Science of Changing Sex

Given the ongoing “culture war” regarding sexual orientation, wherein some elements of society wish to portray homosexuality as “sinful”, “mental illness”, or both it is no surprise that the question of etiology of homosexuality, and indeed of any sexual orientation, has become a political, as well as scientific question.  Into this fray has come some of the best and brightest of the sexologists who are exploring the science.  I know that some transsexuals and transgendered folk won’t like to read the name of the lead author, but in science, it is not important who says something, but what the evidence says.  The lead author is J. Michael Bailey.  Yes, that Prof. Bailey.

Bailey is joined by Lisa Diamond, Paul Vassey, Marc Breedlove, Eric Vilain, and Mark Epprecht in a masterful compliation and exposition on the current science of sexual orientation.  The paper also covers evidence concerning androphilic MTF transgender people and covers some remarkable conjectures regarding the role of culture, nurture if you will, regarding the difference between MTF transkids and conventional gay men.  Fortunately, the paper is NOT behind a paywall, so my reader may follow the link provided in the reference section to read it for oneself, which I highly recommend.

The paper lays out powerful evidence that shows that indeed “nature” has a very strong role to play in the development of sexual orientation.  But as the authors point out, this does NOT mean that morally or politically such evidence, or indeed proof, has any bearing on how society should treat non-heterosexual people,

Ongoing political controversies around the world exemplify a long-standing and widespread preoccupation with the acceptability of homosexuality. Nonheterosexual people have seen dramatic surges both in their rights and in positive public opinion in many Western countries. In contrast, in much of Africa, the Middle East, the Caribbean, Oceania, and parts of Asia, homosexual behavior remains illegal and severely punishable, with some countries retaining the death penalty for it. Political controversies about sexual orientation have often overlapped with scientific controversies. That is, participants on both sides of the sociopolitical debates have tended to believe that scientific findings—and scientific truths—about sexual orientation matter a great deal in making political decisions. The most contentious scientific issues have concerned the causes of sexual orientation—that is, why are some people heterosexual, others bisexual, and others homosexual? The actual relevance of these issues to social, political, and ethical decisions is often poorly justified, however.  … No causal theory of sexual orientation has yet gained widespread support. The most scientifically plausible causal hypotheses are difficult to test. However, there is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial causes of sexual orientation than social causes. This evidence includes the cross-culturally robust finding that adult homosexuality is strongly related to childhood gender nonconformity; moderate genetic influences demonstrated in well-sampled twin studies; the cross-culturally robust fraternal-birth-order effect on male sexual orientation; and the finding that when infant boys are surgically and socially “changed” into girls, their eventual sexual orientation is unchanged (i.e., they remain sexually attracted to females). In contrast, evidence for the most commonly hypothesized social causes of homosexuality—sexual recruitment by homosexual adults, patterns of disordered parenting, or the influence of homosexual parents—is generally weak in magnitude and distorted by numerous confounding factors.

Setting aside the issues of policy and etiology, there are still some important issues regarding cultural factors influencing expression of androphilia in males because one of the models of why non-heterosexual orientations may persist is that of kin selection, in which the gender atypicality of androphilic males is evolutionarily selected for and maintained in the population because androphilic males help their near relatives raise their children, thereby increasing the chances of their own genes, shared with those close relatives, to perpetuate.  In this model, gender atypical androphilic males are in effect, an evolutionarily ‘fit’ alternative ‘morph’; far from being a “mistake of nature”, they are in a very real sense, a “third sex” involved in reproduction by proxy through childcare.

Consistent with the predictions of the Kin Selection Hypothesis (KSH), research conducted in Samoa on transgender androphilic males (fa’afafine) has repeatedly demonstrated that they show elevated avuncular (uncle-like) tendencies compared to Samoan women and gynephilic men. (This is measured via a 9-item scale measuring willingness to care for, and to give resources to, nieces and nephews. Furthermore, this finding does not appear to reflect a general tendency to help others, but a specific preference for kin. In contrast, research on cisgender androphilic males in Western populations and non-Western industrialized cultures has garnered virtually no support for the KSH. It is possible that elevated avuncularity is not expressed unless male androphilia takes on the transgender form. More research is needed to ascertain whether other populations of transgender male androphiles exhibit elevated kin-directed altruism or not.  …  Societies in which transgender male androphilia predominates exhibit a significantly greater presence of human ancestral sociocultural conditions compared to societies in which the cisgender form predominates. This suggests that the transgender form of male androphilia was likely the ancestral form. As such, transgender male androphilia likely represents the best model for testing evolutionary hypotheses, given that more derived forms of this trait may reflect recent cultural/historical influences that might obscure the outcome of evolutionary processes. Consequently, the most promising results from tests of both the KSH and SAGH are from studies of Samoan fa’afafine. The evidence would be much stronger if other populations of transgender androphilic males showed similar effects.

Let’s think about this a moment.  If the Western form, conventional gay men, don’t show an interest in their kin, is that because their homophobic siblings won’t let them, or because trying to be gender typical (straight acting) includes disavowing any interests in what would be considered womanly interest in young children?  I know its only anecdotal, but my reader may wish to check out my own history of a very strong interest in children.  Also note that my siblings have forbidden me from having anything to do with their children, due to extreme religious notions and transphobia.  (Note to researchers: Can we please use the more gender identity respectful term materteral if we are speaking of transgendered MTF folk here?)

Here is where things get really interesting.  The authors conjecture here that cultural factors influence the form that male androphilia takes depends upon the culture that androphilic males find themselves in,

Same-sex sexuality between adults typically takes one of two cross-culturally recurrent forms, which are related to gender-role enactment and gender identity. These two forms are cisgender and transgender male androphilia and female gynephilia.

Cisgender male androphiles and female gynephiles occupy the gender role typical of their sex and identify as “men” and “women,” respectively. This is the form of homosexuality that is nearly universal in the contemporary West. In contrast, transgender male androphiles and female gynephiles do not occupy the gender role typical of their sex. Not only do they behave in a highly gender-atypical manner, but they often identify, and are identified by others, as neither “men” nor “women,” but rather, as a member of some alternative gender category. Contemporary examples of transgender male androphiles include the kathoey of Thailand, the xanith of Oman, the muxes of Mexico, and the fa’afafine of Samoa. Some contemporary examples of transgender female gynephiles include the tombois of Sumatra and the mahu of Tahiti.

In some cultures, transgender male androphilia and female gynephilia are linked to particular institutionalized labor practices, which often involve specialized religious activities. This type of transgender male androphilia has been referred to as “profession defined”. For example, on the Indian subcontinent, transgender male androphiles known as hijra bestow blessings from Hindu gods and goddesses for luck and fertility at weddings and at the births of male babies. In Sulawesi, Indonesia, transgender androphilic males known as bissu are shamans who bless people for good health and successful journeys and who play important ritual roles in weddings. These institutionalized religious roles sometimes carry with them the expectation of asceticism, but often this ideal is not realized. In general, same-sex-attracted individuals self-select to fill these roles, probably because they are recognized as socially acceptable niches.

Here I have to interject a note of caution, nay, derision.  There is a tendency for Western sociologists to romantasize the social status of transgender people.  For example, the hijra are NOT welcome guests at wedding and births.  They come uninvited.  I’ve had a number of occasions to speak at length, careful not to ‘out’ myself, with Hindu expat colleagues from India.  Universally, when speaking of hijra, the tone is one of revulsion and hatred.  The hijra are not revered co-religionists, but feared and dispised “vermin”.  The “blessings” being bestowed are the obverse of a coin, the reverse of which is the obviation of the threat that the children of the marriage or newborn will be “cursed”… the superstitious Hindus believe that the hijra have the power to curse the future childen of a bride or a newborn to become hijra, the lowest of the low, so they pay the unwelcome hijra “guests” money to ensure that they leave without cursing their children.  The hijra also beg on the streets, with the understood threat that if they are not given money, they will lift their skirts to the horror of the onlooking men, to show the scars of their very crude “castration” while being cursed.  From other lengthy conversations I’ve had with an Amercan transsexual who lived for a time among the hijra in India, I learned that many hijra suppliment their begging with prostitution.  Thus, the hijra have wrested for themselves a social position of begging and prostitution… a social position not too much different than poor street transkids in the Western nations.

But, to continue,

Cisgender male androphiles and female gynephiles behave in a relatively gender-typical manner when compared with their transgender counterparts. However, they are relatively gender-atypical when compared to gynephilic cisgender men and androphilic cisgender women. Thus, regardless of the form they take, male androphilia and female gynephilia are associated with gender-atypicality. However, the strength of this association varies with the manner in which same-sex sexuality is publicly expressed.

Both the cisgender and transgender forms of same-sex sexuality may occur within a given culture, but typically one or the other predominates. For example, the cisgender form tends to be much more common in many Western cultures. In contrast, the transgender form appears to be more common in many non-Western cultures. In places where the two forms coexist, their members often consider each other to be part of the same subculture. Margaret Mead observed a meeting in which an Omaha minquga (i.e., a transgender male androphile) and a Japanese homosexual man (i.e., a cisgender male androphile) who visited her field site in 1961 instantly recognized each other. Within an hour of the Japanese man’s arrival, the sole minquga in the tribe turned up and tried to make contact with him. Similarly, sociologist Fredrick Whitam noted that, in São Paulo, travesti (transgender male androphiles) are an especially conspicuous presence in gay clubs and are treated with a high degree of respect.

In contemporary Western cultures, cisgender male androphiles typically engage in sexual interactions with each other; the same is true of cisgender female gynephiles. That is, in the West, homosexual relationships are typically between two homosexual individuals. Such individuals comprise the Western gay and lesbian communities. This type of same-sex sexual relationship has been referred to as “egalitarian” and is characterized by partners who are not markedly different in age or gender-related characteristics. Within such relationships, partners tend not to adopt special social roles, and they treat each other as equals. In contrast, this pattern appears to be relatively uncommon in non-Western cultures and has emerged only recently in certain non-Western urban centers.

Although transgender male androphiles are same-sex attracted, they rarely, if ever, engage in sexual activity with each other; the same is true of transgender female gynephiles. Rather, these individuals engage in sexual activity with same-sex cisgender partners who self-identify, and are identified by others, as “men” or “women.” For example, in Samoa, very feminine natal males called fa’afafine (which means “in the manner of women”) have sex with masculine Samoan men. The fa’afafine would be aghast at the idea of having sex with one another.

Little research has focused on the cisgender sexual partners of same-sex-attracted transgender males and females. Blackwood noted that, in Sumatra, the cisgender female partners (femmes) of tombois “assert an uncomplicated attraction to men, [but] position themselves (if temporarily) under the label ‘lesbi’”—a derivative of “lesbian.” This suggests an episodic pattern of bisexual attraction on the part of femmes. In many cultures, same-sex sexual interactions between transgender and cisgender persons are not considered “homosexual” because they are understood to be hetero-gendered. In other words, if a cisgender androphilic male and a transgender androphilic male engage in sex, the former individual is often understood to be “the male partner” in the interaction, whereas the latter individual is often understood to be “the female partner.” Accordingly, the interaction is understood as male-female rather than male-male. The degree to which cisgender individuals who have sex with transgender persons of their same biological sex (i.e., men who have sex with female-appearing men and women who have sex with male-appearing women) are perceived as different from those whose sexual behavior is only with the other sex (i.e., conventional heterosexuals) remains an open question.

OK, there is one person who has conducted at least limited research on transgendered male androphiles and their non-trans male romantic partners, Dr. Richard Green.  As I explored in another essay, at least in the United States, they are conventionally heterosexual.  I can’t speak for the partners of fa’afafine in Samoa, but I got the impression from reading about them that they too find conventionally heterosexual partners.

For the sake of a thought experiment, let us conceed for the moment that the form that male androphilia takes depends on the culture that they find themselves.  (This will not be a popular notion among either Western Gay men nor autogynephiles who would otherwise wish to identify as androphilic transwomen.)  Let us further assume that the Kinship Selection Hypothesis is correct.  This would support not only the notion that androphilic males are a special morph, but that of neccessity, the transgender form is the evolutionarily selected form.  In which case, transkids are not “failed gay men”… but Western Gay Men are “failed transkids” !!!  This also reads upon efforts to “help” gender atypical children to be “more gender fluid”, less gender atypical, less.. well… less likely to be transgender, is in fact an attempt to fight an evolutionarilty selected and natural role, and as such is a “crime against nature”.

I would be tempted to close this with “just say’n”, but I’ve always found that expression to be irratating.

Further Reading:

Essay on the male romantic partners of transwomen

Essay on evidence that MTF transkids and gay men have the same etiology

References:

Bailey, et al., “Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science”, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, doi: 10.1177/1529100616637616

Thanks  https://sillyolme.wordpress.com/

Bilingual people seem to have different neural pathways for their two languages

Bilingual people seem to have different neural pathways for their two languages, and both are active when either language is used. As a result, bilinguals are continuously suppressing one of their languages -- subconsciously -- in order to focus and process the relevant one.

The first evidence for this came out of an experiment in 1999, in which English--Russian bilinguals were asked to manipulate objects on a table. In Russian, they were told to "put the stamp below the cross". But the Russian word for stamp is "marka", which sounds similar to "marker", and eye-tracking revealed that the bilinguals looked back and forth between the marker pen and the stamp on the table before selecting the stamp.

And it seems the different neural patterns of a language are imprinted in our brains for ever, even if we don't speak it after we've learned it. Scans of Canadian children who had been adopted from China as preverbal babies showed neural recognition of Chinese vowels years later, even though they didn't speak a word of Chinese.

காதலித்து கெட்டு போ. நா.முத்துக்குமார்

அதிகம் பேசு
ஆதி ஆப்பிள் தேடு
மூளை கழற்றி வை
முட்டாளாய் பிறப்பெடு
கடிகாரம் உடை
காத்திருந்து காண்
நாய்க்குட்டி கொஞ்சு
நண்பனாலும் நகர்ந்து செல்
கடிதமெழுத கற்றுக்கொள்
வித,விதமாய் பொய் சொல்
விழி ஆற்றில் விழு
பூப்பறித்து கொடு
மேகமென கலை
மோகம் வளர்த்து மித
மதி கெட்டு மாய்
கவிதைகள் கிறுக்கு
கால்கொலுசில் இசை உணர்
தாடி வளர்த்து தவி
எடை குறைந்து சிதை
உளறல் வரும் குடி
ஊர் எதிர்த்தால் உதை
ஆராய்ந்து அழிந்து போ
மெல்ல செத்து மீண்டு வா
திகட்ட, திகட்ட காதலி..

How big is a proton? No one knows exactly, and that’s a problem

It’s a subatomic mystery with big implications. Six years after physicists announced a bafflingly too small measurement of the size of the proton, we’re still not sure what’s going on. With the release of new data today, the mystery has, if anything, got deeper.

Protons are particles found inside the nucleus of atoms. For years, the proton’s radius seemed pinned down at about 0.877 femtometres, or less than a quadrillionth of a metre.

But in 2010, Randolf Pohl at the Max Planck Institute of Quantum Optics in Garching, Germany, got a worryingly different answer using a new measurement technique.

Pohl’s team altered the one proton, one electron composition of a hydrogen atom by switching the electron for a heavier particle called a muon. They then zapped this altered atom with a laser. Measuring the resulting change in its energy levels allowed them to calculate the size of its proton nucleus. To their surprise, it came out 4 per cent smaller than the traditional value measured via other means.

A 2013 measurement strengthened the finding, sending physicists searching for an explanation to the “proton radius puzzle“.

Pohl’s experiment also applied the new technique to deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen that has one proton and one neutron – collectively known as a deuteron – at its nucleus. Accurately calculating the size of the deuteron took plenty of time, however.

“The only thing that’s going to allow us to solve it is new data”
Today, the team have published their measurements, revealing that like the proton, the deuteron comes up short: in this case by 0.8 per cent.

These new numbers show that the proton radius problem isn’t going away, says Evangeline J. Downie at the George Washington University in Washington DC. “It tells us that there’s still a puzzle,” says Downie. “It’s still very open, and the only thing that’s going to allow us to solve it is new data.”

Several more experiments, at Pohl’s lab and others, are already under way. One will return to the same muon technique to measure the size of heavier atomic nuclei, like helium. Another plans to simultaneously measure the scattering of muons and electrons.

Pohl suspects the culprit may not be the proton itself, but an incorrect measurement of the Rydberg constant, a number that describes the wavelengths of light emitted by an excited atom. But this constant is well established through other precision experiments, so something drastic would have to have gone wrong.

Another explanation proposes new particles that cause unexpected interactions between the proton and the muon, without changing its relationship with the electron.

That could mean the puzzle is taking us beyond the standard model of particle physics. “If at some point in the future, somebody will discover something beyond the standard model, it would be like this,” says Pohl, with first one small discrepancy, then another and another, slowly building to a more monumental shift.

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6300/669

https://www.newscientist.com/…/2100834-how-big-is-a-proto…/…

http://arstechnica.com/…/researchers-orbit-a-muon-around-a…/

https://www.newscientist.com/…/dn23105-shrinking-proton-pu…/

http://www.physicscentral.com/explore/pictures/deuteron.cfm

https://www.psi.ch/media/the-psi-proton-accelerator

Incredible Photo with Exrtraordinary Story

This incredible photo marks the end of Matador Torero Álvaro Múnera’s career. He collapsed in remorse mid-fight when he realized he was having to prompt this otherwise gentle beast to fight. He went on to become an avid opponent of bullfights. Even grievously wounded by picadors, he did not attack this man.

Torrero Munera is quoted as saying of this moment: “And suddenly, I looked at the bull. He had this innocence that all animals have in their eyes, and he looked at me with this pleading. It was like a cry for justice, deep down inside of me. I describe it as being like a prayer - because if one confesses, it is hoped, that one is forgiven. I felt like the worst shit on earth.”

தீயோடு தோன்றுக! நா.முத்துக்குமார்

'ஒரு வண்ணத்துப் பூச்சி எந்தன் வழிதேடி வந்தது... அதன் வண்ணங்கள் மட்டும் எந்தன் விரலோடு உள்ளது' என காதலின் நுண்ணுணர்வை எளிய சொற்களில் பாடிச் சென்ற கவிஞர் நா.முத்துக்குமாரின் அகால மரணம்,

பிரபல தமிழ் திரைப்பட பாடல் ஆசிரியர் நா.முத்துக்குமார் (41), உடல் நலக் குறைவால் இன்று சென்னையில் காலமானார்.

மஞ்சள் காமாலை நோயால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டு, சிகிச்சை பெற்று வந்த முத்துக்குமார், சிகிச்சை பலனிற்றி இன்று காலமானார்.

காஞ்சிபுரம் மாவட்டத்தைச் சார்ந்தவர் நா.முத்துக்குமார். இயக்குநராக வேண்டும் என்ற நோக்குடன் இயக்குநர் பாலுமகேந்திராவிடம் உதவியாளராக சேர்ந்து, சீமானின் வீர நடை திரைப்படத்தில் பாடலாசிரியராக அறிமுகமானார் முத்துக்குமார். இரண்டு முறை தேசிய விருது பெற்றுள்ளார்.

ஆயிரத்துக்கும் மேற்பட்ட திரைப்படங்களுக்கு 1,500க்கும் மேற்பட்ட பாடல்களை எழுதியுள்ளார். அதிகபட்சமாக 2012-ஆம் ஆண்டில் மட்டும் இவர் 103 பாடல்களை எழுதி உள்ளார். கிரீடம் படத்தின் மூலம் வசனகர்த்தாவாக அறிமுகமானார்.

காதல் கொண்டேன், பிதாமகன், கில்லி, கஜினி, நந்தா, புதுப்பேட்டை, காதல், சந்திரமுகி, சிவாஜி, கற்றது தமிழ், 7 ஜி ரெயின்போ காலனி, காக்காமுட்டை, தெறி, தெய்வத் திருமகள், சைவம், தலைவா, சிவாஜி, சந்திரமுகி உள்ளிட்ட பல படங்களில் வரும் பாடல்கள் எழுதிய பாடல்கள் பெரிய வரவேற்பைப் பெற்றவை.

'தங்கமீன்கள்' படத்தில் இவர் எழுதிய ஆனந்த யாழை மீட்டுகிறாய் பாடலுக்கும், 'சைவம்' படத்தில் எழுதிய அழகே அழகே பாடலுக்கும் தேசிய விருது கிடைத்தது குறிப்பிடத்தக்கது. 2005-இல் தமிழக அரசின் சிறந்த பாடலாசிரியர் விருதினையும், பல பிலிம்பேர் விருதுகளையும் பெற்றுள்ளார்.

நியூட்டனின் மூன்றாம் விதி (கவிதைத் தொகுப்பு), கிராமம் நகரம் மாநகரம், பட்டாம்பூச்சி விற்பவன் (கவிதைத் தொகுப்பு), அனா ஆவண்ணா, என்னை சந்திக்க கனவில் வராதே, சில்க் சிட்டி, பால காண்டம், குழந்தைகள் நிறைந்த வீடு, வேடிக்கை பார்ப்பவன் ஆகிய நூல்களை எழுதியுள்ளார்.

1975-ஆம் ஆண்டு ஜூலை 12-ஆம் தேதி காஞ்சிபுரம் மாவட்டம், கன்னிகாபுரத்தில் பிறந்த நா.முத்துக்குமார், சென்னை அண்ணா நகரில் வசித்து வந்தார்.

நா.முத்துக்குமார் - தீபலஷ்மி தம்பதிக்கு ஆதவன் (9) என்ற மகனும், யோகலஷ்மி (8 மாதம்) என்ற மகளும் உள்ளனர்.

இவரது பிரிவு தமிழ் திரையுலக்கிற்கு பெரும் இழப்பு. தமிழ் திரையுலகத்தினரிடையே பெரும் அதிரிச்சியை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது.

தினமணி இலக்கிய திருவிழாவின் பேசுகையில் அவர் சொன்னது:

குடுசை வீடு தான், ஆனால் வீடு முழுவதும் 1 லட்சத்துக்கும் மேற்றப்ட்ட புத்தங்கங்கள் இருக்கும், அப்பா எந்நேரமும் வாசித்து கொண்டே இருப்பார். அவரை நான் தூங்கி பார்த்ததே இல்லை. இதை தவிர தமிழகத்தில் வரும் அனைத்து சஞ்சிகைகள், சிறு பத்திரிகைகள் என அனைத்தையும் வாங்குவார். சுற்றிலும் உள்ள 10க்கும் மேற்பட்ட நூலகங்களுக்கு, என்னையும் சைக்கிளில் அழைத்து செல்லுவார்

மிகவும் வேகமாக பாடல்கள் எழுதுவது இவரது தனித் திறம். இதன் காரணமாகவே பல வாய்புகள் இவரை தேடி தேடி வருகின்றன. எனக்கு தெரிந்த மட்டில் அடைமொழி இல்லாத கவிஞர் இவர் . (இணையத்தில் இவரை பற்றி தேடினால், கவி இளவரசன் என்று வருகிறது. அவர் அதை சூட்டிக் கொள்ளவோ, எந்த படத்திலும் பயன்படுத்தி கொள்ளவில்லை என்பதே நிதர்சனம்). கடந்த வருடத்தின் சிறந்த பாடலுக்கான விருதை : ஆனந்த யாழை, இந்திய அரசு இவருக்கு தந்து சிறப்பித்தது.

1975 ம் ஆண்டு ஜூலை மாதம் 12-ம் தேதி என் தாயின்

பிறந்தகமான சென்னையில், எழும்பூர் அரசு மருத்துவ

மனையில் நான் பிறந்தபோது, ஒட்டுமொத்த

மருத்துவமனையே மாடிக்கு ஓடி வந்தது. என்னைப் பார்க்கத்தான்

வருகிறார்கள் என்று நான் என் பால்யத்தின் முதல் புன்னகையைப்

பூமிக்குப் பரிசளித்தபோது, அந்தக் கூட்டம் என்னைக் கடந்து,

மொட்டை மாடிக்குச் சென்றது. ஒரு சில உயரமான கட்ட டங்களே

சென்னையாக இருந்த அந்த மொட்டை மாடியில் பதற்றத்துடன்

அவர்கள் பார்த்த காட்சி எல்.ஐ.சி. கட்டடம் தீப்பிடித்து எரிந்துகொண்டு

இருப்பதை.

இப்படித்தான் நண்பர்களே நான் பிறந்தபோதே என்னைச் சுற்றித்

தீப்பிடித்தது. அந்தத் தீயை அபசகுனமாகக் கருதாமல், என் தகப்பன்

தன் நாட்குறிப்பில் இப்படி எழுதினான்… ‘இன்று உலகின் இரண்டாவது

அறிவாளி பிறந்தான்!’

நான் முதல் முறையாக நா.முத்துக்குமார் ஆனேன்!

–

ஆழம் அறி!

எங்கள் வீடு முழுக்கப் புத்தகங்களே வியாபித்திருந்தன.

தமிழாசிரியரான தந்தை தேடித் தேடி புத்தகம் வாங்கினார்.

வால்கா முதல் கங்கை வரை என்னை புத்தக உலகில்

பயணிக்கவைத்தார்.

மூன்றாம் வகுப்பு படிக்கையில் சந்தை என்ற தலைப்பில்

சிறுகதை எழுதி அப்பாவிடம் வாசிக்கக் கொடுத்தேன்.

காய்கறிச் சந்தையில் கடை வைத்திருப்பவரைப்பற்றிய

கதை.

வாசித்துவிட்டு ஒன்றுமே சொல்லாமல் திருப்பிக் கொடுத்தார்.

அடுத்த நாள் அதிகாலை ஐந்து மணிக்கு என்னை எழுப்பி

சைக்கிளில் அமரவைத்து, காஞ்சிபுரம் ராஜாஜி காய்கறிச்

சந்தைக் குக் கூட்டிச் சென்றார்.

ஒருபுறம் லாரியில் இருந்து கூடை கூடையாகத் தக்காளிகள்

இறங்கிக்கொண்டு இருக்க…

உள்ளூர் விவசாயிகள் கீரைக் கட்டுகளை அடுக்கிக்கொண்டு

இருந்தனர். எங்கிருந்தோ வந்த ஒரு பசு மாடு, வாழை இலை

ஒன்றை இழுத்து கடிக்கத் துவங்க, யாரோ ஒருவர் அதை

விரட்டிக்கொண்டு இருந்தார். ‘இந்த டீக்கடையில் நான்

காத்திருக்கிறேன். நீ மார்க்கெட் முழுக்கச் சுற்றிப் பார்த்து

விட்டு வா’ என்றார் அப்பா. அரை மணி நேரம் கழித்துத் திரும்பி

வந்த என்னிடம் ‘உன் கதை நன்றாக இருந்தது.

ஆனால், அதில் உண்மையான காய்கறிச் சந்தை இல்லை.

எந்த இடத்திலும் காய்கறியின் வாசம் இல்லை. எதையும் உணர்ந்து

அனுபவித்து எழுது, உன் எழுத்து வலிமையாக இருக்கும்’ என்றார்.

வீட்டுக்குச் சென்றதும் அந்தக் கதையைக் கிழித்துப் போட்டேன்.

அன்று இரண்டாம் முறையாக நான் நா.முத்துக்குமார் ஆனேன்!

–

கோபம் கற்றுணர்!

–

பள்ளியில் படிக்கும்போதே என் கவிதைகளும் கதைகளும்

பத்திரிகைகளில் வர ஆரம்பித்தன. எங்கள் பள்ளியில் ஒரு சில

ஆசிரியர்கள் தங்களிடம் டியூஷன் படிக்கும் மாணவர்களுக்கு

மட்டுமே பாஸ் மார்க் போட்டார்கள்.

வகுப்பிலும் சொல்லித் தருவதில்லை. இதைக் கண்டித்து தூசிகள்

என்று கவிதைத் தொகுதி வெளியிட்டேன். பிரேயரில் என் கவிதை

விவாதிக்கப்பட்டு, என்னை ஒரு வாரம் சஸ்பெண்ட் செய்தார்கள்.

வார்த்தைகள் என்னைக் கைவிட்ட நிலையில், குற்றஉணர்வுடன்

அப்பா முன் நின்றேன். அவர் அமைதியாகச் சொன்னார்,

‘இப்போதுதான் உன் எழுத்து வலிமையாகிக்கொண்டு இருக்கிறது.

இன்னும் நிறைய எழுது!’ மூன்றாம் முறையாக நான் நா.முத்துக்குமார்

ஆனேன்.

உன் திசை உற்றுணர்!

காஞ்சி பச்சையப்பனில் இளங்கலை இயற்பியல் சேர்ந்தேன்.

எங்கள் வீடும் கல்லூரியும் அருகருகே இருந்ததால், பத்திரிகைகளில்

இருந்து என் கவிதைக்கு வரும் சன்மானத் தொகையை என்

வகுப்புக்கே வந்து தருவார் தபால்காரர்.

வேதியியல் பேராசிரியர் ஒருவர் ஒருநாள் இதைக் கவனித்து,

‘இப்படியே கதை, கவிதைன்னு சுத்துனா, சத்தியமா நீ பாஸாக மாட்டே’

என்று திட்டினார். எப்போதும் அதிக மதிப்பெண்கள் வாங்கும் மாணவன்

ஒருவன் என்னைப் பார்த்து ஏளனமாகச் சிரித்தான்.

அன்று ஒரு வைராக்கியம் தோன்றியது. அவனைவிட ஒரு மார்க்காவது

அதிகம் வாங்க வேண்டும். 85 சதவிகிதம் பெற்று தேர்ச்சியடைந்தேன்.

அவனுக்குக் கிடைக்காத பி.டெக். வாய்ப்பு எனக்குக் கிடைத்தது.

என் சபதத்தை முடித்துக்கொண்டு, சென்னை பச்சையப்பன் கல்லூரியில்

எம்.ஏ. தமிழ் இலக்கியம் சேர்ந்தேன்.

இவ்வளவு மார்க் எடுத்துட்டு ஏன் தமிழ் படிக்கிறாய் என்று அறிவுரை

சொன்னார்கள். மௌனமாகத் தலையாட்டிவிட்டு, மண்ணில் விழுந்த

மழைத் துளிபோல் தமிழின் வேர் வரை பயணிக்கத் தொடங்கினேன்.

கல்லூரியிலேயே முதல் மாணவனாகத் தேர்ச்சி அடைந்ததும்,

அமெரிக்காவில் இருந்து ஒரு பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் தமிழ்ப் பேராசிரியர்

பணிக்கு வரச் சொல்லிக் கடிதம் வந்தது. மாதம் மூன்று லட்சம் சம்பளம்.

மீண்டும் அப்பா முன் நின்றேன். நான் திரைப்படத் துறையில் உதவி

இயக்குநராகப் போகிறேன். இந்த வேலை வேண்டாம் என்றேன்.

என்னை உற்றுப் பார்த்துவிட்டுச் சொன்னார், ‘உன் முடிவை நீயே எடு.

பின் நாட்களில் அதற்காகச் சந்தோஷப்படவும் வருத்தப்படவும் உனக்கே

உரிமை உண்டு!’ அன்று நான் சலனப்பட்டு அமெரிக்கா சென்றுஇருந்தால்,

முனைவர் நா.முத்துக்குமாராக மட்டுமே இருந்திருப்பேன்.

சினிமாவுக்கு வந்ததால் நான்காம் முறையாக நா.முத்துக்குமார் ஆனேன்.

–

எரிக்க எரிக்க எழுந்து வா!

இயக்குநர் அருண்மொழி, பட்டுக்கோட்டை பிரபாகர், அறிவுமதி என்று

பலரிடம் உதவியாளராக இருந்துவிட்டு, என் ஆசான் பாலுமகேந்திராவிடம்

சேர்ந்தேன். பெப்சிக்கும் படைப்பாளிகளுக்கும் பிரச்னை நடந்த கால

கட்டம் அது.

ஒரு வருடமாக வேலை நிறுத்தம். தன் காரை விற்று எங்களுக்குச்

சம்பளம் கொடுத்தார் பாலுமகேந்திரா சார். என் தூர் கவிதையை ஒரு

விழாவில் எழுத்தாளர் சுஜாதா வாசிக்க, என் மேல் மஞ்சள் வெளிச்சம்

விழுந்தது.

நண்பர்கள் பாடல் எழுத அழைத்தார்கள். விளையாட்டாக எழுதத் தொடங்கி,

கடந்த ஆறு வருடங்களாக அதிக பாடல்கள் எழுதும் பாடலாசிரியர் என்கிற

நிலை வரை ஓடிக்கொண்டு இருக்கிறேன்.

‘சினிமா உலகம் போட்டியும் பொறாமையும் நிறைந்தது. இங்கு தூங்கும்போது

கூட காலை ஆட்டிக்கொண்டேதான் தூங்க வேண்டும்; இல்லையென்றால்,

இறந்துவிட்டான் என்று எரித்து விடுவார்கள்’ என்றார் என்.எஸ்.கிருஷ்ணன்.

சென்ற வருடம் என் திருமண நாளன்று, நான் விபத்தில் இறந்து

விட்டதாகவும், தற்கொலை செய்துகொண்டதாகவும் என்னைப்பற்றி வதந்தி

கிளம்பியது. இறந்துபோனதை அறிந்த பிறகுதான், ‘இறக்க வேண்டும் நான்’

என்று எப்போதோ நான் எழுதிய கவிதை ஞாபகம் வந்தது.

முகம் தெரியாத அந்த நண்பருக்காகவாவது இன்னும் கவனமாகவும்,

கூடுதலாகவும் உழைக்க வேண்டும் என்று தோன்றியபோது, நான்

ஐந்தாம் முறையாக நா.முத்துக்குமார் ஆனேன்!

–

————————————

மூலம் : ஆனந்த விகடன்

நா.முத்துக்குமார் தனது மகன் ஆதவன் நாகராஜனுக்கு எழுதிய கடிதம்
“அன்புள்ள மகனுக்கு அப்பா எழுதுவது இது நான் உனக்கு எழுதும்முதல் கடிதம். இதைப்படித்துப்புரிந்து கொள்ளும் வயதில் நீ இல்லை. மொழியின் விரல் பிடித்து நடக்கப்பழகிக்கொண்டு இருக்கிறாய்….
வயதின் பேராற்றாங்கரை உன்னையும் வாலிபத்தில் நிறுத்தும். சிறகு முளைத்த தேவதைகள் உன் கனவுகளை ஆசீ்ர்வாதிப்பார்கள். பெண் உடல் புதிராகும். என்தகப்பன் என்னிடமிருந்து ஒளித்து வைத்த ரகசியங்கள் அடங்கிய பெட்டியின் சாவியை நான் தேட முற்பட்டதைபோல நீயும் தேடத் தொடங்குவாய். பத்திரமாகவும் பக்குவமாகவும் இருக்க வேண்டிய பருவம் அது. உனக்கு த் தெரியாதது இல்லை. பார்த்து நடந்து கொள்.
நிறைய பயணப்படு. பயணங்களின் ஜன்னல்களே முதுகுக்குப்பின்னாலும் இரண்டு கண்களைத்திறக்கின்றன. புத்தகங்களை நேசி.ஒரு புத்தகததை தொடுகிறபோது நீ ஓர் அனுபவத்தைத் தொடுவாய்.உன் பாட்டனும் தகப்பனும் புத்தகங்களின் காட்டில் தொலைந்தவர்கள். உன் உதிரத்திலும் அந்த காகித நதி ஓடிக்கொண்டே இருக்கட்டும்.
கிடைத்த வேலையை விட பிடித்த வேலையைச்செய். இனிய இல்லறம் தொடங்கு. யாராவது கேட்டால்இல்லை எனினும் கடன் வாங்கியாவது உதவி செய். அதில் கிடைக்கும் ஆனந்தம் அலாதியானது. உறவுகளிடம் நெருங்கியும் இரு.விலகியும் இரு. இந்த உலகில் எல்லா உறவுகளையும்விட மேன்மையானது நட்பு மட்டுமே.நல்ல நண்பர்களைச்சேர்த்துக்கொள். உன் வாழ்க்கை நேராகும்.
இவையெல்லாம் என் தகப்பன் எனக்கு சொல்லாமல் சொன்னவை. நான் உனக்கு சொல்ல நினைத்து ச்சொல்பவை.
என் சந்தோஷமே நீ பிறந்த பிறகுதான் என் தகப்பனின் அன்பையும் அருமையையும் நான் அடிக்கடி உணர்கிறேன்.நாளை உனக்கொரு மகன் பிறக்கையில் என் அன்பையும் அருமையையும் நீ உணர்வாய்.
நாளைக்கும் நாளை நீ உன் பேரன் பேத்திகளுடன் ஏதோ ஒரு ஊரில் கொஞ்சிப்பேசி விளையாடிக்கொண்டு இருக்கையில் என் ஞாபகம் வந்தால்,இந்தக் கடிதத்தை எடுத்துப்படித்துப்பார். உன் கண்களில்இருந்து உதிரும் கண்ணீர்த்துளியில் வாழ்ந்து கொண்டிருப்பேன் நான்.
இப்படிக்கு,
உன் அப்பா
நா.முத்துக்குமார்

10,000 years of art history in 90 seconds

500 Years of Female Portraits in Western Art

ஸ்ரீ கணபதி சஹஸ்ரநாமம் சில சுலோகங்கள் ஜெபித்து வருவதால் பல பலன்களை அடையலாம்

ஸ்ரீ கணபதி சஹஸ்ரநாமம் விநாயகரின் 1000 திருநாமங்களைக் கொண்டது. அதைத் தினமும் கூற முடியாதவர்கள் ,சஹஸ்ரநாமத்தில் உள்ள சில சுலோகங்களைத் தினமும் ஜெபித்து வருவதால் பல பலன்களை அடையலாம்.இது அனுபவத்தில் கண்டது.

1.காரியத்தடைகள் நீங்க:-
மஹாகணபதிர் புத்தி பிரிய :க்ஷிப்ர பிரசாதன :|
ருத்ர ப்ரியோ கணாத்யக்ஷ உமா புத்தரோ க நாசன||
இதைத் தினமும் 18 தடவை ஜெபித்து வர எல்லாக் காரியங்களிலும் தடைகள் நீங்கும்.ஏதேனும் ஒரு செயலில் இறங்கும் இந்த ஸ்லோகத்தை 18 தடவை ஜெபித்து பின்னர் துவங்க வெற்றி உண்டாகும்.
2.எதிரிகளால் துன்பம் நேராமல் இருக்க
வஜ்ராத்யஸ்த்ர பரீவார:கனசண்ட ஸமாஸ்ரய :|
ஜயோஜய பரீவார :விஜயோ விஜயாவஹ :||
இதைத் தினமும் 27 தடவை தெற்கு நோக்கி அமர்ந்து சங்கல்பம் செய்து ஜெபித்து வர எதிர்ப்புகள் ,எதிரிகளால் உண்டாகும் தொல்லைகள் நீங்கும்.
3.கல்வியில் முன்னேற்றம் உண்டாக :-
சரஸ்வத்யா ஸ்ரிதோ கௌரி நந்தன ஸ்ரீ நிகேதன :|
குருகுப்த பதோ வாசா சித்தோ வாகீஸ்வரேச்வர :||
இதைத் தினமும் 18 தடவை கிழக்கு நோக்கி அமர்ந்து கல்வி,கலைகளில் உயர்வுபெற வேண்டிச் சங்கல்பம் செய்து ஜெபித்து வர நல்ல முன்னேற்றம் உண்டாகும்.
4.செல்வம் பெருக,தியானம் சித்திக்க :-
தனதான்யபதிர் தந்யோ தனதோ தரணீதர :|
த்யானைக பிரக்டோ த்யேய :த்யாநோ த்யான பராயண:||
இதைத் தினமும் 18 தடவை மேற்கு நோக்கி அமர்ந்து ஜெபித்து வர நிறை செல்வமும் ,ஆன்மீக,தியான நிலையில் உயர்வும் கிட்டும் .
5.நாகதோஷம் நீங்க,புத்திர ப்ராப்தி உண்டாக :-
ஸ்தம்பகாகார கும்பாக்ரோ ரத்னமௌளிர் நிரங்குஸ:|
ஸர்ப்பஹார கடீசூத்ர : சர்ப்ப யக்ஞோபவீதவாந் ||
ஸர்ப்பகோடீர கடக: சர்ப்ப க்ரைவேய காங்கத:|
ஸர்ப்ப கக்ஷோதராபந்த: ஸர்ப்பராஜோத்தரீயக:||
சர்வ வஸ்யகரோ கர்ப்பதோஷஹா புத்ரபௌத்ரத :||
இந்த ஸ்லோகத்தைத் தினமும் 18 தடவை மேற்கு நோக்கி அமர்ந்து ஜெபித்து வர சர்ப்பதோஷம் நீங்கும்.சர்ப்ப தோஷத்தினால் குழந்தை பாக்கியம் உண்டானால் அது விலகி குழந்தை பாக்கியம் கிடைக்கும்.இதை அரசமரமும்,வேப்பமரமும் இணைந்த இடத்தில் உள்ள விநாயகரின் முன் ஜெபிக்க நிறைவான பலன் கிடைக்கும்.
6.வழக்குகள்,எதிர்ப்புகளை வெல்ல
மேதாத :கீர்த்தித:சோகஹாரி தௌர்பாக்ய நாசன :|
பிரதிவாதி முகஸ்தம்ப: துஷ்ட சித்த பிரசாதன :||
வாக்குவாதம்,வழக்குகளுக்குச் செல்லும் பொழுது இந்த ஸ்லோகத்தை 27 தடவை தெற்கு நோக்கி அமர்ந்து ஜெபித்து குங்குமம் அணிந்து செல்ல வெற்றி கிடைக்கும்.
7.கிரக தோஷ பாதிப்புகள் விலக :-
ராசிஸ் தாரா திதிர் யோக : வார :காரண அம்சக :|
லக்னோ ஹோரா காலசக்ரோ மேரு :சப்தர்ஷயோ த்ருவ:||
ராஹூர் மந்த:கவிர் ஜீவ :புதோ பௌம சசீ ரவிஹி :|
கால: ஸ்ருஷ்டி :ஸ்திதிர் விஸ்வ:ஸ்தாவரோ ஜங்கமோ ஜகத்||
இந்த ஸ்லோகத்தை 27 தடவை வடக்கு நோக்கி அமர்ந்து ஜெபித்து வர கிரகதோஷம் நீங்கும்.

Beautiful Indian woman Hair style on a statue

Top Tips for PhD students

William Buchanan

Professor at Napier University

I have done many MSc/PhD examinations, and I enjoy them so much. With PhD thesis' I especially like seeing the face of the candidate when I take the thesis out of my bag, and you can't see the thesis for Post-it notes. This should hopefully show that I've read single word in it, and, hopefully, understood most of it. 

So here's my top Ten 25 hints on how to help your examiner (many of these should also be relevant to MSc thesis' too - to a student aiming at a 1st class Hons dissertation):

1. Say up-front what the problem is, what other people have done, and how you have added to it. The Introduction chapter is the most important chapter of all, and you need to grab the reader, and tell them what the problem is, and how you have solved it. If the examiner understands the thesis after the Introduction, you are half way there. I've read a few thesis' which I had no idea what the point was until I actually got to the end, and the contribution was finally revealed on the last page. This is a major gamble, as some readers may give up before that point, and not know the end contribution. Be fair on the reader and tell them the contribution, and keep telling them.
2. Get rid of those typos! You wouldn't believe the number of PhD thesis' I have read that have a typo in the very first line of the thesis. A reader becomes annoyed if they have to keep correcting  typos, and the more annoyed the reader, the more time they are taking away from actually reading the content. Try and start off on a good footing, so that the Abstract and Introduction chapter have been read over several times - typically talking it out loud. If possible get someone else to read the Introduction, and see if they understand what the point of work is.
3. Bad grammar shows bad practice and a weak supervision. Part of doing a PhD is learning how to write and present ideas, and how to review and edit. One of the most important things that you learn in a PhD is how to write, so that others can understand your ideas. A good part of this is for supervisors to get involved reading the work, and in giving detailed feedback. It is often a good idea for supervisors to mark up early drafts with red pen, so that students get an idea on the amount of checking and editing that is often required.
4. Superlatives are not very good! A PhD is a scientific study, and the usage of superlatives should be avoided, along with weak words like "big" ... "the measure gives a very big number". If a number is large, then define what large actually means, as everything is relative.
5. Significance matters. I've read thesis' that draws a graph, and then gives me values of 10 decimal places, and then to be told that there is an importance of one thing to another. But is it significant? If I move from 100.01254632 to 100.1263241, is that a massive change and why do we need so many decimal places? Every measurement has an accuracy, and this should always be included in the presentation of the figures. Examiners want to know the significance of something, and if it isn't significant, then tell them.
6. One table tells much more than a whole lot of numbers. Again I've read so many thesis', where the writer continually presents a whole series of numbers and graphs, and where they could all be moved into an appendix, and compiled into a single table (or graph). A good supervisor should be able to spot how to collapse lots series of tables into a single one, as they often have to do it for papers. Many students rely on drawing graphics for presenting trends whereas tables are often better, especially in defining changes within the figures presented. A great tip is to normalise values, and show how the values vary between each other. Relative values are often easier to understand than absolute ones - remember too that most values have units, and that units matter. I've quizzed many students on whether they are talking about Mbps or MBps - there's a difference of eight in there!
7. Draw some pictures. There is no place for trivial graphics and clip art in a PhD thesis, but there is a place for the abstraction of complex ideas, especially in the introduction. There no real need to just copy the graphics from others, as they should come from the ideas inspired by the writer. I've read quite a few thesis, where the text just goes on and on. Break the text up every now and then, and give the reader something to ponder over. 
8. Break up and but keep a narrative. There's a careful balance here. If you keep your sections short, it becomes to "bitty", and if you make them too long, they become long and unwieldy.  I personally read whole sections in a single sitting, and try and take in the ideas, and I won't move on until I understand it. A long section, especially where there are no sub-sections, often introduces too many concepts which can make it difficult to read.  I normally recommend a maximum of a page and a half of text before there should be a break (such as a sub-section break). Long paragraphs are not a good thing as it becomes difficult to take in all the concepts introduced. Try, if possible, not to make them too short, but not too long. A paragraph that goes on for half a page is probably too long, and one that has only two sentences is probably too short. Along try and avoid too many sub-sub sections, as it becomes difficult for the reader to put it all into context.
9. Avoid using the words of others too much. A thesis is written by the writer, and it is their words. Long series of break-out text items of quoted material becomes fairly generic, where you get little of the sense of the thoughts of the writer. If you must reference others, pull it out, and indent.
10. Be precise. A PhD thesis should be a scientific document which abides to certain standards for the articulation of ideas. It is always sloppy to see a candidate writing 9*6^3, where the "*" is a sloppy way of writing a multiply symbol (x) and ^ should be "to the power off". If it's an equation, it should be pulled out of the text, and a proper equation editor should be used, and a proper numbering system.
11. Every diagram and table should be referenced in the text. I have read some many thesis (typically drafts) where the writer just assumes that the reader know how a diagram or table should integrate with the narrative. Every figure and table should thus be referenced in the text, so that the reader knows when to look at it. If possible don't break up your narrative with a diagram, and move it a little later on, as long as it is after then text which is referring to it.  
12. Be critical of yourself and others. One of the key things within a PhD is the ability to critically appraise the work of others, both for the strengths and weaknesses of their work, and also of the candidate's work. I often circle the first signs of critical thought in a thesis. If it happens on Page 50, there's a problem in not being able to critically appraise work. Along with this some candidates can think that everything is perfect with their work, and that it addresses every single problem in their field. Try to always define both the strengths and weaknesses your own work, and identify how these could be improved. The scope of the impact should never be overestimated, but also not underestimated. If you've developed something that completely changed something, be up-front and tell the reader. Most of the times, be honest to say that you are just enhancing something a little bit.
13. A thesis is not a diary! I have read so many thesis' which are basically just a chronological flow of their research. You can often spot this as the literature review runs out of references which are up-to-date. I have read several thesis' where the latest reference in the literature review is two years ago, and it points to the fact that it has not been updated since it was initially written. A literature review should be written for the thesis, and many parts of the original literature can be dumped, and replaced with newer references which fit in with the contribution.
14. Focus the literature review on the contribution. One literature review of PhD thesis I read was almost 200 pages long, and my head was spinning at the end of it. It covered so many points, and few of them actually went anywhere in the following chapters. Try and focus the literature review on covering the 4 or 5 key concepts involved in the thesis, and not in the research project. A good supervisor can often spot  redundant sections, and advise for them to be cut. If the thesis is still the same by taking something out, there's no need for it to be there, as every paragraph and every word should count, and be carefully crafted as part of the whole story.
15. Make sure the aim is of the thesis, and not of the initial research project.  Many thesis' start with "The aim of this research project is ..." which often is a sign that the original project aim has not changed in the writing of the thesis. Overall the aim is the aim of the thesis, as the research project has finished. Every should be written from a point-of-view that the work has finished, and this is the write-up.
16. Get the flow right. A strong flow of literature, method, build and evaluation helps the flow of the thesis, and where you often see references to literature tailing off as the thesis develops. I've seen some thesis' where there are whole chapters that lack any form of reference to other work. This is poor practice as a PhD thesis should show how every aspect of the work fits in with the work of others. I like to see a reference to other work in the introduction of a chapter, as it shows some key influences for the work. I personally don't like an introduction that says "Section 1 says this, and Section 2 says that, and Section 3 says something else", as I can see from the table of contents what the contents are. If possible the reader should tell the reader what is likely to be revealed and what the significance is. A re-enforcement of the main drive of the work also helps to bring the focus onto the main contribution of the work.
17. If you don't know it ... don't say it! This one seems so obvious, but you won't believe the number of times that you ask in a Viva about the detail of a paper, and the method used, and for the answer to be that they don't actually know what it does. You always increase your exposure to probing if you include things you don't quite understand, so dump them (if they are not a core topic). 
18. Explain it simply. There's nothing nicer for an examiner when the candidate takes a complex idea and gives their own viewpoint on it, in a simple way, using new material. It shows that they can articulate complex ideas in a simple way. The standard test for any thesis is that a 14-year old child should, at least, be able to read it, and understand some of the key concepts in it.
19. Show that you love the subject and that it is relevant.  Three years is a long time, but the sustainment of interest is a key part of the work, so try and show that this is an important topic and that your thesis is exactly what is required, and in the impact that it could have. Again the Introduction chapter is a great place to grab the reader, and show how important the work is. If possible try and find something that has just happened in the news in the introduction that shows how important your work is. The Introduction chapter, at least, should be readable by all, and where, at the end of it, most readers would want to read on, as it sounds so interesting.
20. Make your thesis a sandwich. With a good thesis, we open with the Introduction and close on the Conclusions. The bit in-between justifies what you have opened with and the conclusions should show what you have uncovered to justify your argument. The same goes for each chapter, where the introduction (half a page, typically) shows what you're going to tell them, and the conclusion confirms it. Do not make conclusion into a summary, as they reader has no time to read summaries, and just wants you to conclude the most important things that go forward (and so they can dump all the other things that you covered). If possible say why you are not taking some things forward in the conclusions (and justify using the work of others, if possible). 
21. Don't just pick without reviewing and justifying. There is no justification in a thesis for picking something just because it is easy to get. If possible all the things that are selected have at least been reviewed, and a sensible solution is selected (and justified). Try always to select a few competing methods and tools and put them against each others.
22. Validate before Evaluate. You won't believe the number of Vivas that I've done where I've asked if they validated their system or software before they went onto evaluating it. So "How do you it takes 5 milliseconds to get from here to there?, the wrong answer is "... because the package said it was 5milliseconds". Good experimenters will do "fag-packet" calculations, to estimate things and know the limits of what they expect. I always like to see validation tests within the test data, so that the researcher knows that their system is working correctly. There's nothing work in finding there is a bug in your results, after you have published them ... so always have a sanity check.
23. Get that scientific method. There are so many occasions in a thesis where you have no idea what a graph is telling you, as the axis' are not numbered properly, or where they are  poorly scaled. If the variation is between 990 and 1000, don't draw a graph which goes from 0 to 1000. Work out what the graph is trying to say, and pick the graph type (eg pie chart to show significant of one method against another) to show this.
24. Must be based on a method and be repeatable. There must be a method in the processes used, and designed in a scientific way. Along with this the thesis should outline the procedure in a repeatable way, so that someone else can perform the same evaluation and get the same results. So candidates should always say to themselves... "Is there enough information for someone to build the artifact?", "Is there enough information to repeat the experiment?", and "Do I have the data that the examiner can look at, in order to verify the evaluation?"
25. Evaluate your method against others. The standard method to show a contribution is to take your method, and evaluate it against other competing methods. The best approach is to use the best competing method and show an improvement. This can sometimes be difficult, so, at least, there is an evaluation against other methods. Showing an improvement is obviously a good thing, but there is often nothing wrong with an evaluation which shows a negative impact, especially if it is backed-up with a strong critical appraisal.

Oh, I stuck to 25, but there's a few more:

1. Be fair and honest with your experiments. Often an experimental procedure is selected to benefit your own method. If possible be fair on all the methods and do not bias your approach to your one. It does no harm to show weaknesses and downsides to your own contribution, as it gives you a chance to critically appraise and show how future work could improve things. Your experimental procedure and the associated data collection should be repeatable and verifiable, so don't delete that data you have gathered.
2. If possible, know your examination team. While the thesis should stand-alone you should also know your examination team before the Viva, so avoid patronising them with background theory which they know inside-out, or provide some background which might help the examiners to understand the area. Often an examiner, as part of the Viva, will give advice on moving things between the core material and appendices, in order to address the target audience for the thesis.
3. Show that you are now an expert in your area. People expect those with a PhD to be an expert in the area of study, so make sure you know your core principles in the subject area. If you are doing a cryptography PhD read around the subject, and know the core principles of the most important methods. For me, anyone doing a PhD in electrical engineering, for example, should know Ohms Law, and the same should go for other subjects.
4. Use appendices. Many PhD thesis' are full of material that is irrelevant to the many arguments, and writers are often too sensitive about removing material, but irrelevant material can often be placed better in an appendix.
5. Quality is better than quantity. Some of the best thesis I read have been relatively short and sharp, but where the quality is high. A good eye for moving material in appendices is important, and helps the examiner. For some reason, candidates like to produce thick thesis, and they think that the more pages there, the better the material. This is often the opposite, and a thesis written with self-contained papers are often the best in their presentation.
6. Define published work. A key part of PhD study is the dissemination of the work, especially with peer reviewed. The examiner often needs to know what has been published.
7. Watch those unreliable references. In a PhD thesis, the references should be credible and verifiable references, and references to industry-focused white papers or general Web pages cannot be trusted providing credible viewpoints.
8. Look for small-scale to large-scale experiments. A good researcher will often start small scale and prove principle, and then look for a large-scale experiment. The sign of small experiments, along with a large-scale experiment which properly evaluates the methods presented, is a good sign of a strong research ethos.
9. Leave the Introduction and Conclusions to last, and then do the Abstract, and finally the title. You will know the full scope of you work once you have done the main chapters, so leave the Introduction and Conclusions to the end, and writing them together, with an opening statement and a concluding answer. The abstract then distils the whole of the thesis and pick a title that then reflect this (and that you are happy with).
10. Few abstracts are actually any good in first draft. For some reason most PhD students struggle to write an abstract, and often it is written more as an introduction rather than a distilled version of the thesis. Remember that the abstract is the first thing that the reader reads, so if it is not focused on presenting the whole of the thesis, you have missed an opportunity to get the reader on your side. If possible an abstract should be a page in length, and outline the problem, the contribution, the most significant methods, the thing that has been designed/modeled, what has been evaluated, and what the most significant result is.
11. Conclusions should conclude the whole thesis. Often the thesis just verifies aims and shows the significance of the results, but it should also recap the key parts of the literature and the other chapters.
12. Mind those commas. Commas seem to be a dying bread, but are there to help speak directly to the reader. Try and read out loud, and if there's a slight pause, add a comma.
13. End on a high! Don't spoil your thesis, by adding another chapter after the main contribution. Leave the reader on a high, and get them into the Conclusions, and leave the stage. I've read a few thesis' where the last chapter is a real let-down, and contibutes very little to the overall focus of the work. If you want, put your lovely new models in an appendix, and refer them in the main chapters, but try and finish the main chapters with the answer to the question posed at the start. The last dot of the last main chapter cements the argument, so don't run on into something else that you just happen to be looking at, and just feel your thesis isn't thick enough yet.

In the Viva:

1. Be ready to defend, up to a point. You are unlikely to ever win with a debate with the External Examiner, as they typically have the experience to know when they are right. The Examiner does want to see you putting up arguments against theirs, and not bend. A strategy is often to debate the case, and try different routes of explanation, but then to take on their advice for any changes that would be required.
2. Draw it out and keep it simple. Drawing diagrams and abstracting is a great way to explain your ideas, so wherever possible try to draw an abstraction to show a key point. Try not to overcomplex things, as they examiner is often looking for you to article complex ideas in a simple and understandable way.
3. The simplest things are often the most difficult to explain. Many candidates go into a Viva thinking they will get probed on the complex areas of their work, but end up having to justify an extremely simple concept, that they have taken for granted. An examiner can often spot a weakness in some fundamental areas and probe around that, in order to see how the candidate thinks through a problem. So candidates should also try and be well versed on the fundamentals areas, especially when it involves maths.
4. Know your examiners. Every examiner is different, and they have their own style. Some go from page to page, others read generally around significant parts of the work. They will generally have expertise in certain areas, so try and understand their motivations in their research, and some of their specialities, as they are likely to draw on these for questions.
5. Don't leave it too long for the Viva. The best time for a Viva is straight after you've written your thesis, so try and don't leave it too long for the Viva, as you will forget a few things.
6. Stay calm and enjoy. It is your opportunity to lock horns with an expert in their field, so enjoy it, as you'll probably never have the chance to do something like this in your career.

Conclusions

A PhD is a long road, and you learn along that road. The end result should setup you up for the even longer road ahead, but you now have all the tools to be ready for a career in research. None of us truly knows the formula for a successful PhD, but the methods applied by examiners and supervisors have stood the test of time, and do actually result in something that can contribute to the body of science. Remember that you are:

Standing on the shoulders of giants

a key thing is knowing who's shoulders you are standing on, and help the others who could stand on your shoulders. Enjoy your time!

And finally...

For a bit of advice, have a look at Ralph Merkle's time. He invented key exchange while an undergraduate, but his professor rejected his ideas because he didn't articulate them properly, and Ralph then tried to publish a paper on it, but it was rejected because he had no literature in the paper 

So, try and write well ... and perfect the art of speaking directly to the reader, and also follow the rules of research that have been laid down over the centuries, and you are half way there.