YOU CAN BE WORTH TOO MUCH...

     This isn't about God hatred. I don't really go for that. It's about that shitty handwaving mentality of "everything happens for a reason" I can't stand and this image macro post exemplifies it. I'm sorry things aren't going your way but it's because you're more valuable than the people who get what they want easily so you're just going to have to wait, and wait...and wait.....and wait some more believing that someday you, yes you!, will be found worthy of happiness long after the time it would've been useful for you to have.

     Ugh...

     There is such a thing as being too valuable. You see it in some convenience stores when they won't accept $50 or $100 bills regardless of how much you purchase. This poster says to me that while all your $10 and $20 friends get to have lunch, your $100 self will just have to go hungry because you're worth so much more than lunch right now when you need it...

     Ugh...

Anyone got change? I need change.

I DON'T WANT YOUR FOOD RELIGION...

     I am fortunate to have friends from all sides of the political divide even if the majority of them fall into the liberal side of the equation. One of the things I see popping up in my Facebook feed is a call for the labeling of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). It's taken me a while, but I have come down decidedly against such labeling, at least so long as it is mandatory.

     First of all, I don't find the proponents of such labeling to be putting forth scientific arguments. They fail to establish how transgenic plants (and presumably one day, animals, but let's stick to plants for this post) are inherently different from plants produced by selective breeding, grafting, cloning, and chemical and radiation-induced mutagenesis (i.e. the deliberate damaging of DNA).
     Calling it unnatural is a non-starter since both grafting exists and bacteria having been trading genes with each other across species for billions of years. Perhaps analogously, it is the bacterial version of sexual reproduction.
      I would need a reason (or reasons) that make the insertion of a gene into a plant's DNA fundamentally different from any of the other mentioned methods. Presently the only difference I can say exists definitively is that the changes wrought by such gene insertions are far more precise than any other form of selective breeding as this chart shows.

(click to enlarge)

      Nextly I've learned that such a label would be redundant. There's already a label for it: organic. In order for a foodstuff to receive the coveted organic label, among its requirements is that the foodstuff cannot have been made using GMO plants.
      Therefore, if you do not want GMO products in your diet, you have the organic label to provide you with that reassurance.
      When I originally made this point I was told that organic products are expensive to which I replied they are expensive because they are not popular. If getting GMOs out of people's diets is the goal of label proponents, they need only begin advertising this fact. If getting GMOs out of diets is truly the will of the people, they would then flock to organic products, having a new reason to do so. More people desiring organic products would put pressure on producers which in turn would increase the amount of such products on the market and drive their price down.  I got no response to that.

      It was with this mentioning of the already-existing organic label that got me believing that GMO labeling proponents are not about creating an informed citizenry. I could argue that it is about fear-mongering (especially the calls/stall tactic for ascertaining its safety when I don't see them eager to have scientifically verified/disproven the legitimacy of their claims about organic foods) and while that may be a component of the push for GMO labeling, I thought of it as something else instead: religion.

      As far as I know, there's no science behind organic food nor its movement. Organic appears to me as a philosophy, perhaps a misguided philosophy but a philosophy nonetheless akin to other values-based, but often pseudoscientific, movements like raw food advocacy and alternative medicine. It's presented in an emotionally persuasive, but not evidentially persuasive, way by practitioners to prospective converts. Logical fallacies like "appeal to nature" are also employed but I'm digressing...

      What I'm getting at is I see anti-GMO movement as an offshoot of the organic movement, though still most definitely under the natural food movement's umbrella. For me, their dietary requirements are akin to religious dietary requirements.
      Take kosher (or halal) for example. There's nothing dangerous or particularly unhealthy about non-kosher foods nor is there necessarily anything better or healthier about kosher ones. People consume non-kosher foods all the time without consequence to their health. Scientifically there's nothing to support keeping kosher either. There's some ret-conning of things like pork saying that trichinosis was common back in ye olde days so avoiding pork was a good idea but that's not why this was done.
      No, the reason why religious dietary restrictions exist is the same reason why cultural idioms exist: it serves as a useful way to solidify membership/express solidarity in an exclusive club (so to speak) and to identify outsiders. There are plenty of war stories about how spies were caught not because of some elaborate operation, but because they looked the wrong way first before crossing the street.

     Organic worshipers (if you will) have a set of values by which they abide and through these values, offer a means to show solidarity with fellow practitioners and like any religion, there's an ever-present need for additional adherents to avoid extinction.

      Anyways, plenty of products exist out there which are naturally kosher but others may fall into a gray area and though I'm not Jewish, my store has a rather large Passover selection when the holiday rolls around. Simple observation shows that Passover has its own requirements, or at least stricter ones, as certain products are labeled as being kosher, but not kosher for Passover and others as kosher always.
      If you want kosher products, you have an easy means for identifying them in the marketplace whether the K in a circle symbol or "parve". You can choose to buy kosher whether you are Jewish or not. There are also no requirements (to my knowledge) that all foods that are kosher be labeled as such. It is a voluntary label for the voluntary adherents of Judaism. It might be good business, but it is not a required business.

      I see the organic label as no different than the kosher label and I view the movement to have GMOs labeled without proper scientific reasoning to back up such a labeling requirement as no different than Jewish leaders petitioning Congress to mandate the labeling of all non-kosher foods in the US marketplace. There's no need to label foods as non-kosher when a kosher label already exists and it would violate the First Amendment of the US Constitution I would assume for the government to mandate such labeling as it would appear to be the sponsoring of a religion.
     There's no science behind kosher, only religious values. There's also no science behind organic labeling, only values. Labeling GMO foods does not educate or inform the consumer, it would only promote ignorance in a manner similar to when people use the lay definition of theory when deriding a scientific theory they disagree with. It is not a safety issue since GMO foods are not substantially different from non-GMO foods nutritionally (and if they are, that would require a label or the modification of an existing one like golden rice for example, the Vitamin A section of the nutrition label would have a different number than ordinary rice). We already happily import non-native plants and animals so it can hardly be considered an environmental issue either.
      The FDA already has a black mark against it because its authorizing act specifically exempted pseudoscience-based homeopathic remedies from scrutiny and Congress has never fixed this. The USDA doesn't need a similar black mark with GMO labeling.

      I guess the point is - assuming I've even been making one - is that if you're promoting your values, advertise the organic label better to both increase your adherents and bring down the cost of organic foodstuffs. But until and unless you have a scientific argument to support GMO labeling, I want you to keep your religion out of my food...

Today is NEWSCASTERS PRETEND TO CARE ABOUT VICTIMS AND THEIR FAMILIES Day...

     We have taken our pound of flesh for the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks. It is enough. Time to move on as a nation and get on with rebuilding all those things we have been neglecting as a result of our prolonged response to those terrorist attacks. We are well past the time to be moving money set aside for revenge and destruction and using it instead to rebuild our roads, our schools, our water pipes, our electrical grid, etc. etc. etc. etc.

     September 11th has become this national day of mourning and it offends me. Unless you personally knew someone who died that day as a result of the attacks, today is not about you. You experienced a nexus in history...congratulations...but it's not about you. Your life was not affected, so live it instead.
     But that doesn't matter because ghoulish engines have been built and continue to churn out these prepackaged 9/11-themed sorrowful human interest stories for the public to consume. The news programs play somber versions of their regular themes too, just like the Brady Bunch. And the newscasters themselves wear their sad faces when reading from the teleprompter. The girls who were hired to be big-titted, attractive stage props are made to dress like they're going to a funeral. And of course the endless jingoistic photo montages of American flags, the still-standing Twin Towers made to look majestic, sad-looking people, bald eagles, heavenly blue skies, and don't forget the firemen hoisting the flag shot and the "cross of steel" too because for some reason, miracle! Each news organization quietly competes to get the most talked about montage because why not, it's not like Nielson ratings, Cume, shares, AQH, and TSL take the day off when it's a bad-memory day for the United States. Money, money, money!
     By now, the references to the attack itself are oblique at best. Maybe one picture of the actual attacks and even then, it's a safe one before getting back to the people aspect of it, rather than the political part and the military response. They don't want to stoke any latent anger in the American public anymore and I'm fine with that overall, but not the way the newsmedia goes about it. And then of course, the next day, it's all back to normal: playful banter between hosts and wacky stories and cleavage galore from the hot weather girl...just like yesterday never happened.

PICTURED: not September 11th

DO YOU WANT TO KNOW THE SECRET? (doo dah doo)

     My Best Friend the other day was telling me about a book I've heard before called The Secret and its bullshit philosophy therein. The basic idea is that good things will come to you so long as you have a positive attitude. But my words cannot do it justice, why not quote the passages (I'm lifting them from this review by the way)?

"What is The Secret? What is Rhonda Byrne’s philosophy? What is the Law of Attraction?

It’s defined many times, in many different ways, by many different people in the book. Here are a few of the more concise descriptions:

'Everything that’s coming into your life you are attracting into your life. And it’s attracted to you by virtue of the images you’re holding in your mind. It’s what you’re thinking. Whatever is going on in your mind you are attracting to you. Every thought if yours is a real thing – a force.'

'Thoughts become things!'
 

'Thoughts are magnetic, and thoughts have a frequency. As you think thoughts, they are sent out into the Universe, and they magnetically attract all like things that are on the same frequency. Everything sent out returns to the source – you.'

Got it? If you think about something, that something will be attracted to your life. Whatever is in your life is there because you caused it to be there. All the good and bad things surrounding you – your friends or loneliness, your loving or abusive relationships, your success or failure, your health or illness, your life and death – all are there because you caused them to be there. This is the 'Law of Attraction'”.
     What kind of philosophy is that? So every bad thing that has ever happened to everyone is the result of your negative thinking? You just weren't positive enough? How insulting.

     Unless your personal betterment philosophy can take into account the results of the Holocaust, you really ought to shut your fucking mouth or at the very least not suggest that the Universe gives even the slightest fuck about our existence...or suggest that this only works on the small scale when the tides of history aren't rushing in or out (and even that is bullshit, but at least slightly easier to swallow bullshit than what has been quoted above). So...those eleven to seventeen million people who were systematically and mechanically murdered by the Nazi regime were just being too negative? Holy fuck, for real? I'm sure every single one of those Jews, homosexuals, Gypsies, political dissidents, communists, and whomever else the Nazis just plain thought ought to be exterminated caused it to happen to themselves. Holy fucking fuck fuck!
    Even illnesses are apparently caused by you misapplying the Law of Attraction. They're practically reviving the pre-Germ Theory explanations for diseases. Should I have my humours checked? Perhaps my melancholy and blood are out of balance. Or perhaps I need a talisman to ward off evil spirits...

    Also, note how the "philosophy" has a ready-made excuse for your failure: if you didn't get what you wanted from the Universe, you simply weren't being positive enough. You didn't want it enough. You brought your failure upon yourself. This "philosophy" sets you up to remember your few coincidental successes and gloss over your many failed attempts. That means Winwood and Costello are in my life because I properly applied the Law of Attraction rather than it being the more likely result of if you keep trying, eventually something will stick.

     And the sad thing is these kinds of books get eaten up by the ignorant masses that comprise our public. I am not a practitioner of prayer, but the fact remains that I have more respect for whomever offered up this prayer philosophy than any charlatan preying and capitalizing on the stupid lazy people of this world looking for an easy way out to their problems.

"HAUL AWAY" AND "TAKING TO THE CURB" ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS

     Am I wrong in thinking that a furniture company ought to also being a hauling away business as well? They would seem to go hand-in-hand.

     I have a little bit of money set aside and given the uninviting appearance a single chair gives to my living room, I thought it time to buy a couch. I found a suitable design (and color, yes, thank you) and despite the website saying that they "haul away" - those exact words - when I called, before even placing the order, I asked to verify and for some reason, no...they do not actually haul away the furniture they are replacing. How deceptive.
     You might be thinking, "Oh, but they will put it on the curb for you, right?" Yes...at my expense. But I can't just put stuff like that on the curb. The town only picks up on certain days and you can only put it out the night before pick-up. Delivery windows do not include "night" and even if that were not a problem, timing a delivery for the night before pick-up is really just too many dice to roll. What they offer to do is to take the furniture out of my apartment...that's something I could do (albeit not safely). But that's not hauling away unless you want to get liberal with the definition.
      Car dealerships have this figured out. I'm assuming bulk appliance dealers do as well (stoves, refrigerators, etc.) I would think furniture stores would as well. Could you imagine having to figure out how to rid yourself of your old car while buying a new one? The hassle? The insurance issues? It'd be fun, right?

      And aren't we also in the midst of a recession/depression/whatever-the-fuck-they're-calling-it? And here I thought service increased during such times because businesses desperately want to survive and if you can't sell like you used to or lower your prices any further, maybe you could encourage the opening of a wallet by improving service.
      And I'm not even asking that they do it for free. They could offer to haul away for free, but I'm not that much of a dick. I grasp that hauling to a dump probably comes with fees and such. I am content to pay to have this stuff hauled away along with my delivery, but no...they don't do that.

     Maybe this is why I'm not a businessman. I clearly don't understand these things. Enjoy the money you're not getting from me Futonland!

THE BLUE LINE IS MY LAUGH AT YOUR EXPENSE

     Words only hurt if you let them. I wish more people would understand that. But as they say, the proof of the pudding is in the tasting, so here goes:

Oonme'n ÿan ÿkÿ ahdÿehn yrnedyl cohlynay teu dayce de vÿoreu ne t'ÿke ni morvÿ.

     I just insulted you heavily in another language. Do you feel insulted? Why not? You should be. It was pretty ( and hilariously) heinous. But yet you're not insulted and why is that? It's because you cannot ascribe meaning and even more importantly, value, to that statement.

     Words can only be slurs if the speaker intends them to be, otherwise despite your accusations, they are not slurs. A good example is "Jew" because the word is both, depending on how it's used, descriptive and a pejorative. Whether it be the former or the latter is as much dependent upon the listener's as well as the speaker's intent.

     Things change. Sometimes people forget that. A word may once have been "bad" but not everyone speaking it today is necessarily aware of its origin: they don't see it that way and how does making them aware of that origin help your cause? You want the hate to stop, right? Because sometimes I swear the politically correct groups out there want the hate to continue because without it, their organizations lack a reason to be. You would think the purpose of such PACs would be to become obsolete, but they don't disband...they endure.

     I hear Gypsies still get insulted over the use of the verb "gyp". Why? Do you honestly think users of the word today are aware of its etymology and are purposefully using the verb hurtfully? Same with words like "tranny". You'll be hard-pressed to find English speakers who like using polysyllabic words with great frequency (not an intelligence joke...really!). They interrupt the flow of speech. Though I cannot speak for all, I would say the majority of people using the word "tranny" today are simply doing so because they would rather not have to utter the complex structure of the word "transsexual". A hurtful past is not necessarily indicative of a hurtful present. Nicknaming is a strong habit I remind anyone who says Liz, Mike, Sam, Alex, Ted, Chris, Bill, Jen, Nick, etc. Hell, it could even be argued that "tranny" is more a personification than an insult. A "tranny" sounds like a person whereas "transsexual" sounds more like a state of being or diagnosis.

     I don't begrudge you your anger necessarily, but if you are going to be angry, may I suggest you come up with an alternate word we can use which is equally, if not more, catchy than the original rather than simply opposing the word currently favored? And remember that the United States is supposed to be a melting pot of cultures and opinions. Therefore, your goal should be to merge your ideas with the group identity, not to separate your group from that identity otherwise you will be opposed at every turn.

TRUST IN GOD, BUT TIE UP YOUR CAMEL...

TRIGGER WARNING:

Below the cut I will be critiquing a cartoon which contains information about sexual assault and/or violence which may be triggering to survivors. The descriptions themselves will not be graphic but I thought I should include this warning as a courtesy.

I'M A RAMBLIN' MAN...

      Sometimes I think "honest money" and employment in general are related.

LANGUAGE POLICE...

      Language evolves. It always has. It's the nature of the beast. Before I get into my rant, enjoy a stark contrast of then and now with the Lord's Prayer. Every iteration is in English by the way.


Circa 11th century -- Fæder ure þu þe eart on heofonum; si þin nama gehalgod to becume þin rice gewurþe ðin willa on eorðan swa swa on heofonum. Urne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us todæg and forgyf us ure gyltas swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendum and ne gelæd þu us on costnunge ac alys us of yfele. Soþlice.

A.D. 1258 -- Fadir our in heuene, haleeweide beota thi neume, cuman thi kinderiche, thi wille beoth idon in heune and in erthe. The euerych dawe bried gif ous thilk dawe. And worzif ure dettes as vi vorsifen ure dettoures. And lene ous nought into temptation. Bette delvvor of unval.


A.D. 1300 -- Fadir our in hevene, Halwewyd by thi name, thi kingdom come. Thy wille be done as in hevene in erthe. Oure urche days bred give us today. And forgive us our detes, as we forgive our detoures. And lede us not into temptation. Bote delyvere us of yvel.


A.D. 1582 -- Our Father which art in heaven, sanctified by thy name. Let thy kingdom come. Thy wil be done as in heaven and earth also. Give us this day our super substantial bread. And led us not into temptation. But deliver us from evil.


A.D. 1611 -- Our Father which is in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, in earth as it is in heaven. Biue us this day our dayly bread. And forgive our debtors. And leade us not into temptation, but deliver from evil. For thine is the kingdome, and the power and the glory for ever.


A.D. 1789 -- Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the Kingdom and the Power and the Glory, forever and ever. Amen.


A.D. 1970 -- Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us. Save us from the time of trial, and deliver us from the Evil. For the Kingdom, Power and the Glory, are yours now and forever. Amen.

     It is a varied and many-splendored thing as well as a wonderful accidental service of Christian missionaries who so dutifully translated the Bible into its local languages. In some cases, the only written records we have of a language have come from such translations. (see Gothic) Linguists I am sure are eternally grateful for their efforts.

     But the point is, things change. Let them change. I don't see why people to this day get up in arms when a kid uses "retarded" as a synonym for "stupid"; "gay" as a synonym for "stupid" or "lame"; and "faggot" as a synonym for a "wuss" or anyone who's making lame (gay?) excuses as to why he will not be a part of a group activity or demand. The opponents say these are "hurtful words" but are they? At one time, sure. But today's generations, while preserving the words as kinds of insults, wish for them to be more generally applied and no longer necessarily referring to their original targets. Should we not be encouraging this trend rather than attempt to preserve the more hateful meanings?

      Even the words "dumb", "stupid", "lame", etc. all once meant something far more specific but are now more generally applied insults and have been so for such a long time that to hear the words applied more originally sounds odd to a listener. In some cases, the meanings of words have changed so completely as to be not recognizable.

      I encourage this trend. Based on the way it is used today, I can't help but wonder if "nigger" will ever come to mean something benign. Perhaps in the future, and something tells me long after we're gone, the word could mean something as innocuous as "neighbor" or "friend" (especially one who goes back a ways or who has shared critical experiences with you). One can only hope. And for those of you who worry about losing the "fun" words, I can't ever see racism and hatred ever dying...it's just too human. We'll come up with all new words to spread the hate. Human ingenuity cannot be stopped!

APOLOGY NOT ACCEPTED...

      I hate when people say, "...and I apologize if I have offended anyone with my/by my/because of/etc. (blah blah blah)." The most insincere of all apologies.
   
      This article offers a fairly recent example of this kind of false contrition. The owner of a ride featured in the Broward County Fair named his rollercoaster "The Zyklon". Anyone with even a quarter of an education should be wincing uncomfortably after having read that. And while yes, "Zyklon" means "cyclone" in German and the owner of this ride was most probably trying to associate himself with more famous rollercoasters operating under the "Cyclone" banner, a simple Google search would have put the word in historical context very quickly (though surprisingly, a Norwegian death metal band called Zyklon ranked higher in the search than the more infamous "Zyklon B"). When confronted with this fact, Mr. Zaitshik offered his version of the insincere apology, "There's actually no ill will intended to anyone of the Jewish faith, and I apologize if the name has offended anybody." (full article here)

      Now, I actually believe him: I really do. I've come across enough people wholly ignorant of things that one would think would be widely known. And while I still blame him for not doing a basic Google search beforehand, I in no way believe he was deliberately intending a Holocaust reference for his fair ride. But that's not the problem...it's the "if".

      You don't make apologies unless you've not only done something wrong and are penitent about it and you certainly don't use the word "if" when doing so. Clearly you've offended people. There's no longer any "if" about it. The use of "anybody" isn't helping either now that I think about it. It's a bit clumsy, but how about this? "I did not intend a Holocaust reference when naming my rollercoaster The Zyklon. I have been informed of and have since learned about the historical context of the word and will change the name of the ride immediately. I apologize to those whom I have offended with my ignorance."

       Even just changing the word "if" to "that" in his original apology would have made all the difference.

      That being said, I still feel genuinely bad for this company. This is a real commercial and it came out shortly before AIDS made its public debut. I wonder if they renamed or simply went out of business?

CAVEAT EMPTOR...

      I love these commercials going around on the radio and TV trying to convince people to part with their hard-earned cash to buy bullion gold, gold coins from back in the Gold Standard days, or just shares in companies that mine the commodity. The fast-talking narrator is all about the falling value of the dollar via inflation and how you need the "security" that comes with owning physical gold because a "day of reckoning" is coming because the Federal Reserve (or "government") is printing money ("Ben Franklins" according to one commercial I just heard) and has a license to do so.

      Not that I know where this security comes from seeing as how in all my years of cashiering, while I have had the occasional pre-1965 silver dime and quarter pass my way, never once has anyone paid me with an American Silver Eagle (1986-present), any of the various American Gold Eagles (1986-present), or Platinum Eagles (1997-present) either at face value (for which you would be an idiot) or at trade value (which as far as I know, my store would not even accept at a percentage of current bullion value).

       I understand the basic argument in that you convert your spendable cash into tradable gold which you can then later (and the commercials strongly imply at a profit) convert back into spendable cash by selling them to dealers. The commercials just annoy me because they prey on the ignorant and use their irrational fears to encourage them to part with their money. Gold is already high (at least from my perspective). It's trading in the $1700/tr.oz. range when ten years ago it was under $300/tr.oz. Not that this stops these commercials and print ads from speculating that gold will rise to $5000/tr.oz.

       According to an official inflation calculator, gold should only be about $360 per troy ounce today if gold were truly the indicator of the dollar's loss of value its supporters claim (calculation based on the official $20.67/tr.oz. price in 1933 in 2011 dollars). Back in 2001 thanks to countries dumping a lot of their physical gold holdings back in the late 1990s, this gold as an indicator of the dollar's loss of purchasing power temporarily matched actual inflation statistics perhaps giving (re)birth to this idea in modern times (with a little help from Y2K hysteria no doubt). So gold being at $1700/tr.oz. is not the result of inflation (or hyperinflation as these commercials warn is just on the horizon) but speculation and speculation fueled by irrational fears too. I feel bad for those people who will be holding on to their overpriced gold when the bubble finally bursts and it comes down to more reasonable levels.

       But then, I also won't feel bad because a fool and his money are soon parted as has been said and really, if you take the time to think about it, if holding physical gold were such an important thing to be doing right now, why is it this company is trying to sell it to you? Magnanimity? Why are they perfectly happy to take your dollars, those very same dollars the commercials and ads are claiming to be losing value and will soon be rendered nearly worthless as per their claims of hyperinflation to sell you their gold? Perhaps if you are the buyer, you think they are suckers to part with such valuable metal for mere paper and ink or perhaps they know something they know you don't...

HELPFUL TIP FOR THE LADIES

      This has happened to me twice in a row now. Hardly a trend, but no less annoying.

      What I am talking about is relationship statuses online...specifically Facebook since that is the hub website du jour of the internet. Don't be like Digby, who I know for a fact had three boyfriends over the past four years but never once changed her status from Single to In a Relationship with So&So. Sadly (and I say this for her), she could have avoided my numerous advances entirely had she been "In a Relationship with So&So". If a girl is taken, I'm not gonna hit on her (at least once I know). Now, maybe you don't want to change that little status marker for fear of the embarrassment that comes if and when it needs to be changed back to "Single", but there's a way around that.

      Number Twelve, while it listed "In a Relationship", made me question it because when I first friended her, she was listed as "Married" to one of her female best friends so when it switched to "In a Relationship", while a fair hint you might say, the fact that it had not indicated with whom and the fact that none of her friends "Liked" this change nor commented on it suggested to me that it might be a feint. I searched her pictures and saw nothing to indicate she actually had a boyfriend.

      This was also true of Digby. I know these boyfriends existed because I learned about them afterward through hearsay amongst her friends. But never once was a picture posted of her with one of these boys. And here is your helpful hint.

      Now, while I'm aware there are those guys who simply do not give a fuck and will proposition you anyway regardless of what you post, you can still relieve yourself of the headache of better mannered men by simply posting that you are "In a Relationship with So&So". The "with So&So" part is important as it puts a hope-killing fact right in your face. But there's a better way...a blunter way.

       What you do is, create a photo album with just one picture in it of you and your boyfriend. Label him as your boyfriend whether by name or by status. Secondly, call the album something very in-your-face like "I Have a Boyfriend So Leave Me The Fuck Alone". Simple. Elegant. Blunt.

       Now, if you're the type who posts a lot of picture albums, just remember to add a photo to it once-in-a-while to keep it up to date. You can leave the total photo count at one, but make sure it remains visible.

       Thank you.

      And yes, should I ever get a girlfriend, you can be damned sure I will enjoy posting just such an album myself for the sheer pleasing arrogance of it.

THIS IS WHY THE DEMOCRATS LOSE...

      I want to make it clear that I hate the Republican Party, but I really fucking hate the Democratic Party. Do they have any fight left in them whatsoever? The nimrods in genuine leadership positions for the GOP have been lobbing underhand pitches the Democrats for some time now and not a single swing on their part. The amount of shame and scorning for their hypocritical stances, anti-science views, and downright Orwellian propaganda (job-creators anyone?) the Democrats ought to be heaping upon the GOP is downright enormous and yet, the jackass-symboled party remains cowered and silent. What the fuck?

      You have the obvious shit like the GOP's sudden turn on fiscal conservativism. NOW debts are a problem? Where the fuck were these assholes during the Bush administration? They seemed to be in place for the last years of the Clinton one, y'know...when the country was generating surpluses for the first time in my life but for Bush? Let's see, you had tax cuts made during a(n undeclared) war - something has NEVER been done in the history of the world - to which another (undeclared) war would be added, huge increases to the military budget, a medicare drug benefit bill, among others...all paid for on borrowed money creating huge annual deficits. But that didn't matter because Vice President Cheney declared that "deficits don't matter."

      The biggest hypocrisy is, in my opinion, the party's sheer lack of compassion. Look, I haven't read the Bible cover-to-cover so it's possible I've missed something. However, I'm fairly sure that Jesus was much more likely to support tending to the impoverished, the malnourished, and the sick than to be insuring that the wealthy pay the least amount of taxes possible and making sure that we project overwhelming military authority across the globe rather than overwhelming moral and ethical authority (If you've ever wondered how far we've fallen, check this out. Imagine that ever happening today). Yet the party which has somehow secured itself as the Party of God manages to do exactly none of the things that even an eighth-way decent Christian would do. And do the Democrats effectively call them out on their bullshit? No. And a resounding No at that.

      Their anti-science stances are also legendary. Never mind that the power the United States was able to gain over the past century had EVERYTHING to do with education, especially science education; never mind all our advances in medical technology and improvements in the quality of life; never mind all our military advances too; none of it matters. Let our education and educational infrastructure crumble until we become a has-been on the world stage because you're afraid of evolution, unions, sex, and having your religion become marginalized.

       But what has one of the many medical fronts we have "declared war on" been in the past fifty years or so? That would be cancer. There's been a "War on Cancer" for some time now. It's hardly won, but a cure has been recently found for cervical cancer and it comes in the form of a three-shot vaccine for the human papillomavirus (HPV). Thousands of women die from this cancer every year and a cure has been found, but Governor Rick Perry and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (and I would bet good money a large share of the Republican Party) are opposed to mandating this vaccine which, to be most effective, must be given to girls before they become sexually active. Any given girl has a 1 in 2 chance of contracting this virus over her sexual lifetime...that's not statistically insignificant...and the virus will ultimately kill about 4000 of those women annually. We've found a cure for a cancer and the GOP does not want you to have it.

       It is fair to say that they are not advocating this vaccine (or others) go away, just that you shouldn't be "forced" to get them. Never mind the excellent safety records of ALL vaccines and the literally tens of millions of lives saved by them and that even 1-2% of the population being unvaccinated is enough to negate the benefits of vaccination overall. No, false information about them gets spread like they cause autism (disproven) or retardation or simply making vaccines sound conspiratorial by calling them "government injections." Aside from the fact that I have no idea how these assholes (and others like Jenny McCarthy) don't get sued for libel/slander by vaccine makers for spreading false claims and dangerous misinformation about their products, I can't help but wonder...where the fuck are the Democrats in all this? Whatever happened to fighting fire with fire?

      I don't like Republican tactics. I don't like their Orwellian treatment of language and how it seems they're taking orders from unseen leaders (take the time to notice how quickly every Republican and their supporters - most notoriously Fox News and the Wall St. Journal will all be using the same words, phrases, and jingoisms whenever a new one emerges. It's like they got memos). Notice how there are no wealthy or rich people in this country anymore, they're "job creators." And they get to continue to be called "job creators" unchallenged because the Democratic party seemed pathologically incapable of pointing out how there are fewer jobs now than there were in 2001 (y'know, before the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy which were supposed to create jobs and how tax cuts now are supposed to be spurring the same thing, but clearly aren't). This goes back a while now considering that the word "liberal" is now a curseword in politics and conservativism is somehow a badge of honor. In a country founded on innovation, both scientific and entrepreneurial, being conservative (in the political sense of going back to the "good old days" and not the dictionary sense of preserving of the status quo and resistant to change) is like being proud of your ignorance rather than ashamed. Now that I think about it, the difference between conservativism (in the dictionary sense) and Republican conservativism seems exactly analogous to Chris Rock's famous "Black People versus Niggaz" bit from "Bring the Pain" back in 1996. (Nothing makes a Republican happier than not knowing the answer to your question... ;-) )

Actual U.S. half-disme pattern. Look at the legend: "Lib(erty) ∙ Par(ent) of Science & Industry"

      But what I'm getting at here is where are the attack ads? And by that I mean the attack ads of the caliber I've come to expect from the Republican Party. Y'know, the ones with blatant exaggerations and out-of-context quotations? The ones which make spurious connections that will cause anyone who's not used to thinking critically to accept unquestioningly? Where're the black&white ads with ominous music making claims (rather than cautiously insinuating) that Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann want to withhold a cure for cancer; that these people would rather your daughter die of cancer because preventing it offends them? It makes me want to rip what's left of my hair out. It's way too easy to attack these assholes and attack them viciously on any number of issues and yet...conspicuous silence. Even just the fact that like 99% of Republican voters are actually voting against their self-interests. Republican districts are overwhelmingly dependent on government assistance and yet are the same districts who rail against government in their lives. Those same districts benefit heavily from tax allocation (that is, they receive more money from the government than they pay in taxes) yet decry socialism. It's insane.

      The party's supposed to be religious yet no one expects corporations to behave morally and ethically. Shouldn't a company where the officers rake in a shitload of money while simultaneously laying off workers or offshoring them to another country be shamed rather than praised? Shouldn't at least a tithing of the bonuses CEOs make be spread amongst the workers that made it possible? What about the lack of charity? The highest ranking members aren't expected to sacrifice in order to make sure their most vulnerable employees can keep their jobs? When did stockholders become more important than the people in the company? (Oh, right...) But still, the Party of Jesus remains silent on what should be a very big issue.

       Ugh... I'm done for now. Too annoyed to go on...

ADDENDUM: Here's an example of how Democrats should fight. They may not win right away using this kind of strategy, but if they keep up with this drumbeat, they will shine...

BRAVADO

      It seems yesterday, there was supposed to be a terrorist attack, car-bomb style, in New York City yesterday on the tenth anniversary of the Trade Center attacks. (read article here) It didn't happen. Whether this was the result of bad information, the planners getting spooked by the newspapers/heightened security, or that it was actually foiled and information about it will surface eventually, at this time, remains unknown. But it got me thinking, and thinking in ways I often do...

      Shouldn't we be mocking al Qaeda at this point? I mean, they've been reduced to car bombs? What happened to the grand, ostentatious displays? Each attack by this group escalated in both size and daring. You had the first bombing of the Trade Center with simple truck bombs (which were supposed to topple the one tower into the other), the U.S. embassy bombing in Kenya, the brazen attack on the U.S.S. Cole battleship, and finally culminating in the, and yes I will say it, impressive nearly simultaneous hijackings of four jet airliners turned guided missiles on the Pentagon, World Trade Center, and (presumably) the Capitol Building. You can't go back now...that's weakness, not to mention a blow to pride. Car bombs are hack for this group and to use them at all would only reveal their inability to carry out the kinds of attacks they've made a name for themselves with. It's laughable that they even considered stooping to such a level.

      Blame bin Laden if you will. The trouble with the 9/11 attacks is that they were so amazingly amazing that they're difficult to follow-up on in terms of scale. I'm not saying car bombs don't represent serious threats to lives and property, but my, how far you've fallen al Qaeda...

I CAN ONLY HOPE I'M DOING THE RIGHT THING...

I know this sounds silly at some level, but I think my Best Friend and I need a divorce. I've always wondered how couples who were married for 20-30 years would just call it quits. My thinking was like, "Well, you've made it this far, why not just stick it out?" But I think I get it now.

I'm tired of being taken for granted...actually, it's worse than that because at some level I don't mind being taken for granted because, at some level, it's actually a good thing...it means the other person believes in me...that I'll be sticking around. It can obviously be taken too far, but I do kinda like it.

My Best Friend is just this well of negativity. I don't even know how to describe it well enough to do it justice. For years, I would deal with it because I knew she was depressed so I tried not to take it personally, but it's hard not to now. I don't know that she's actually done anything about her depression. Sure, she's been on medications, but in terms of behavioral therapy which I think she needs more than she does drugs, she's worse than she's ever been. I'm tempted to post all our recent text messages for examples, but I'll stick with just one recent one. This was her asking me about my daytrip to see Bronx the other week. This was her first text to me about it. Not, how was it or did you have a good time. No, she wrote me, "watd u think of Bronx's attractiveness? u like her? saw the pic...nice. ur are in the same league...an undeerattractive coupke...she shud go for u wtf lol" [sic] This is what I have to deal with. When I said that Bronx was pretty, because she is, both physically and mentally and because she's fun to be around and good company, Best Friend responds with, "pretty my ass....u crazyyyy. and Ukrainian isnt attractive. shes the type who needs makeup to fool people." [sic] It wasn't enough for her to put down my friend Bronx, but she had to toss in my other friend and insult her too - one who I went through some trouble to introduce to each other and who really likes my Best Friend. And Best Friend wonders why I get mad at her.

It's a ton of insecurity and jealousy. And when it's not that, I just feel used (which I guess would be what you call what happens when you cross the line dividing "being taken for granted"). Her problems are always my problems or that of whomever she called. I only recall her rarely taking the initiative to figure out her conundrums. But generally, she's happy to parasitically use another to get this shit done and god forbid if you don't want to help her or aren't helping her satisfactorily because at no point does she realize that I am not obligated to actually provide this help but oh will I get hell if I refuse. That selfishness. Me, me, me, me. And I hate complaining about it because I can't help but feel like I am becoming exactly the person I am railing against when doing so. It's so frustrating. And I think it generally bugs me because I'm never able to press the offensive because SOMETHING always comes up be it a break-up or this one time when her ex actually DIED or when she would get fired or when she was genuinely scared about something or other...I get stuck being unable to demand that she correct or at least work to correct her extremely negative character before it brings an end to our friendship. It gets put on hold and by the time I can get back to it, I would only look petty for bringing it up meaning I have to wait for the pot to boil over again. That's happening now, but oh wouldn't you know, her grandmother is on the verge of death so I have to be there for her when it happens. I don't resent this...it's what you do as a friend, but it does mean that it all gets put on hold...again...but maybe not this time. I wrote this and sent it to her as a message on Facebook. Regarding the bus part, she wants me to visit her but doesn't want to have to pick me up to do so which is fine, whatever. I don't expect these kinds of things so I looked it up and commented in the same message. I didn't want to use ellipses and have it thought that I am manipulating the message. I hope I'm doing the right thing...


We can talk about your grandmother, but that's it. I'll be there for you in that regard but otherwise I need a break from you again.

There are no direct buses to your street from here. I'd have to take two buses and coordinate with their schedules. If I'm lucky, it would be about an hour of travel time plus walking time. If one of the buses is late, then it could be two hours or more of travel time. And going home could end up meaning a lot of walking. But quite frankly, until you can figure out how not to nap at least when I'm over (or you're visiting me), I'm not interested in visiting you or having you visit. It's really a waste of our time together when you do that. And especially if I'm staying by you, get up when I get up. I don't like being awake for hours waiting for you to get up. It's rude.

As for hanging up on you, I don't like your dismissive attitude and I'm about full up on your negativity. It doesn't matter what your excuse is for it because it doesn't change the fact that you're a real drag to be around. You really need to work on that. You need to be openly appreciative of the people in your life too instead of this clingy, needy, jealous girl you've been for the past half-decade or so. I'm really tired of it. Speaking just for myself, I give and I give and I've given, but it's never enough. You really need to learn how to appreciate being alive and how to stop taking out your negativity on others. You have to stop putting down my friends, it's always uncalled for. You have to stop framing my life choices in terms of you. If you want me to learn how to drive, it should be because you truly and honestly believe that it would (have) improve(d) my life, not because it inconveniences you that I don't. Don't take me for granted. I thought I could handle it, but it turns out I can't. I have a limit and you're fast approaching it. Like I said, I'll be there for you regarding your grandmother, but I need a break from you and you really ought to evaluate yourself and your attitude and your path in life, especially if you expect me to remain there by your side throughout it. You're losing me as a friend because I really can't take you as you've been for the past several years anymore. If who you are now is who you will continue to be, then you will have to be this woman without me. I'm not interested in being friends with someone who's ashamed of me and embarrassed about what I do for a living. I need friends who love me, not ones who judge me by how I make them look to others.

I still have some faith left in the idea of there being an "us" so I'm not giving up on you just yet, but I need some time away from you and I sincerely hope you will use this time productively.

ADDENDUM: The response I got back was this [names changed to aliases, but otherwise sic]:

Where did all this come from? I didn't do anything to warrent this. You are overreacting again. And what about your freinds who put me down? That is OK right? You are such a hypocrite!!!!!!!
After this little tirade of yours I am really not sure I want to be your friend so don't worry too much. Again, I did nothing to you. And don't take your misery about not driving out on mr because everyone harps on it with you. You know other people...Mystic and Ukrainian....have made the same compliant. I've told you for yearssssss to drive for yourself to help your life but you won't listen. I refuse to have pity on a person who refuses to help himself. Other people don't like driving you around and won't like I have. And if the bus was so much of an issue, I said I would drive. I figured it would be one bus n easy since there are so many around here.
You are making a BIG DEAL out of me making a comment "it's a inconvience for me so if you could take a bus...." I was just asking you. If i have to tip toe around you with what I say when I'm not even saying anything wrong then I don't need a person like that as a friend anyway.
You not wanting to be my friend anymore after "this" whatever "this" is is absurb. I am the one who now has every right to be annoyed with you.
And WHere did this come from?
"I'm not interested in being friends with someone who's ashamed of me and embarrassed about what I do for a living. I need friends who love me, not ones who judge me by how I make them look to others"

----Fuck you! How DARE you accuse me of this??????????THis is BS! I'm Not!!!! Cry me a river, Best Friend is the bad guy! WHEN am I ashamed of you?WHAT have I done to even prove this? This is bullshit and not true, you just want to play VICTIM. Iv'e been wanting you to hang out with Ukrainian and Mystic and me all together. Iv'e mentioned it to both of them. If I'm so ashamed of you why would I want that? I am not ashamed of you, I know how you are by know and you are projecting your insecurites about yourself on to me. If OTHERS don't think your "good enough" and its it's now MY fault? Bacuse women aren't interested in you are blaming me and taking your anger out on me instead? That is what is going on an I doin't deserve that.
For ex..... I'm a bitch b/c I want a guy who graduted college(* but Ukrainian isn't?) You of course, take this as a direct insult b/c you haven't. In turn you hate me for expressing that. Turns out the rest of the world of women feels the same way, you realize it, then turn to hate me cuz you don't have the guts to say anything to anyone else.....and you shouldn't even be offended in the first place b/c not everything is about you but you are because you are an egomaniac, that's how you think.....
I thought before the email yesterday that I was wrong in thinking you were a real true friend and this only confirms it. Again, I did not do ANYTHING to you so knock off the victim routine.
Yes, Iv'e been depressed, yes I sleep a lot. That's about it. And I understand I should be awake when your over, so if that's the worst thing I did that you won't be my friend so be it.
I think you have to straighten yourself because acting the way you are is NOT normal.

She temporarily suspended her account after this but it is back up today and I am still on her Friends List. Make of this as you will but I can't help but feel my Best Friend has missed the point by a wide margin. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought my original message was being painted in broad strokes suggesting a pattern of behavior that I am in need of relief from whereas her response seems to indicate a far narrower approach as well as virtually no recognition of her role in this (and yes, it amuses me somewhat her lack of response to my accusing her of a dismissive attitude), strongly suggesting this is 100% my fault and she, the innocent. Her memory of others is long while for herself it is short. I might have to port some entries from previous blogs to here to further illustrate the scope of this problem. Until then, if you've known me, you'll know where they may still be found.

In the meantime, I am going to clarify to her that I did not mean to imply that I had wished to break off all contact. I am still willing to have a Facebook relationship with her, but I don't want phone, text, or visitation contact since those latter three are the greatest sources of my misery with her. I need all the positivity I can muster right now, especially considering my new online project...

THOSE THINGS YOU NOTICE...

      I've started scanning my journals again after a long absence. Hard to believe it's been almost 2½ years since I've last spent some time doing this.

      As I scan each page, I skim the contents of the upcoming one. While the most common theme is me talking about girls I want and have wanted (and wouldn't've minded wanting), the second most common is rediscovering all these things my friends, both past and present, said they were going to do for me or places we were supposed to go together that ultimately never panned out. It made me think of a journal entry I made in 1994 which may be the first of these examples that survived. So, so many have since followed and I'm sure a great many preceded it, it's just by that point I was writing shit down. I can't even remember them specifically anymore which is what makes reading these entries surprising. While I've forgotten the specifics of each broken promise/intention (with the exception of a few "famous" ones), it all has blended in my mind into this seamless continuum of disappointment in my friends and occasionally family.

FEEDING THE TROLLS...

      A common trolling post besides the ever popular "Atheism vs. Christianity" posts, is one making fun of the seemingly bizarre and ineffective Imperial* measurement system versus that of the Metric system.

One of the zillions of examples out there (click to enlarge)

CATERING TO FOOLS...

      Since I'm moving, I've been busy gathering those companies I do business with and changing my addresses with them. Reasonable, no? I want the address change to take effect on June 1st. I sent in the form with post office but I have had trouble in the past with forwarding.

       The first apartment I lived in never received any forwarded mail. I guess the application got lost in the fold despite getting the confirmation letter of it. That didn't matter so much as I was leaving home so mail arriving there could be picked up at my convenience.

       When I left that apartment for the current one, again the forwarding application went through and while I did receive the occasional forwarded letter, most simply arrived at the old address. It was fortunate that my Best Friend needed to stay there an extra month or else some rather important mail would not have come my way like my IRA statements. I found out when talking to the post office (it turns out the guy I spoke to actually knew who I was through my father) that my route was staffed only by part-timers...multiple ones at that and apparently not all of them got the message to forward my mail. Mail forwarding is done at the level of the carrier who affixes that familiar yellow label on such mail. If they don't have the forwarding order, it just gets dropped off at your old address.

       So naturally, you might understand I'm a bit wary about trusting my mail to be forwarded given my past experiences so I've gotten to not only putting in the forwarding application but changing the addresses myself for those which I can think of. Now while PSE&G and Cablevision seem to grasp the concept of changing the address on the date I tell them, my credit cards don't. Each one told me that the address had been changed immediately to my chagrin. For two of them, this won't matter as my next statements will be sent after June 1st but for one of them, I had to change it right back. How aggravating.

        So much for being responsible and doing things ahead of time to assure a smooth and orderly transition. I blame all those assholes out there for doing things at the last minute or even after that point for this. I also blame capitalism for creating the kind of environment that causes businesses in their need for ever broader customer bases to accept this kind of behavior in the first place. Thanks for making the last minute the only one in which I can get things done...

ADDENDUM: After reconciling my books for the month of May, I realized that I never received my bills from Verizon and PSE&G. Last night, my cousin gave me a letter that got sent back to him with two orders on it. The first order said the Change of Address had not gone through yet and to deliver it to the old (that is, my current) address. An overlaid sticker said it was "NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED" even though the address was correct with the additional line "UNABLE TO FORWARD". It wasn't supposed to be forwarded yet you fuckers! Now I wonder if those other two bills were returned to their respective senders. Thank goodness for online bill payments or else I'd've missed two payments so far. Three for three USPS. Three for three. At least the reasons for fucking up my mail delivery have been unique each time. Novel frustrations are considerably less boring than repeated ones.

LINE OF THE DAY, part XIV

      Gawker posted another article which made me mad this morning which is probably a good thing given the sheer amount of days I've been down these past ten weeks.  It was yet another instance of someone getting unfairly punished over a comment made on her own time on Facebook and who was narced on by another student's parent. The student, who was 13 (I mention that as it may be a mitigating factor), made a clearly hyperbolic statement wishing that Osama bin Laden had killed her math teacher.

       This is another instance of four things that piss me off. First of all, she made this statement on her own time, not school time, so I don't see how this is the school's business. If anything, perhaps it's time to construe these types of internet violations as something akin to illegally recording a phone call. The LoTD comment ultimately makes mention of a "reasonable expectation of privacy" and that ought to be codified in law thus making it a crime to report something seen on the internet that was not intended to be seen by you the equivalent of a warrantless search. Oh wait, that is a Federal law. It's the Fourth Amendment. What needs to be done then is to extend Fourth Amendment rights to instances like this as well. Secondly, the parent who reported this to the school violated a basic social compact by not going to that child's parents. That parent failed to respect the social chain-of-command and should be publicly shamed for doing so. Thirdly, the principal of this school failed to use discretion in this case. Suspending a student for five days over this is beyond ridiculous. The principal should have understood this to be an instance of hyperbole (because no one's ever said, "Oh God! I wish I were dead!" ever before and actually wanted it to happen. No one's ever wished death upon someone over a perceived injustice and actually wanted that to happen. Assholes...) and used it as a teachable moment for online postings that this girl be more careful in the future as it should now be plain to her that there are people out there with agendas and that you could very easily become a victim of one if you are not careful. And fourthly, can we get a fucking comedy version of the Miranda Warning please already?!

      Seriously, it is well past time that we have an actual honest-to-God Federal regulation declaring that all seemingly controversial statements must be considered acts of hyperbole, sarcasm, and/or satire until, and only unless, it can be demonstrated to be otherwise. I am fucking tired of these overreactionary shitheads (which I guess I am now one of albeit from the opposing side). The comments section in the linked article is a joy and frustration to read. There are many worthy comments to post, but I shall focus on this one by lancehubner:

She said she wished Osama "had killed" her teacher, not that he would kill her teacher from beyond the grave. She said it in private (or what she thought was private) and it's not worded as a threat--obviously a hyperbolic joke from a frustrated kid, not to mention being in the past tense.

This vice principal needs to get his head out of his ass. And the parent who reported this is a hysterical dong. 

to which iphone_myphone responded:

If its on fb, its not really private anymore. If she mentioned the teachers name, it becomes a threat.

to which lancehubner responded (and this would be the LoTD):

No, it doesn't. To be a threat you have to threaten someone.

If I write "I wish Osama had killed iphone_myphone" on a piece of paper and put it in a drawer, I didn't threaten you because I didn't say it TO YOU. If I whisper it to a friend it's still not a threat, for the same reason.

She had privacy settings on. She reasonably expected nobody to read it outside her circle of friends, and certainly not the teacher she hates. Ergo, not a threat.

Also not a threat because it doesn't say: I am going to kill you! It says: I wish a person who is now dead had already killed this guy I don't like. How is that a threat? If I say, "I wish Donald Trump had died in a hairspray accident 10 years ago," am I threatening to kill him? Ridiculous!

Just a minor point with the above comment. "Had killed" in the use described would actually be the past tense in the subjunctive mood.

MOTHERS' DAY

       I don't celebrate either Mother's or Father's Day and that's not because I don't believe in the holiday or that I'm opposed to it on quasi-religious grounds or because I stand in solidarity with the holiday's creator Anna Jarvis's opposition to the holiday's commercialization or even because I am holding the holidays hostage until I am able to secure a girlfriend who can successfully guilt me into doing something about after all these years [though I will admit that would likely be a most powerful motivator]. No, it's because, quite simply, I am an asshole. I won't make excuses for it. This however, has not stopped me from thinking about how the holiday might be better (or at least more reasonably) done.

      My proposal may or may not be related to what other cultures may or may not already be doing. I don't know, I'm not researching. My proposal would also not fly commercially as it has no set nationally recognized day to give greeting card, flower, and restaurant companies a dependable single-day boost in revenue. Just as your birthday is celebrated more or less personally on the day you were actually born, a woman becomes a mother on the day her (first) child is born, thus your birthday is also a mother's day. Now what I would be proposing is more of a passing-the-torch type celebration. I figure since we legally become adults at eighteen in this country, that eighteen would also be the last year your birthday would be celebrated as your birthday. Now that you are an adult, you would, for the rest of her life, honor your mother on your birthday, her mother's day, instead. Just as children grow out of Santa Claus, so to would you outgrow your parents' recognition of your birthday. The day could be celebrated more-or-less as it is now or more preferably, customized to her situation ultimately reflecting gratitude for the life you have both received and have had nurtured throughout childhood.

       If you are an only child, you would honor Father's Day on the same day. A Parents' Day if you will. Otherwise, I would think Father's Day would be the obligation of the second child (on that child's birthday despite the fact he became a father upon the birth of the first child). I say this because I can't help but feel this holiday as naturally matriarchal much like the word "widow" is naturally feminine (in that it requires an ending to make it masculine [widower] whereas other nouns [at least in languages which reflect gender more readily] take endings to make them feminine [actor : actress // der Freund : die Freundin // le voisin : la voisine].) leaving Father's Day to be naturally secondary in importance despite the far more typical patriarchal setup with regards to the ruling classes. Subsequent children would be absolved of these duties and instead take upon these roles should their elder brethren die, are no longer capable of performing their duty, or could instead be given the more general "Parents' Day" obligation. I personally favor absolution though as large families might make multiple yearly celebrations look tacky/excessive from a neighbor's perspective though I would totally expect the tradition to be inherited as already described.

      If there are other cultures which already do anything resembling what I've already described, then great, I would then feel justified in bearing such thoughts. Otherwise this way of doing things seems more logical to me. I tend to feel it proper to keep what amounts to personal celebrations personal. I can see how the guilt in opposing this holiday can come about. It's far too easy to be accused of hating mothers making it impossible to oppose such a holiday on principle. So we're stuck with it even though I think most people would find it odd if we chose not to celebrate individual birthdays but rather celebrated everybody's birthday on an assigned day each year.

      I could go on if I were both not really hungry right now and had actually made notes before typing but I won't, opting instead to end this mild rant here...