Being a woman in public: just like wearing swastikas and shouting racist slogans

Well, I can't say I wasn't warned.

Tallulah Spankhead of the Lady Garden warned readers not to, under any circumstance, read the comments on this article about a woman who was assaulted in a well-known "problem area" in Wellington, New Zealand.

I was told but did I listen? No. So of course I was subjected to the usual victim-blamey bullshit like women shouldn't expect to be able to just walk anywhere without being assault, like actual people.

My personal favorite was Comment 19 from Scott:

Its not about blaming the victim, its about common sense about keeping yourself safe. Its like walking into south Auckland with a swastika on your head shouting racist slogans. Sure you can do it and in a perfect world it would be your right to free speech but your a dumbass if you do.

So the very act of being a woman in public is akin to wearing swastikas and shouting racist slogans? Our very existence is provocation to violence? AWESOME.

I love the "in a perfect world, but it's not a perfect world" bullshit attitude. It's not a perfect world but it's definitely not going to improve as long as people keep shrugging their shoulders and saying "Well, that's the way it is."

That's not the way it has to be. We can start by placing blame for assault squarely where it lay - on attackers.

There's about 1000 Penn State Students that need a good hearty Throat-punch and a number of staff that need way worse than that...

SEVERE EFFIN' TRIGGER WARNING LIKE WHOA FOR SEXUAL ABUSE.


I've never cared much for football.  The only things I care less about than college football are NFL Football and to an even lesser extent, CFL football.

I care a shit-load about kids though.  Which is evidently more than I can say about the jackholes at Penn State that were rioting in protest over the sacking of long-time coach Joe Paterno after he was fired for helping cover up for a former player after the player was caught raping a small child in the locker room.  TWICE.  Over ten years ago.

Let's let that sink in for a moment, shall we?

Mike McQuery, assistant coach, walked into a locker room sometime in 2002 and found Jerry Sandusky sodomizing what looked like a 10-year-old boy.

Again, take a second and think about the build of your average football player.  Now think about the size of the average 10-year-old boy.

Yeah.

McQuery, in all his wisdom, turned around and walked out.  Now, call me crazy, but I think the proper response in this situation may have been a physical intervention in the 'GETOFFTHATLITTLEBOYYOUTWISTEDFUCK' vein.  That's just me.  Seems a little more pro-active than 'Oh.. hrm.  I need to go think, but as you were, gentlemen.'

Instead he walked into Paterno's office, told him and was effectively told "No, we're not going to call the cops.  We'll let the administration take care of it."  Then both he and McQuery washed their hands of the situation while the administration handled it to the effect of telling Sandusky "Hey, Jerry.. if you're going to rape little boys, can you please not do it on campus.  Mmmkay, thanks."

It gets even better when you consider that this was NOT the first report of Sandusky's misdeeds.  In 1998 a janitor stumbled across Sandusky performing oral sex on another small boy in the locker room.  And again, walked out.

What the fucking fuck?

Now it seems that Sandusky took his dirty work somewhere off Penn State campus and got caught.  Someone decided NOT to sit on their hands and in the wake, the dirty details of the other children he victimized have come to light and Penn State University is in a world of shit, because they've been covering up for Sandusky all these years.  Because football, you know.  Way more important than preventing child-rape.  Clearly.

*swallows bile*

So the President stepped down, and Paterno has been fired, as he should be.  Penn State students are rioting.

Are they rioting because it took so goddamned long to bring these allegations to light, and fire some of the people responsible for covering up?  No, it's because their precious coach got fired and who's going to coach the big game now?  Each one of the kids crying over Paterno and the good name of Penn State being ruined should be punched in the throat.

Fucking hell.

A commenter on Feministe's article tried to paint Paterno as sympathetic and torn between conflicting ethical dilemmas.  Protect the school's good name or potentially put a child-rapist behind bars.

"We all have to balance competing ethical obligations all the time, let’s at least do each other the courtesy of admitting that it’s difficult.  I’m not saying what Paterno did was right, I’m saying it was understandable."

Um. No.

Full Stop.

There is no way that not calling the police after witnessing a child rape, or not INSISTING on calling the police after someone else witnesses a child rape, does not make you the worst person in the whole fucking world (outside of the rapist themselves).  There is no 'competing ethical obligation' here.  The only ethical obligation was to those kids who were victimized by Sandusky.  Not to the University, not to the team and definitely not to Sandusky.

To the Penn State rioters:  Paterno is NOT the victim here.  He is culpable, just as the school president is culpable, just as McQueary is culpable as they KNEW that Sandusky was a predator and they looked the other way to protect the 'good name of the school'.

Every time you whine about the 'witch hunt' you are figuratively slapping a nameless little boy in the face and saying "We don't care about you.  You mean nothing.  We only care about the game."

Disgusting.

Edit:  For future reference, other universities or organizations may want to use this handy, simple flowchart for reference, care of Adulting:

The Internet is Effing INSANE part 2

Sometimes, as a blogger, we have no way of knowing what post is going to explode on us.  To my surprise, my most popular post to date in terms of views is a post where my friend Dan and I speculate on Yosemite Sam's junk.  Now, I know that 588 views do not quite equate to an internet explosion, but it just goes to show, you never know what's going to be wildly popular, or unpopular.

Two days ago, feminist blogger, lawyer and activist Jill Filipovic wrote a one-off post at Feministe about a note that was left in her bag by a TSA agent after they found an item of a... *koff* personal nature in her luggage.  Jill's initial reaction to it was lighthearted, while still acknowledging that hey, this is not cool.

Total violation of privacy, wildly inappropriate and clearly not ok, but I also just died laughing in my hotel room.

Then kaboom.  I guess a few other sites including Jezebel got a hold of the story and the whole thing has kind of gone kablooey.  Kind of?  Actually, to be more accurate, it seems that the whole damned internet has gone apeshit over this story. You'd almost think that Jill had dared to insult the Bloggess or something.

Can I just say, first, that it is totally possible to find something incredibly inappropriate and incredibly hilarious at the same time.  I would have giggled too.  But I laugh at dead baby jokes and make smart ass remarks about heroin addiction.  Doesn't mean either of these things aren't horrifying.  Sometimes you gotta laugh, to keep from crying.

So far this story has hit Fox News, Gawker, Forbes and a number of other media outlets.  The original post itself has 20 trackbacks at this time.  A lot of the articles focus on the issue of privacy which has been an ongoing concern with the TSA and for some, this is just another example.  There's a weird faction of articles that want to focus on the 'hot-chick-practices-self-love' angle, which is kind of creepy as fuck if you ask me.

Us ladies, we like to get off sometimes.  T'ain't no big thing.  Why you gotta make it a big thing?

The most eye-crossingly bizarre commenters and articles are the ones that are claiming that Jill must have done this all for attention and hits to her blog.  One commenter on the original thread ripped into Jill (comment 79: trigger warning) and made some not-so-veiled threats, which I loved the hell out of Jill's response (comment 80):

But thanks for the weird rape threat? You seem totally cool and normal.

While I understand and practice the whole caveat emptor where stories on the interwebs are concerned, it really shocks me the vitriol that is being spit at Jill over this whole thing.  She has been accused of purposely planting said item in her luggage with the knowledge that it would be searched; of writing the note herself to make the TSA look bad and I ask.. why are people so convinced it's not true?  It's not like the TSA hasn't come under fire for way worse things.

And if it isn't true and she made it up?  Who the fuck cares?  On one hand, some of us may have gotten a much needed giggle for the day.  On the other hand, it has reopened discussion about civil liberties and privacy and how much of our freedom we should be willing to give up in the name of security.  It has opened up discussion in regards to what kind of respect should be shown by people who are given clearance to rifle through our most personal belongings.

Oh, and the people I really love - and by "Love" I mean "would like to hit with a brick" - are the people who are all 'Well if she was so embarrassed, why did she post about it?'  You can point out that something is a huge invasion of privacy without being embarrassed.  The fact that it was posted tells me she couldn't have been too embarrassed.  If anything would be embarassing it's probably the way this whole affair has blown out of proportion.

I personally hope that this doesn't end up affecting Jill on a personal and professional level, as someone who blogs under her real name and has covered a number of serious topics.  It'd be a shame that a severe over-reaction to what seemed to be a quick post made in jest ended up undermining a promising career or turning her away from blogging.

I've got some red on me...

Oh Toronto Zombie Walk, how I adore thee.

Yesterday marked my second time at the Toronto Zombie Walk and I'm still washing blood out of my hair today.  Last year I went with a good friend of mine, and found the whole experience thrilling.  This year I got to take my two girls as they are old enough not to be too freaked out by the.. well.. freakshow. Reegs, the little one got right into it.  My oldest is getting to that 'too cool for school' age and it took some cajoling to get her into the spirit.  I was also accompanied by two of my oldest friends and my 16-year-old cousin who sometimes scares me with how much like me at that age she is capable of being.

Part of what I enjoy aside from the opportunity to engage in some imaginative, poor-taste, grotesque humor is that it's a very uncommercial, organic event.  It has yet to be bought by corporate interests and seems truly to be a home-grown community event.  Participants are generally well behaved, the cops that help to make sure no one is impeding traffic are, beneath the gruff exterior, generally well-meaning.  (as one cop tried to corral us out of a busy intersection by yelling 'clear the way' myself and another guy responded a few times with "We're working on it!" to which she replied with a sympathetic "I know..")  Non-participants seem to enjoy the event as well, gathering in doorways to watch the parade go by.

I also love how people manage to take one unifying theme (ie.. zombie apocalypse) and come up with what seems like hundreds of different ideas, even if some do show up year to year.  I have come to the conclusion that each walk will have, invariably, the following (amounts are approximate, and probably exaggerated):

• 1 Zombie Waldo
• 2-3 Zombie Jesus'
• 21 Zombie Brides
• 3-7 Zombie hunters (that is, Hunters of Zombies, not Zombiefied big game hunters)
• 118 Shaun of the Dead characters.
• 1-2 Thriller-Era Michael Jacksons
• 275 Zombie Nurses
• 314 Zombie Schoolgirls

Each year I go, I tend to get a little gorier.  I haven't done a theme costume.. mostly I just go with generic zombie.. Some nasty fake scar tattoos, light makeup, and a shite-load of fake blood.  Everywhere.  It generally does the trick.

Product Shot! Where's my damn money, Tim Hortons??

The girls had a bit of a theme.. Prom-Queen Zombie (making good use of the dress from last year's Carrie costume) and Hobo-Clown Zombie (I was reminded of Sol the Clown from my TVOntario childhood)

In front of the house.  Yes, That's a dead baby on my porch.  I put the ass in class.

At one point during the walk, I thought they may have been getting tired out, until i realized that Reagan was not getting tired.. she was TOTALLY in character.  Foot-dragging and all.  That's my girl.

So before I post some random pics, I'm going to take a poll.  Which of the following is a bigger dick move.

Entering a small, classy type restaurant (half hour away from the parade) in full Zombie Regalia, minus blood and makeup after crowding into a single stall bathroom to clean it all off, however still wearing aforementioned gaping headwound tattoos due to not having the necessary rubbing alchohol or baby oil necessary to remove them without taking a layer of skin with it.  Sitting down in said restaurant, practically ass-cheek to ass-cheek with other diners, all of whom are staring, some in amusement and some in disgust, and potentially disturbing their dinner...

 - Or -

Entering a small, classy restaurant in full Zombie Regalia, piling 5 people into a single stall washroom to wash off blood and makeup, thus occupying said washroom for a good 15-20 minutes and using all their paper towel and then walking out again, having decided that as a group you'd feel much less guilty about ruining people's dining experiences at a Kelsey's or a Boston Pizza?

Survey Says?

No matter, what is done is done.  At least we cleaned the blood out of the sink first.

Anyway, here's some more pics:

Lots of OWS themed signs. This guy told us he was headed down to Bay Street after the walk.

Group Shot, me the girls and my cousin

Reegs doing her zombie face

This year's family Christmas card portrait

Kiki, who made up for a lack of make-up with a very convincing and chilling zombie-stare

Tierney looking frighteningly gorgeous

Amber*, who took most of these pictures

So much fun and Hallowe'en isn't even over yet!!

*Sarah, this is the friend that I said looked like you in the post with the picture of you and your daughter on the pony.

The Internet is Effing INSANE.

So, first of all, if you're not reading The Bloggess, you are missing out on some top-notch funny.  Seriously, you three, you need to get on it.

But not only is she funny, she's apparently crazy-powerful as well.

This week, a gentleman *koff* by the name of Jose of Brandlink Communications found this out the hard way.

Here's the full backstory, but I'll sum it up real quick-like for ya:

 - The divine Ms. Lawson receives poorly-researched PR pitch for something having to do with Kim Kardashian and pantyhose.
 - Jenny responds how she usually does to unsolicited PR pitches... with a short letter and a picture of Wil Wheaton Collating Paper
 - Jenny receives short, snippy but on-the-whole still fairly professional email response from Erica at Brandlink Communications.
 - VP Jose replies by calling Jenny "a fucking bitch" but has mistakenly hit Reply All.

In the immortal words of Eddie Izzard: "*sigh*  Stupid man..."

 - Jenny calls Jose on his remark, explaining this her usual response to unsolicited pitches, and most people either find it funny, or at the very least, take the hint.

 - Jose basically tells Jenny she should be flattered that said PR firm should even find her relevant enough to send pitches to.

Let me just add here, that @thebloggess currently has 170K+ Twitter followers to @brandlinkcomm's 900-someodd.  The woman created a Facebook page for a giant metal chicken that has over 26K likes.  This is not what I would call irrelevant.  Irreverent, maybe, but definitely not irrelevant.

Again:

- With a single tweet and a blog post, said Bloggess unleashes an unholy, sulphur-raining maelstrom of internet smackdown on Brandlink Communications.

It was awe-inspiring.

I'm convinced that "Please Stand By For Demonstration of Relevance" is officially the most bad-assed line since "Yippie Kay-ay, Motherfuckers."

I can't read that line without imagining Jenny standing on top of a mountain, arms raised, with lightning flashing and thunder crashing while angry hordes of bloggers and tweeters come swarming from over the surrounding hills, right up into BrandLink's "grill" - so to speak.

I don't think I have to remind Ms. Lawson of Uncle Ben's old adage of great power and great responsibility.  Jenny has also used her blog as a platform to help others by promoting philanthropic causes and in one case, simply publishing one Christchurch, NZ woman's utterly hilarious plea for help.

Wow, those are five words that don't seem like they should go together.

Anyway, if my blogging efforts resulted in me becoming even 1/457 as 'relevant' as this one, I'd consider myself one very excited blogger.

Disinformation, Douchebags, Disney and Why You Shouldn't Fuck with Saskatchewan.

The new Facebook newsfeed has some downsides (gee, really?), one of which is that from time to time I'll get something on my newsfeed that a friend has commented on.  I want to weigh in, but since the original poster is not a friend of mine, I can't.  Once again, in the wake of the new changes, we're getting the ridiculously asinine reposts about how Facebook is going to start charging and blah blah, repost and you won't get charged.

And people repost this shit.  It's enough to make my head explode.  But here is what I have a real issue with:

Newsflash, commenter number 1:  Spreading misinformation does not make you smart, it makes you an asshole.  Check your sources before reposting this inane shit, thankyouverymuch.  The friend of mine that commented on this, thus exposing me to this other person's dumbassery via my newsfeed, had a very reasonable suggestion - check snopes.com if you are unsure. At LEAST take the time to do a quick Google search.

Again, it is NOT smart to repost shit 'just in case' if you don't have your facts straight.  In a case like this the worst that will happen is that you'll piss off some people, and maybe lose a few e-friends in a fit of annoyance, but the possibility may arise that someone will re-post something that is hurtful, oppressive or downright untrue and may be harmful to others.  Adam P. Knave posted a great article about the dangers of spreading misinformation through social media last week and puts it more eloquently than I have here.   Recommended reading, indeed.

******************************************************

Source

As a sociologist with a great interest in popular culture, it's usually a lot of fun to Disney bash, what with the various Disney princesses and their tropes and unrealistic messages of storybook romance.  However, in watching an older DVD with my kids tonight, I was reminded that they're not all bad.  Disney, after all, also gave us Kim Possible which to date is one of my favorite female fictional character geared towards kids.  She's loyal, smart, ass-kicking and genuinely wants to help people.  And although Ron plays the mostly bumbling sidekick, he has his occasional moments of glory, and is secretly a highly-trained ninja, and is often the more zen of the two (except in the face of monkeys).  I love that they end up together without a lot of the typical nice-guy-pines-for-hot-girl-and-continuously-cajoles-her-into-seeing-what-a-great-catch-he-is-because-he's-so-nice storyline.  No, Ron values Kim's friendship and happiness overall (and vice-versa) and that desire to see her happy is his motivation. 

He's like the Ducky (from Pretty In Pink) of the coming generation, without getting fucked over for boring-as-drying-paint Andrew McCarthy.

Did I mention that the main villainess is pretty effin' cool as well?  Of the many cartoon villains I've seen in my time, Shego remains one of my favorite, with the best villainous one-liners - ("Pleased to beat you!").  She's kind of an interesting commentary on the glass ceiling and being taken less seriously in her field as a woman in spite of the fact that between her and Dr. Drakken she's clearly the brains AND the brawn of the operation, but is woefully under-acknowledged and mocked for being a mere sidekick.  I love when she gets to rule a particularly dystopian future in A Sitch In Time.

I will add that everytime I image search Kim Possible, some of the fan art never fails to destroy my soul, piece by piece.

*************************************************

Based on this post, it has become clear to me that we have a need for a new genre of music which I have decided shall be called 'DoucheRock'.  Theory of a Dead Man is the latest to delve into the land of mysogynist arena rock, which frankly, hasn't been remotely cool since Axl started braiding his hair.  I'm not surprised when you consider how heavily they take their influence from Nickelback.  I'm glad I stopped listening to Rock Radio (ie Rock95, I'm looking at you) so I don't have to hear this kind of crap. And I thought Buckcherry's "Crazy Bitch" made my teeth itch.   *shudders*

************************************************

Lastly, I got a good giggle at this video posted at the Fuck Yeah CBC Tumblr.  My future husband, George Strombolopolous finds out the hard way that a) you don't fuck with Saskatchewan b) You definitely don't want to make 'flat' jokes and c) Word travels fast (and haphazardly) in the Canadian entertainment industry.  This clip was the intro for the 2007 Gemini awards.  It's got a lot of awesome cameos from Brent Butt and Eric Peterson of Corner Gas, the cast of Little Mosque on the Prairie, Sue Johansonn (aka Sunday Night Sex with Sue), Colin Mochrie, Rick Mercer and more.

Nothing is more fun than commenting on something I'll never have to deal with..

Conversation I had with my sister shortly after the birth of my eldest daughter.

N:  So, are you going to have her circumcised?
Me (with utter shock): Uhm.  No.  Pretty sure that's heavily frowned upon in this part of the world.  I think the UN may be trying to have it banned, even.
N: Ah, frig.  Girl.  Right.

In fairness, my sister had had her second son a scant year-or-so earlier and it was a question she was surprisingly used to hearing.  I say surprisingly, because I would think the decision whether to snip your little one's pecker would be a pretty private matter, but as I have learned over the years, when it comes to conceiving, carrying, birthing and raising babies, nothing is sacred.

As much as I bitch about the perils of raising little girls, this is one area that makes me glad I never had boys, although nowadays I'm sure I'm a lot more clear on my stance as far as to snip or not to snip.  Unnecessary surgery?  Oh hell no.  I didn't even want to pierce my girls ears until they were old enough to ASK me.

That being said though, there's some interesting debate happening around a proposed law to ban male circumcision in San Franciso.  Personally, I think treating such a topic as a matter of a municipal by-law is silly at best, since anyone could drive out of town to have the procedure done.  Plus the proposed sentence of a year in prison seems, oh, I don't know, a little over-the-top.

No, this is one of those cases where "Education, Not Legislation" would be the most viable approach.  As far as I can tell, the most common reasons for circumcision  are:

• For religious reasons
• For hygenic reasons
• Because it's better to do it when they are younger so they don't feel it as much (lolwhut??)
• Fear of the child looking different than other kids or their respective male role models

Religion:  This is one of the main reasons why an all-out ban is asking for a shit-storm of trouble, because jailing people for performing what is viewed as a sacred ritual is going to cause all manner of discrimination suits.  In all honesty, I'd be willing to guess that the people who circumcise for religious or spiritual reasons are probably a smaller number than those who do it 'Just because'.   Aim for reducing the numbers elsewhere then eventually the major religions will catch up, just like the Catholic Church did with birth control..  oh, wait.

Hygenic reasons:  Teach your kids to wash their junk properly.  Pretty simple, no? From what I understand, research on the health benefits of circumcision are pretty sketchy and the benefits don't seem to outweigh the risks of just leaving well enough alone.   Yes, a kid may have a problem down the line that requires foreskin removal, but the thing is.. if you have a problem because you're intact, you can fix it.  It's a lot harder and likely more costly to fix issues from a botched circumcision.  And it's super-cheap to teach your kid to wash their junk.

Better to do it when they are Younger:  I call bullshit here.  I will not be convinced that an un-anesthetized procedure hurts a baby less than a older child or an adult.  The difference is a baby can't verbalize their discomfort in the same way.

But I don't want little Billy to Look "Different":  Calling bullshit again here.  This is where North American tendencies to be over-the-top Puritanical when it comes to our bodies and how they work really does a number on us.  So little Billy's little billy doesn't look like Daddy's?  Try this:

“Well, Billy, once upon a time, when Daddy was a baby, people had no problem with slicing off the end of your penis for no apparent reason, and even encouraged it. But we think they were wrong, so we didn’t, because we like you and don’t think cutting babies is cool.”

That's not so hard is it?

*snicker*  Yes, I have then mentality of a 12 year old.  Don't you judge me.

This line of reasoning always reminds me of this joke:

One day a little girl was watching her mom make a roast beef. She cut off the ends, wrapped it in string, seasoned it and set it in the roasting pan.

The little girl asked her mom why she cut off the ends of the roast. Mom replied, after some thought, that it was the way that her mother had done it.

That night grandma came to dinner and the little girl and her mom went to her and asked why she had cut the end off of the roast before cooking. After some thought grandma replied, that was the way her mother had done it.

Now great grandmother was quite old and in a nursing home. But the little girl went with her mom and grandma to see her and again asked the question.

Great Grandma looked at them a bit annoyed and said, "So it would fit in my pan, of course."

Sometimes you just gotta. (short fiction)

Standing at the busy intersection a young woman in her mid-twenties watched the light turn red out of the corner of her eye.  When the cars started into the intersection, she did a quick survey to make sure there were no cars in the right-hand-turn lane.  Although the light facing her direction was still red and the pixellated amber hand beckoned her to hold her place, she started out into the intersection, knowing the way was clear.

A little man watched from the corner as she strode confidently into the street with head held high and sucked in his breath.  When the walking man appeared on the traffic signal he dashed across the street to catch up with her.

"Excuse me! Excuse me miss!"  She kept walking, either ignoring him or not realizing she was the miss he was addressing.  Meeting her stride, he tried to get her attention again. This time she turned.

"Why did you do that?"

"I'm sorry?" she asked, puzzled at this odd little man who was attempting to keep up and doing a not-so-good job at it.

"The light.  It hadn't changed.  But you went anyway. Why?  Are you in a hurry?"

She stopped in her tracks. This was a bizarre line of questioning indeed. Shrugging, she replied "Well, the way was clear.  So I decided to go."

The little man furrowed his brow and shook his head.  "No, no," he said, clearly troubled. "The light had not changed.  You can't go if the light hasn't changed.  That's the rules."

She looked at him for a long moment before she replied.  "That light is there for the our protection.  But as people, we are able to make decisions, to gauge risk and to decide, ultimately whether we walk, or we don't walk.  Sometimes it's necessary to break rules, even small ones, to remind us even for a split second of our free will.  Of our agency over our own bodies and minds."

He looked around as he pondered her words, but when he turned again, she was already down the street.

Maybe they should have called the baby 'Shitstorm'*

..because it seems that's what the parents in Toronto who decided to keep their baby's gender a secret in an attempt to keep zir unfettered by gender policing and expectations, have effectively created.  For the good or the bad, is what I've got to wonder.  In my honest opinion, if anything damages this kid, ambiguously named Storm, it'll be the media hype surrounding zir lack of gender definition, rather than a lack of defined gender*.  I'm unclear as to who actually alerted the media to the couple's plan, although I think it may have been relatives of the child in question.


Myriads of commenters on the Yahoo article I read, as well as at least one columnist for the Toronto Star questioned the ethics behind this couple 'treating their child as an experiment'.

Thing is, parenting IS an experiment.  There's no strict set of rules for this stuff. 

Myself, I can totally see where the parents are coming from, in wanting their children to explore their own personalities and gender identification without having expectations pressed on them based on what is between their legs.  I'm still completely lost as to what connection there is between a Y chromosome, a penis and an aversion to pink.

As far as 'damaging' this child we should probably remember that baby Storm is four months old.  Zir main concerns at this point in time are "I'm Hungry.  I'm Shitty.  I'm Bored."  Somehow I don't think "I'm Having a Crisis of Identification" comes into play at that age.  Besides, I think zie will figure it out.  I think the idea is not to raise an indefinitely ambiguous child, but to allow the baby for it's first few years to be less restricted by those gender expectations that are thrust upon us from the earliest of ages. 

From the very moment we are born and the doctor declares "It's a Girl/Boy!" - at least, in instances where it's clear from the beginning - we treat baby boys and baby girls differently which in turn helps to shape how they see themselves in the context of gendered expectations.  Not having a 'gender'** could result in people responding to baby Storm's individual personality rather than a preconceived notion of babyhood.

Interestingly enough, the number of people who have wagered that Storm is a boy is staggering.  This may have to do with a common societal trope that uses feminine markers to identify as female, so

Baby - feminine identifiers = default = boy.

I'm gonna laugh my ass off if Baby Storm is indeed a girl.  At this point, I'm not wagering any guesses.

Which brings me to where the potential for backfire comes in.  Columnist Caroline Porter of the Toronto Star presented the idea that by refusing to acknowledge their child's gender they may inadvertently make it a bigger issue, by "trapping him in an endless discussion."  I think there is something to be said for this view, as it does seem possible that Baby Storm could end up being defined by the unending "Well, what is he/she?" question.  Because you KNOW, people aren't going to let go of that one easily.

I think, underneath the question of gender anxiety, another issue is at hand that has people wringing their hands, and I think part of it is the refusal of the Wittericks to enforce gender expectations on any of their children.  The older children, both boys, play with nailpolish and the older one frequently wears his hair long and in pigtails.

Somehow people think that by not adhering to strict gender guidelines, they are setting them up for trouble later, from being bullied at school, or that they are going to be gender-confused.  My question is, how many 'gender-confused' people grew up in homes where gender rules were enforced but still re-identified later in life?

As far as kids teasing them, call me crazy, but I think the way to combat bullying is not to try and force potential victims into conforming to expectations (see the case of the teacher who kicked a kid out of class for wearing high-heels "for his protection"), but rather to teach people to just fucking relax already and if a little boy wants to wear nailpolish, or a little girl wants her hair short, it's not the end of the world, just like it's not the end of the world if you don't know what pronoun to use around a four-month old baby.

As for Baby Storm, as the media frenzy dies down, I think he'll figure out who he is.. long before he has to answer the 'which bathroom to use' question.


*For the record, although I've named my own children rather unique names, I would never advocate actually saddling a small child with the name Shitstorm.

**Keeping in mind that sex and gender are often two different things.  Sex is generally (although there are many different schools of though on this) defined by a) genitalia and b) presence or non-presence of a Y chromosome.  Gender's more complicated and has more to do with how one identifies themselves. Someone may identify as female, while presenting as male, and vice versa.  Some gender theorists have eschewed the idea of the binary model and presented ideas that there could be up to as many as nine different genders.

A 'victory' that is bittersweet, at best.

Having had roughly 24 hours to reflect on the revelations of last night, namely that U.S. special forces had finally captured and killed Osama Bin Laden I gotta say, I have some mixed emotions.  It might be fair to say I'm a little numb.

In no particular order, my thoughts:

I'm happy and relieved for the people who lost friends, family and co-workers in 9/11 who will hopefully find some sort of closure from this news.

I'm afraid of Bin Laden's martydom being catalyst for more aggression against North America.

I'm conflicted because I don't usually believe that justice for taking life should involve taking more life, especially without due process, but in this case, a big part of me is willing to give it a pass, just this time.

I'm irritated with people screaming 'America, Fuck Yeah' and 'Hooray for the good guys!' like we've won some kind of pissing contest.  It's not the Olympics.  It's not the bloody Stanley Cup Playoffs.  It's life and death.   It's not just about one man, it's about the memories of thousands lost, on both sides of the fence.  Let's show a little decorum so we can at least hold ourselves to a higher standard than those people who celebrated and rioted in the streets when the World Trade Center fell.

I'm apathetic because I know this is merely a symbolic victory.  Bin Laden's capture and subsequent death won't end terrorism, it won't end the blood spilt over conflicting ideologies.  This is a continuation of an ongoing cycle of violence with no end in site.

I'm still more than a little amused with the fact that Barack Obama's address cut into the end of Celebrity Apprentice.  Suck it, Trump.

Yeah, so all in all.. don't know how I feel.  There have been a few choice things I've read around the interwebs that addressed it nicely:

Yes, bin Laden the man is dead. But he achieved all he set out to achieve, and a hell of a lot more. He forever changed who we are as a country, and for the worse. Mostly because we let him. That isn’t something a special ops team can fix - The Stay-At-Home Feminist Mom

Osama Bin Laden is dead.  Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving guy. - Jill at Feministe

The world breathes a sigh of relief that the foremost terrorist leader has been eliminated, and rightly so, but let's not lose sight of temperance and grace. This is far from over and the actions we take and the words we speak today will color what happens in the future. - Everything I like Causes Cancer

ten years ago, i may have felt different.
ten years ago, i may have felt a bit of righteous and well deserved retribution.
ten years ago, i may have felt that good triumphed over evil...
ten years ago, i would have felt that we struck a huge blow to the terrorists.

i may have felt that we knew where they were and were coming for them.

not yesterday.
not today.
not tomorrow.

revenge is a dish that is best not served.
it is a dish that is best a lost recipe.

today this feels
like a lie.
a ruse.
a spin.
a hide the weenie.
a slight of hand. - Bruce's Evil Twin at Stupid Stuff I See and Hear

and this which has been going around Facebook:

I have never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure - Mark Twain

No witty title here, just some seriousness.

Quick Trigger Warning.  If you're triggered by sexual assault, you may want to skip this post.  

*****************************************************

A week or two ago a friend and reader sent me a link to a story that was more than a little infuriating.  It seems a convicted rapist in Thomson, Manitoba was given a slap on the wrist because the victim and her friend had "made their intentions publicly known that they wanted to party"

In the article it's noted that the judge felt that there was miscommunication and so instead of mandatory jail time, the perpetrator, Kenneth Rhodes, was given a conditional sentence, even though the Crown wanted three years minimum.

Rhodes pleaded not guilty at the trial on the basis he thought the woman had consented. Dewar rejected his defence -- but said aspects of it can now be considered in sentencing.
"This is a different case than one where there is no perceived invitation," said Dewar. "This is a case of misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour."

At first I didn't really know how to deal with this.  Any articles I found didn't give many actual details of the evening, other than than the usual speculation of what the women had been wearing (typical, right?), the fact that they went into the woods with Rhodes and his friend, and implications that Rhodes had "misunderstood her intentions when he forced intercourse" on her.  P.S. Kenny, if you have to 'force' it, it's probably unwanted.  Enthusiast Consent, folks, it's a wonderful thing. 

Still, part of me wondered if maybe there was some mistake?  So I hesitated on commenting on the story, until later I had a 'Slap-your-forehead' moment and went "Hang on a minute!  This was a SENTENCING hearing.. not the trial itself!"  So even thought I didn't know the details of what actually went on, based on media coverage, clearly, the jury and/or judge or whatever felt there was enough evidence to support a rape conviction, a charge that, in Canada, requires jail time at minimum.  The sentence is the equivalent of saying "Okay, well *technically* you're guilty, but not really, because she had it coming, being all sexy like that.  Silly girl."

The judge on the case, Robert Dewar was later reprimanded for his comments and removed from cases of a sexual nature.

Have we not gotten over this yet, people?  Have we not gotten over the idea that someone can 'ask' to be raped? No, apparently not.

A local radio personality, Meg Whitton of the 104.1 The Dock wrote about an experience she had at a campus safety assembly at York University.  One of the Toronto police officers told the assembly they could avoid rape by not dressing like a slut. Thankfully the Toronto police chief was quick to eschew the troubling statement from his underling, but as Meg had pointed out, the issue is a lot bigger than a lack of sensitivity on the part of one or even a number of police officers.  It's a problem that is STILL rampant in society.  We constantly look for reasons to justify rape, even in the most heinous of cases.

Take this past week.  The New York Times came under fire for their wholly slanted coverage of a story of an eleven-year-old girl in Cleveland Texas who was gang-raped in an abandoned trailer by up to 18 men.  The NYT were called to task for their coverage that seemed to smack of victim blaming.  Local townsfolk were quoted asking where the child's parents were (fair question, but more importantly, where were the parents of the boys involved?).  They also quoted townsfolk about the little girls manner of dress and activities:

They said she dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground, some said.

 This quote is my personal favorite (note dripping sarcasm):

“It’s just destroyed our community,” said Sheila Harrison, 48, a hospital worker who says she knows several of the defendants. “These boys have to live with this the rest of their lives.” 

I sure the fuck hope so.  I hope it haunts them in their nightmares.  I hope at least one of them wakes up in a cold-sweat, night after night, screaming and shaking with guilt over what they have done to a little girl. 


Can I just reiterate that this was an 11-year-old child?  A LITTLE GIRL. 

I'm wondering where the concern for this little girl is from the locals.  I haven't even mentioned that the men, who ranged in age from roughly 14 up to 27, videotaped the attack on a cell phone and passed it around.  This is how the situation came to the attention of the police, when one of the victims classmates told a teacher that they had seen a video of the attack.

Speaking as the mother of a beautiful, innocent, almost-ten-year old, I'm concerned for this poor East Texas girl, who may have already been dealing with issues at home or in her life, who now has to live for the rest of her life with not only being brutalized by up to 18 men, but also having the knowledge that via wonderful fucking technology, god only knows how many people have witnessed her humiliation.  And to top it off knowing that most of the community seemed to be more concerned with how this little girl may have brought it on herself.

I say, fuck that community.  They sound like a bunch of backward assholes.

Those that claim that the Times article wasn't slanted at all may wonder why they left out this particular quote, that was included in the release from the Associated Press:

"She's 11 years old. It shouldn't have happened. That's a child," said Oscar Carter, 56, who is related to an uncle of one 16-year-old charged in the case. "Somebody should have said what we are doing is wrong."

 Regardless if it's the media or a group of townspeople or the comments section in some of these articles, which I try not to read as it makes me stabby and kind of like I want to vomit, I really have to ask what kind of effed up world we live in where people will look for a reason to justify the gang-raping of an eleven-year-old girl.  That we would look for reasons such as someone's dress in order to take responsibility off of that of the rapist and on to the victim.

These attitudes not only harm women, but men as well.  Because it paints the idea that men cannot help raping women, that, if provoked by a woman (or, shit.. an 11-year-old CHILD's) attire they will have no choice but to attack.  It presents the idea that men are driven so wild by the sight of a woman dressed provocatively that they are unable to control themselves.  Which is bullshit, at absolute best. 

I know a lot of men who are fully capable of reasoning beyond the needs of their own dick.  I believe that the majority of all men out there are fully capable of this.  Fully capable of reading signals, and looking for enthusiast consent.  And the ones that aren't, need to be in prison.

My inner elitist is laughing and pointing..

I am very defensive when it comes to the reputation of the Canadian music industry.  I admit it.  In my online journey's I have encountered numerous (mostly American) folks who seem to regard Canadian music as all Anne Murray, Celine Dion and Nickelback, and allow the success of these particular 'artists' to paint a pretty grim picture of our industry.

I've always maintained that their success is more a reflection of the listening tastes of the U.S. listeners, because time and time again some of our most talented musicians are consistently overlooked.

So I'm indulging in a good giggle from the uproar over the Grammy upset last night with the Arcade Fire and their win for Album of the Year.  In my opinion, they are an innovative, talented group of musicians and a pretty well-kept-secret.  When you put them up next to their co-nominees, well, let's just say Lady Antebellum is destined for the One-Hit-Wonder bin, Eminem is played out, the Gag is overhyped (although admittedly talented, I'm sick of hearing about her.. an EGG?  seriously?) and Katy Perry.. yeesh.  So it warms me in the cockles of my heart to see an album win on merit rather than hype, for a change.  Way to go, Grammys.

Who are these guys?

On their Twitter feed, CBCRadio2 linked to a site dedicated to this upset called Who Is the Arcade Fire and it's chalk-full of the confused reactions of the Grammy-watching public.  The confusion is delicious and seems to prove my point that a whole lot of good music is being overlooked in a country that somehow made Justin Beiber famous.  We just birthed him, we didn't give him a recording contract (okay, we probably did, but Beiber-fever isn't isolated to Canada).

Congratulations on your win, Arcade Fire.

Has it come to this?

I hate this time of year. 

Way too many bad memories associated with it, and I find it one of the loneliest times of year.. the Christmas letdown, New Years Eve, which is a big fuck-off ball of wrist-slitting fun, hell right up until Valentines day.  In the past, I've been subject to fits of depression around this time of year, and rightly so, when you consider what some of my past New Years' have been like.   The last two years haven't been too bad, last year because around that time period I had met the most recent ex, and the year before that I was embroiled in a bit of drama which although mildly stressful, kept things interesting.  My dark moods tend to come with boredom and loneliness.

In an act of desperation/morbid curiosity/boredom/blind optimism I reopened my Plenty of Fish profile.  Jesus H. Christ.  What a sad place that is.  Honestly, I'm not sure how long I'll be able to leave it up.  First, it took all of a half an hour to discover-most-recent ex on there, and that was fairly traumatizing, and second, I also discovered a dude that I had been talking about a year and a bit ago who turned out to be a bit of a whackjob is lurking around too.. and POF's security settings don't allow you to block someone until they've messaged you.  LOVELY.

So many damaged, jaded people.  So many 'nice guys' (find out more about my issue with 'nice guys' here).  So many people with laundry lists of what specifically they are looking for in a woman.  One guy even referred to 'Attributes'.  Fellow co-workers will understand why this terminology makes me laugh.  Compare these brands and models.  Oi.  So many cheesy topless pics.  Seriously guys?  So much about what they want, and what they desire, and what they REQUIRE, but so little about who they are.

SO many people desperate to reach out and be a half of a whole.  There but for the grace of God go I and other such blather.  Oh, wait...

I give it a week.

In the meantime, a well-suited musical interlude (have I sunk to a brand new low?):

Awkward randoms of awkward awkwardness

So the guy in the store that is always smiling and saying hi to me is not flirting but rather being friendly, seeing as I briefly dated his brother.  AWKWARD.

It was pointed out to me today that my black purse, when it blends in to my black t-shirt and is subtly camoflaged by my coat and scarf, make me appear to be quite pregnant.  AWKWARD.

The kid in McDonalds needs to be commended for keeping a straight face, as tonight I walked in, ordered and paid for food, and walked away without realizing I had a Christmas tree sticker in the middle of my forehead.  AWKWARD.

*******************************************

In other news, I'm a lousy consumer.  I trekked out to go Boxing day shopping, with a book and a DVD to return, and roughly 70 dollars worth of gift cards, and I walked away with a coffee.

I'm not a fan of gift cards, actually.  I can appreciate the idea that it means the recipient can get whatever they want, but as someone that tends to put a lot of thought (and at times, overthink) when it comes to gift giving, they're a safe but kind of boring option.  Now, in my particular case this year, I know that the original gift I was supposed to get was a well-thought-out, but just seasonally unavailable one.  (my grandma's boyfriend had the intention to get a punching bag for me, but they're not in stock this time of year, so the gift card was a viable alternative).

I'm one of those people who is not a good candidate for cash or gift-card because of an annoying habit of buying practical things I need or things for the girls, rather than a gift for me. My loathing of big box stores (namely the seventh circle of hell that is Wal-Mart), is kind of an issue too.

So my attempt to indulge in some mass consumerism was a bust.  I'll hold on to the cards until something pops into mind that can be had... I'm considering going apeshit on art supplies (there's a set of acrylic paints - big tubes of it for like 35 bucks), or something to that effect, or maybe replenishing my makeup supply.  Truth be told, the older I get, the less interested in the accumulation of stuff.  Even books and dvd's, which used to be my major vices, don't elicit the same excitement.. as gifts, yes, but not so much as something I feel the need to purchase myself.

I get a lot more excitement out of A) being gifted something really cool that I'd generally never justify buying myself B) A successful barter or bargain-find for something I generally wouldn't justify buying myself at full price - yes, I'm a yard-sale, free-cycle, value village/sally ann junkie.  C) finding something really awesome, handmaid and one-of-a-kind that I wouldn't be able to find in a big corporate box store.  Something with a story behind it.

On one hand, I pity people who are tasked with having to buy me gifts for whatever occasion. On the other hand, my interests are pretty varied, and I'm not picky, plus you know that saying 'Champagne Tastes on a Beer Budget?'.. I'm like, 'bathtub moonshine on a beer budget', so that being said, maybe I'm not such a terrible person to buy for.

One last thing.  Our mall?  Sad.  Sad sad sad.  only about 50% of the units are open, and they're mostly big chain stores.. I went there today, and it looked about as busy as a normal mall on any given day.  I've heard the rent is exhorbitantly high and that's why none of the stores but the big ones can afford to stay open.  I'd love to meet the owners and say "Hey, congratulations on single-handedly crippling the local enconomy... Kudos!"

More Exclusionist Xmas B.S. Hooray.

We can't say Merry Christmas, we have to say Happy Holidays. We can't call it a Christmas tree, it's now called a Holiday tree??? Because it might offend someone! If you don't like our "Canadian Customs" and it offends you so much then LEAVE!! They are called Canadian customs because we live in Canada and WE HAVE OUR OWN TRADITIONS!! If you agree with this, please post this as your status and MERRY CHRISTMAS EH!!!

 So, this is one of the recent 'put this as your status if you agree' Facebook tropes going around at the moment.  Putting aside my general annoyance at the bandwagon-hoppingness (yes, I make my own words) of the copy/paste status and its illustration of the herd mentality (seriously, try having an original thought, folks.. even if you are just putting the same thought into your own words), this one I find both offensive and and innacurate.

• We can't say Merry Christmas, we have to say Happy Holidays. 

Bullshit.  You're more than welcome to say Merry Christmas.  It's not like a law was passed, outlawing the term.  But as I talked about last week, Happy Holidays is a nice way to acknowledge that A) there's more than one holiday this time of year and B) not everyone celebrates Christmas.  But no one is putting a gun to your head.

•  We can't call it a Christmas tree, it's now called a Holiday tree???

As far as Holiday trees go, do I think it's silly that Toronto City hall or whoever decided to call the tree out front a Holiday tree rather than a Christmas tree?  Oh heck yes.  Dumb.  But that's their choice, in a (admittedly lame) attempt to be inclusionary.  Incidentally though, the only references online to the City Hall Holiday Tree were blogs that were complaining about it.   One article I found (and I did not know this) gave me the impression that former Mayor Mel "Bad Boy" Lastman, reversed that decision, back in 2002.  So, yes, Virginia, you can say Christmas Tree.

•  If you don't like our "Canadian Customs" and it offends you so much then LEAVE! 

Ohh, this reeks of 'why don'tcha come back where you came from??' mentality.  This makes the assumption that the people who don't celebrate and who are 'getting offended' are immigrants.   What about Jewish people whose families have been here for generations?  Pagans?  Atheists?  Where exactly do these people go?  As Canadians, do their own customs not fall under the umbrella as 'Canadian customs?'  Does one have to subscribe to Christianity to be Canadian?  Not according to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

• They are called Canadian customs because we live in Canada and WE HAVE OUR OWN TRADITIONS

I've always operated with the understanding that another one of our Canadian customs was.. oh.. hrm.. what's it called again?  Oh yeah, I remember...

MULTICULTURALISM. 

Canadians are not of any one cultural background, race or heritage. Instead, Canadians today reflect a vast diversity of cultural heritages and racial groups. This multicultural diversity is a result of centuries of immigration. - About Canada - Multiculturalism in Canada

 So yeah.. my point?  Christmas is a tradition enjoyed by many Canadians, but is not inherent to being Canadian.  There are many Canadians who do not celebrate, yet still remain Canadians, whether they are first, second, third, fourth or 23rd generation Canadians.  Say Merry Christmas if you like, Say Happy Holidays if you like.  No one is stopping you.  But to tell others if they don't like it, leave, just makes you sound like a racist asshole, mmkay?  Because seriously, when was the last time someone came up to YOU and gave you shit for saying Merry Christmas?

• MERRY CHRISTMAS EH!!!

 And Happy Holidays to you too. 

Like, really guys??

Celebrity Death Machine (originally posted on facebook 06/26/09)

No it's not a new Nine Inch Nails album, so don't get excited.

Judging by the 50 some-odd or more status updates from yesterday evening on, most people have gotten wind of the news of the demise of Michael Jackson, once known to the western world as 'The King of Pop', following on the heels of the news that Farrah Fawcett, actress and former pinup best known for being the most well known of a number of Charlie's Angels, succumbed to cancer.

And because these things come in three's, a day earlier we heard that Ed McMahon who was a long-time sidekick to Johnny Carson and also had the dubious distinction of being 'The Publishers Clearinghouse guy' (when Dick Clark wasn't being that guy) passed away from an number of health issues.

I'm left once again to question the morbid fascination we as a people seem to have with the lives and deaths of celebrities. I, for one, feel pretty much numb to it. I never knew these people, and while I can acknowledge the tragedy to some extent, my life goes on as normal.

I think it's the disproportionate level of grief society shows these people... some of whom seem famous for being famous, and may or may not have contributed much to their art in years, but happen to get caught up in the celebrity scandal machine. Immortality acheived through constant exposure.

On Ed McMahon.. well, he was 86. He had a long and full life with much success, so I don't think it's any sort of tragedy. I'm sure his family is sad, and I hope they get to grieve in peace. But I have a feeling that in the next few months, there will be at least one unauthorized biography with tales of a) sordid love affairs, both female and male, b) drug use c) pick your own. I hope not, though.

Farrah Fawcett, I honestly don't know what she has done for the last 30 years. except get married and look pretty. I'm told she's done some movies, some of which could be described as 'good' or even 'very good'. Again, it is tragic that she developed breast cancer at a young age, but I can't really fathom why her death is more tragic than any number of beautiful women (inside and out) and men who have been taken away by cancer.

I do think Michael Jackson's death is a tragedy, but not for the reasons by many. The general concensus is that we've lost this great musical icon.

I'm sorry folks, he was lost to us years ago, when he got caught up in the cogs of the gossip machines and the pressure became too much. Had it not been for his eccentricities, he may not remained in the spotlight as long as he did. Sadly, from another perspective, perhaps without the pressures of being constantly scrutinized by the media's eye, he may have continued to be the creative genius he once was, if a slightly eccentric one.

In my humble opinion, the tragedy lies with his children, who are already standing a good chance of growing up profoundly effed up. Now they've lost a parent, and my fear is that the youngest child, who I believe is only about 6 years old, is going to grow, and the few memories this child will have of his father will be tainted by 'wacko jacko' caricature painted by the media, including some of the uglier allegations. The older children will have clearer memories to counteract that picture but at the same time, it must be easier to deal with the media picture if there is an actual person there to compare. The self-doubt and questioning these children stand potentially go through is mind-boggling.

I sincerely hope the media leaves these poor children alone, and that they are allowed to go on with life and fade into obscurity. I think we all know that's not going to happen.

If I've pissed off or offended anyone, my sincere apologies. Just utilizing a public forum, is all.

slightly disgruntled.

My baby girl is sick.  Fortunately, it's only a throat infection.  I've been having a number of heated discussions with my sister regarding the seriousness of the Swine flu, me being on the side that thinks it's probably being over blown. From a liability standpoint, the WHO has to overplay it to a certain extent, because if they underplay it, and it really does become a worldwide pandemic, then holy hell are people getting fired.  There'd be inquisitions and investigations and tribunals aplenty.

So yeah, after a week of me naysaying the seriousness, my oldest wakes with a fever this morning, and by this afternoon, the ex-hubster is calling me at work asking me to take her to the ER, seeing as I'm the one with the car, and he has other children that must be picked up.  It's my kid, so naturally, I have no problem with this.  I was on my break at this point, and ran back to work to get my stuff (well, I ran part way.. which is more than I could have done a few years back).  But yeah, I'm thinking 'oh man, I didn't take it seriously and now she's sick and blahhh' but yeah it's a throat infection... possibly tonsillitis or strep.  So phew.

My issue is this.  The parking at our hospital SUCKS.  There's about 20 or more spaces reserved for doctors only, of which maybe 5-6 of them are in use at any given time.  Meanwhile, there are only 4-5 parking spaces for the ER.  God forbid one should be able to take her sick child to the ER without not only having to carry them across a huge parking lot (since all the closest spots are either handicapped, which I have no issue with, or for other 'non-doctor' staff), but to also pay five friggin bucks for such a privilegde.  If the poor kid had been well enough to walk, I would have parked at Blockbuster and walked.  It's not much further than where I ended up having to park.

Would it be such a big deal to free up a few of the doctor only spots? 

**********************************************************************

In other news, I may be moving soon.  To a house.  Not my own house, mind you, but a house nonetheless.  More to come.

Superstition or simple logic?

So it had been raining heavily over the past 24 hours, but it started to let up around 3 this afternoon. As a result the little pink strawberry shortcake umbrella had to be brought in from the car. I caught Reagan trying to open it and gently took it and told her 'Don't open umbrellas in the house. It's bad luck." I thought about what I just said and questioned whether I wanted to pass down such a superstition. Yet I honestly didn't want her opening the umbrella in the house. It's dangerous.

That is when it hit me. Some of these so called 'superstitions' must be based in fact. It is indeed bad luck to open an umbrella in the house. Why? Well, in an enclosed area, how long before one of those spokes get jammed in someones eye? I'd say that's pretty unlucky.

But wait, there's more.

Anybody ever tried walking under a ladder without at least brushing it with some part of the body or another? You walk under the ladder, that person falls, they sue you for a ghastly amount of money. Tough luck, don't walk under ladders.

Breaking a mirror=7 years of bad luck. Because seven years is roughly how long it takes to get broken glass out of a rug. Now THAT's some bad luck.

Now about the number 13. Yeah, I got nothing. I think that one is the result of some group hysteria or something.

**********************************************************************
The good news: The place where I have been temping this week wants to hire me for the summer, provided they can find me enough work for the summer.

I also have a better perspective than I did earlier this week. My psyche is on it's way to being housetrained.

I got some pretty feckin awesome final marks back as well. 89 on my final for emergence of social theory (not sure of my total mark) and 81 overall in construction of sexuality. Go me.

Going to wonderland with Krystle on Sunday, should be some good times had by all.