but those approaches to, well, my existence always seemed to be borrowing from, for example, the characterization of Muslim women or "third world" women or other "oppressed group within another oppressed group" that's usually invisible until we decide to hold them up as a reason to deny the broader group rights, because they're oppressive towards that minority in their midst (and so, the subgroup basically doesn't exist except at the leisure of some external privileged force and usually at a high price).

(Ugh sorry, rambling, lost my point...)

My point in all of this, is maybe I could help with a cultural appropriation bit? I really don't feel comfortable (as a white American that is) saying, "ah yes, let me tell you all about cultural appropriation and loss of voice and how I've become a piece of evidence in a larger debate about rights for QUILTBAG folks!" But still, I think I might have something to contribute to that, but I really wouldn't be comfortable doing it alone.

[aravind]

Which is just a convoluted way of saying, hey, has anyone else been made to feel similarly (appropriated/erased) and want to write a 101 with me?

[Leum]

Just in case the slackmods don't get my e-mail, I'm up for taking part in the atheism, depression, and asd/asperger's roundtables.

[Carrie]

Oh, crumbs. Somebody's reading comprehension is terrible today. I definitely sent the poor mods an e-mail about the topics that I was particularly interested in. Thanks, Leum, for causing me to realize my mistake.

[kisekileia]

I'm interested in ADHD and Asperger's round tables. I'm still planning on writing a post on some issues that come up around ASDs and anti-oppression, but I have some other stuff that's a higher priority right now, so that may have to wait awhile.

[sarah]

I could answer questions on depression--but I can really only speak from my own experience.

[Ross]

For the overlap between the circles of "Haven't already heard" and "still interested in the goings on at the new home of our former host," Fred just posted an article on "Comment Spam", which is really a smackdown against a repeated troll who keeps shouting right-wing talking points like some kind of robot michelle bachman (okay, *more* robot). Someone finally made themselves enough of an ass that Fred took it upon himself to respond.

As Leo McGarry would say, "Watch this..."

(Also, every time the afforementioned troll (Because disqus is blocked, his name just shows up for me as "Anonymous") talks about "THE LAW IS THE LAW WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DONT YOU UNDERSTAND", my brain ponies up a clip of Judge Dredd and his brother Rico shouting the word "LAW!" at each other in OTT Stalone-acting)

[zigforas]

My point in all of this, is maybe I could help with a cultural appropriation bit? I really don't feel comfortable (as a white American that is) saying, "ah yes, let me tell you all about cultural appropriation and loss of voice and how I've become a piece of evidence in a larger debate about rights for QUILTBAG folks!"

avarind, I wasn't clear from your post whether you were offering to write about cultural appropriation/loss of voice from your experience as a child of QUILTBAG parent(s), or as a QUILTBAG-identified individual. (I guess that's what 3:29AM EST can do :)). Could you clarify?

[Phoenix]

I'm sorry to hear that piece won't be published. I was hoping to read it. But I, too, commend the slackmods for giving this so much thought and careful consideration, and I appreciate them telling us the conclusion they reached.

@Carrie, I'm glad to honor your request, and I'll watch my other "isms" from now on as well. I apologize if I've been doing this to you or others before now.

I would really, really, really, really like to have a Transgender 101. I want to read more about it, especially about the ways in which society has mistreated such individuals (from those who don't mind sharing, of course) in case I've inadvertently been contributing to them, because the little that I do know so far is really illuminating my blind spots.

Trigger warning for transgender minimalization/mischaracterization which sent me into a blind rage:

I was reading a book last night entitled Boy Meets Girl by Joshua Harris, which is the sequel to I Kissed Dating Goodbye. These books talk about how to "court" rather than date. (I read both of them about ten years ago when I largely agreed with them, and I like to read books that I read when I was young and religious to see how my perspective on them has changed - you might call it a personal project. I usually disagree hugely with the conclusions, but they don't often anger me like this one did.)

One of his chapters delves heavily into gender roles and how God designed men and women to interact with each other and how beautiful the whole thing is, etc. I was already kind of mad (it was a lot of nonsense and blatant pandering to awful stereotypes, which Harris apparently thought were "edgy"), but THEN he dropped this little bomb:

[Blah blah blah, people reject gender roles because of wickedness and sin.] This is a picture of the wicked and perverse generation in which Christians are called to shine like stars (Phillippians 2:15). It's the generation of the "transgendered," in which men act like women and women act like men. And it's amidst this chaos that God wants His children to be faithful to the roles He has assigned us, even though the majority of humanity has abandoned them.

What? WHAT?! Um... wow. Like I said, I don't know a huge amount about this but I do know that his "definition" is not what the freaking word actually means. I honestly couldn't believe what I was reading. And I used to... look to this book... and other like it... for guidance?!?!

Almost as upsetting as the fact that it actually said such an awful thing is the fact that it went completely unnoticed by me the first time I read it. Deprogramming sucks.

D8

[Nick Kiddle]

@Phoenix: You would think, after being told that I'm abusing my child by being trans, that I would be beyond being bothered by that kind of ridiculous statement. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way - it's just yet another reminder of how many people seem to think we're fair game to project whatever obsessions about gender they may have onto. The little gnat bites and the huge sucking wounds are all part of the same horrible hole.

..tl;dr: I agree that there is much to induce rage.

[Nick Kiddle]

"horrible Whole", even. I must be more stressed than I thought.

[Phoenix]

@Nick Kiddle, I don't think I've talked to you before but I've been reading your comments and blog religiously. It was actually you I thought of when I read that comment (I hope that doesn't creep you out or anything!). I'm sure I don't know a fraction of the crap you've been through over this issue.

I would be particularly interested in reading anything you had to say in a 101 discussion.

[zigforas]

And it's amidst this chaos that God wants His children to be faithful to the roles He has assigned us, even though the majority of humanity has abandoned them.

"Even though the majority of humanity has abandoned" cis-typical(?)/heteronormative(?) gender roles? [What descriptive is appropriate there?] Does Joshua Harris live in the same universe we do?

And I used to... look to this book... and other like it... for guidance?!?!

I feel your pain, Phoenix. I really do.

[Zigforas]

Oops, close blockquote!

[Phoenix, who enjoys being a girl and doesn't care to be told how to do it]

I feel your pain, Phoenix. I really do.

The guy has blanket gender stereotypes coming out of his ears. One of my personal favorites was when he said, jokingly, that men prefer food and women prefer flowers (in the context of how to show romantic affection to one another). He said it as a joke, but since it was part of his larger commentary on How Gender Roles Should Work, it made me really mad. (I like to buy flowers for my fiance, and he likes to cook me dinner.)

Obviously this was one of his less offensive statements but it is -really not cool- to generalize like that. And I thought it was a pretty revealing example of how small stereotypes like that can quickly morph into full-blown gender norming.

There are, in fact, so many things wrong with this book that I was tempted to write a Left Behind-style post about it, pulling apart all of the awful things it completely took for granted about love, sex and relationships.

[Izzy]

I'd be willing to participate in something on paganism: the email link brings up Outlook, though, so I'm not sure what to do there.

[Laiima]

I had e-mailed TBAT, but I would be willing to participate in panels on Paganism, ADHD, and depression. I'm not sure if I qualify for "loss of voice", but if I do, I'd be willing to do that as well.

[MaryKaye]

I would be willing to participate in a roundtable on paganism or depression. I could contribute some genetics to a discussion of color blindness but I am not colorblind and I'm not sure how relevant it would be.

I can't use the email link either. TBAT, I believe you already have my email address.

[MaryKaye]

On a cross-continental plane flight I had to sit next to a young man who was reading _Men are from Mars_. I have a bad habit of reading over peoples' shoulders, and I wanted to shake him and say "Get rid of this book! It will make you unhappy!"

All sorts of stuff about limiting peoples' choices and individuality. The one I remember is that I should never light fires if my spouse is around, because it will be so much more fulfilling for him to do it. But...I *like* lighting fires. Even if he does too, why not take turns?

And, men are visual whereas women are not. Um, not my man. Sexy lingerie, stripped to the skin, slinky robes, whatever. It doesn't get his attention. *Touch* him and you've got his attention. I am the visual one of the two of us. So much wasted time and potential happiness missed out if people believe this crap!

There is a story in _Drawing Down the Moon_ about a Pagan priest who met a spiritual advisor in a vision and was told, "Either you can have the wonders of true love, or be a powerful magician." His response was "Get out of here, false adviser." He said afterwards, anything that wants to reduce your life that way is not your ally. (I'm probably paraphrasing this badly, I can't find the book right now.) I think that's just as true of people as it is of spirit guides. If they are telling you, "This is a good thing but you shouldn't have it because you're a man/woman/straight/gay/black/whatever" they are trying to harm you, no matter how many times they say it's for your good.

[aravind]

Zigforas: I wasn't clear from your post whether you were offering to write about cultural appropriation/loss of voice from your experience as a child of QUILTBAG parent(s), or as a QUILTBAG-identified individual.

The former. I think I was getting caught up in the idea of less privileged members within an already unprivileged group and how that template is problematic enough when talking about, say, QUILTBAG folks in the Middle East or women in Latin America, but then applying it to children raised by same-sex couples (and Nick Kiddle's experiences make it pretty clear, trans parents as well) makes it clear that some people are convinced that there's something deeply, seriously "wrong" with them, and that exposing children to us (both QUILTBAG people and children of QUILTBAG people) is, frankly, contaminating.

That's a bit off topic though, maybe. I'd like to focus more on the weirdly contradictory arguments being pushed - that QUILTBAG people don't have kids and even if they did end up with some it would be wrong/damaging/awful.

The first part is kind of a ridiculous generalization, especially given the artificial fertilization technology we have nowadays, but more importantly just ridiculous. We're not running out of people or anything. There are far too many kids without homes. Straight people aren't asked to prove that they're fertile before marrying or anything. There's so much that's just weirdly off about the first argument, but the core of it is a denial of QUILTBAG individual's fertility, which is basically no longer an issue.

The second part is even more complicated though. I'm reminded of one of the lines in the movie The Kids Are Alright, were the lesbian couple's daughter complains that she's worked hard to disprove the myths about lesbians but that she still doesn't feel good enough for her parents. Ugh, because her parents are totally the ones pressuring her to prove that her family is functional and valid. I feel the same pressures that she mentioned, but not because my parents have ever pressured me, but because people have literally come up to them and told them that they're abusive for raising me at all. I don't defend my parents because they brainwashed me (I've been accused of that) or because they've pressured me to. I stick up for them because they've actually been good parents.

It's just really abrasive how people literally try to use your existence or purported non-existence as evidence to take away others' (or in some cases, your own) rights. It seems similar to appropriation or erasure, so I thought if other people had interest in writing something I could contribute.

All of this really reminds me of what MaryKaye just posted, because usually the tone is patronizing but pseudo-sympathetic while I'm being told what my (non-)existence is like - "This is a good thing but you shouldn't have it because you're a man/woman/straight/gay/black/whatever".

Zigforas: "Even though the majority of humanity has abandoned" cis-typical(?)/heteronormative(?) gender roles? [What descriptive is appropriate there?] Does Joshua Harris live in the same universe we do?

Yes, but some one, somewhere, is doing stuff in a way he disapproves of!

[aravind]

PS: Ok, artificial insemination and related procedures make producing kids "no longer an issue" in a really weak sense. There's still social judgment, high costs of procedures, complicated legal issues, and assorted other problems that can and usually will rear their ugly head. But those technologies still make it technically possible without having to be closeted or some such thing, which is a good thing and a step forward in some way, although there's still limitations.

[Phoenix]

@aravind, I hope you do contribute to this post (or write your own about it, even). I am especially fascinated by the idea that by denying your parents, people are actually denying you - and the integrity of your existence. It sounds almost like you're saying that people tell you, "You would be such a better aravind had you grown up with two hetero parents."

I think I have that right? Please correct me if not. But assuming I have, wow. That's a whole new (tragic) angle of de-personing QUILTBAGS that I'd never considered before.

[Heartfout]

There are, in fact, so many things wrong with this book that I was tempted to write a Left Behind-style post about it, pulling apart all of the awful things it completely took for granted about love, sex and relationships.

It sounds like something I'd be interested in doing...except that I'm not sure if I'd be able to, given that I don't really have an internal idea of `gender` myself, and I really don't understand how people have gender identity, so the review would probably mostly be me going `Whaaaaaaaa?`.

(Not saying that identifying as a gender or both genders is bad, just that I can't grok it)

[ZMiles]

I can contribute to an atheism roundtable.

[Deird, who uses gmail]

For the record, TBAT, having built-in links for emailing people can be a real problem sometimes.

I have two computers I'm likely to be using - neither of which will direct me to the right email address from those links. (One will go to my work email, which is just for work stuff, and the other will go to my official editing email. Both use my real name, which I never use for emailing people I haven't met.) When those email links pop up, my only option is to copy-paste everything into my normal email account.

And it used to be much more difficult - when I didn't have my editing email account, clicking those links on my laptop would cause a popup saying SET UP YOUR EASY AND FAST EMAIL ACCOUNT!!! and I'd be left totally unable to send the email I wanted to.

[MercuryBlue]

On topic: Damn shame about the sexual assault post. I hope the author posts it zirself and links it to us. Also, I'd like to contribute to a 101 on atheism but I don't think I have very much to offer on either subject compared to other folks around here.

Since this is a Board Business thread and therefore qualifies as an open thread: I had an idea this afternoon and it is scaring the living daylights out of me. Not because it's a bad idea, since I'm pretty sure it's not, but because it's so good an idea that I'm pretty sure I have to put it into practice and I don't know where or how to start.

A US political party with a platform centered around FDR's Four Freedoms. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from want, and freedom from fear, with particular attention to the social and economic justice concerns of 'freedom from want' and 'freedom from fear'. Inspired by the Tea Party, sort of, and by a friend's comment that nothing in this country happens without Wall Street's consent--the Four Freedoms Party, for lack of a better name, would, I hope, be a grassroots organization to take our country back from Wall Street and from social and economic conservatism.

Opinions?

[Phoenix, who wants a lot of things]

@MercuryBlue - The first two and fourth I get, but what do you mean by freedom from want? How would that work?

[MercuryBlue]

Decent standard of living for all with whom the US is concerned, is the biggest thing there, and immigration reform so that the people currently picking our food can get legal status and decent wages would be included in the package. Not saying yachts for everybody, but no one should be hungry or homeless or jobless if it's in our power to fix, and if we raised taxes enough to cover a whole bunch of federal funding for Habitat for Humanity and for the reincarnation of the Works Progress Administration, such power would indeed be ours.

[Phoenix]

@MercuryBlue - it's an intriguing idea but as a fiscal conservative, I probably won't be of much help in brainstorming here :-)

[Noah Brand]

Regarding the sexual assault piece, I understand and respect the reasons you've chosen not to publish it, but I'm one of the bloggity dudes over at http://noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz.wordpress.com/ and it sounds like just the kind of thing we like to engage with. I'd like to invite the author to contact us via https://noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz.wordpress.com/contact-us/ and we'll see if we can't find a home for his piece on MRA thinking leading to becoming a rape apologist.

[zigforas]

I'd be willing to co-facilitate a 101 on Reformed Christian theology/culture. (Think "Calvinist predestination" if that doens't ring a bell, though there's some fascinating cultural stuff for young evangelical/Reformed Christians going on currently that's sort of akin to yet opposite to the emergent church movement.)

Co-facilitate with one or more, though, if possible--not sure I have the expertise/emotional wherewithal to handle it on my own.

(I'll email TBAT as well. Just wanted to post here to see if there were any interested co-facilitators.)

[Choir of Shades]

If I'm around, I'll help on the depression panel.

I could also contribute a little bit to a trans panel.

[Rowen]

(just in case my mail didn't go through)

I'd be happy to help with a piece on color blindness. I'm red green color blind, and almost failed kindergarten cause I didn't "know" my colors. Yet, I grew up and went to art school (not that I'm doing much with it now, and ended up switching majors my last year, but that had nothing to do with my color blindness).

I'd be happy to do something with Pagans, but I feel like we got that covered. I also spent a few years working on a psychiatric unit, and could give an outsider's inside point of view, if that makes any sense.

[kisekileia]

I would be okay with someone who worked on a psychiatric unit or a relative of someone with psych issues talking about what it was like to work on a psychiatric unit or to have relatives with psych issues. I would not be comfortable with someone in either of those categories speaking authoritatively on what the experience of having a psychiatric disorder is like, and I'd be very iffy about such a person speaking authoritatively about how people with psychiatric disorders should be treated by others (except professionally, if the person has professional training).

[Ross]

I'd be happy to help on the subject of colorblindness, though my own case is mild enough that I'm not sure my observations would be especially useful beyond the observation that "So what color does red look like to you?" isn't a question I can answer in any way that will help you understand why I can't pick strawberries.

[Rowen]

Ross, I think that's part of the whole "mystique" of color blindness. Someone only seeing in monochrome is VERY rare, even though that's what people immediately jump to when they hear the phrase "color blind."

Or they start waving red or green things in my face and asking me what color they are.

[Ross]

@Rowen: Monochrome vision isn't *that* rare, but it's hardly ever congenital. Monocromatism is the kind of colorblindness you usually get if you go color-blind from retinal injury. I had a science teacher who was a monochromat as a result of welding with an inadequate visor. But yeah. I don't even think most people's minds go to that per se, but they always seem to expect that I'll get particular sets of colors transposed, like see red *as* green and vice-versa. Which I don't think anyone does, even with profound deuteranomaly.

Also, we find it really really rude to have things shoved in front of us with a mocking "WHat color is this? What color is this? You're not really colorblind! What color is this?"

[Ross]

Actually, this has me thinking. Last night, Neil DeGrasse Tyson tweeted the hypothetical "If humans had copper-based blood, what color would stop signs be?"

His question was based on the idea that stop signs are red because red is the color of warning because blood is red. And a quick perusal of the internet turns up that *lots* of people think that this is indeed the reason stop signs are red, but I can't find a single *canonical* reference to it -- which to my mind places it in the category of "things which almost everyone believes to be true completely indepdented of whether or not it actually is true."

*I* think that stop signs are red for an entirely different reason. (Well, most people who have looked at it act5ually say that stop signs are red because railroad stop lights are red, but that doesn't actually answer the question, just defers it). I think stop signs are red because of Rayleigh scattering. Red light is scattered less than green or blue light, so at a distance, red things are more visible than other colors.

Does anyone know of a definitive source about red as a warning color?