home | archives | bio | stories | poetry | links | guestbook | message board
previous | archives index | next

January 2006

January 31, 2006

I was thinking this morning (yes, I know - that can be dangerous). Anyhow, I was thinking about how I would talk to kids from troubled homes if and when I was in a situation to try and help them. That might be a situation where I joined Big Brothers & Big Sisters or where I went to a group home to spend time with kids or - in my wildest dreams - being able to be a foster parent or adopt a kid. Whatever the case, I am determined to help troubled kids - children who've been abused at home or who've been abandoned or degraded or ... whatever. I know for a fact that those kids need help most but are most often the ones who don't get help or love because the foster parents and adoptive parents don't want the "damaged" kids. That's a shame, too, because I think the troubled kids need the love and caring more than anyone else, and they simply can't be left to fend for themselves. And very often those kids are even more lovable than anyone else; they just need a break and someone who genuinely cares.

So anyhow - I was thinking about how I'd talk to those kids about what happened to them. Every one of them would have had different experiences and every one of them would react differently to those experiences, but in a lot of ways I think there are pretty similar underlying reactions by everyone. Almost invariably, for example, kids don't want to talk about what happened. When they do they may react with uncontrollable crying and sadness, they may be incredibly angry, they may feel lost and helpless or even trapped, or they may even become numb to everything around them and just shut out their emotions. None of those reactions are positive experiences, and my own opinion on the matter is that talking about what happened, while necessary at certain points for dealing with the trauma of the situation, isn't something that a child should ever expect to become "used" to doing. The trauma will always be there, regardless of how they have learned to deal with those events, and after a certain point there's really nothing to be gleaned from watching a train wreck over and over again in your mind's eye.

I've thought about my own situations from the past, though, and I think that how I react to those things now might provide a good anecdotal explanation for kids about how they will eventually be able to face their traumas as they grow up. My feeling, based upon my own experiences, is that most troubled kids eventually want to know "when the bad memories will go away" or "when will it stop hurting" or "how can I get past that." It's a tough set of questions, but I don't think there is any way to escape them. Troubled kids need to know that, eventually, they will have to face those memories and deal with them. There are good ways and bad ways to do that, and no one way is a sure-fire solution. For me, in fact, various traumatic incidents in my life have left scars of different kinds, and I find myself reacting to each of those incidents differently based upon how much I've come to terms with what happened. This specifically is something valuable that I think I can impart to troubled kids, so that they can feel that there is a chance to put their troubled pasts behind them.

Most importantly, even if it's not what the child wants to hear, is the realization that those memories will never really go away. A trauma victim can learn to face their trauma and they can come to decisions about how to deal with that trauma, but they can't really forget it. Well, they can, but pretty much the only way that such a thing will happen is if the child develops a mental block against those events, and invariably such a block will crumble and the child will still, at some point, maybe even well into adulthood - at some point they will have to face that trauma. What they can do, however, is learn to accept that it happened and that it is over. That, I think, is the very hardest and very most important thing. Realizing that it is over and done with, regardless of how horrible the experience was, is vastly important. Once you face that and see that those traumas won't happen again (or at least don't have to happen again), then you can learn to face those memories and face the feelings for the people and the places and the things in those memories.

The truth is that it is very unlikely that any trauma victim will ever learn to be comfortable with what happened to them. You can successfully put things behind you; you can understand that it wasn't your fault; you can accept that the situation won't necessarily happen again; you can get to the point where you think about the trauma rarely because your life is full of other, better things. Eventually a trauma victim can get past being crippled and haunted by the traumatic memories, but I don't think that anyone ever really leaves them so far behind that they forget or that they don't still hurt at least a bit.

I want so much to be able to help kids get past those bad times and make good memories, get them to look at the world with hope and happiness. As most of you realized long ago, I'm not the happiest person myself, but because of that I am even more passionate that others be happy and stable. I would take all of the unhappiness of the world onto myself if I could, if I really thought that it would help everyone else be happy, but it unfortunately doesn't work that way. And while I'm not very successful at making myself very happy, I do have the ability to help others to find some joy and get past their problems. I can't solve a lot of things, but I can help people to laugh and have fun. I wish I could do more than that. Heck, I wish I could do so much more.

There's a dreamworld that I've envisioned in my mind, you know, and it's a wonderful, loving, caring, peaceful place. All I want is to share it. All I want is to share it.

Posted at 11:26 AM

January 30, 2006

What's so selfish about suicide anyhow? You know what I mean - people are always saying that the reason that someone shouldn't commit suicide is because it's selfish and will hurt everyone they know. Even assuming that everyone they know would honestly give a damn, which in the world as it exists today is always questionable since people don't seem to really give much of a damn about anything, but even assuming that they care, isn't it actually them who's being selfish? Seriously, those people are saying that they want the potential suicide victim to be sad, miserable and hurting rather than end it all. And why? Because they don't want to have to deal with the aftermath. That, to me, sure sounds like it's the other people, not the person who wants to commit suicide, who are selfish. I mean really, if they're going to try to use that argument then they should at least be up front and honest about it.

Of course the way people talk to someone who wants to end their life is the same way they talk to someone they want to manipulate. They figure that guilt is a tremendous tool in getting people to do what you want - and it is - but at the simplest level, they're really just lying and manipulating the person that they're trying to stop from committing suicide.

Now if they actually gave a damn and cared about the suicidal person, really felt concerned about their anguish and pain and all of the things that made that person want to end their life, then you'd think that they would try to understand what that person was feeling. They would listen to that person and take the feelings that person expressed seriously. They wouldn't say the equivalent of "Suck it up" or "Get over it" or "That's a selfish thing to think about doing." If they really gave a flying fuck then they would talk to that person, listen closely, pay attention, come to understand that person's perspective, and if they really, really cared, maybe then they'd try to help that person out - not by telling them to shut up with the suicide talk and help themselves but by offering solutions and solace for each of the problems and agonies that the suicidal person faces, each problem one at a time until there's some light of sign in that person's eyes that all hope was not lost after all and that maybe, just maybe, it might be okay to try facing the world again and give life a chance.

You don't just turn a switch and shut off depression or trauma, and you don't expect victims of depression or trauma to just magically become a different person without any memories of their pasts. And you don't tell a potential suicide victim, particularly someone who intimates they're considering suicide, that you don't believe they'll ever do it, as if daring the person to prove them wrong.

Of course people actually do treat people like that and tell people shit like that. Why? Because they're the one's who are selfish and self-absorbed and who can't be put upon to offer support for someone other than themselves. Such people would be more helpful if they just shut the fuck up. As the old saying goes (and a bit more politely than I just put it), "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." And if such people want to be selfish and uncaring then they should either keep it to themselves or at least be up front about the fact that the selfishness regarding suicide is theirs.

I'm not telling any of you to go out and commit suicide - quite to the contrary. What I am saying is that blaming someone who's suicidal or guilting them or lying to them is not remotely helpful at all. If they're attitude and intentions are in any way to be changed then their suffering must be brought to an end. That's what they're trying to achieve in almost every case, ending their form of suffering, and the only way to draw someone away from considering suicide is to do whatever is necessary to help that person ease their suffering. That's what caring, compassionate people do. That's what love is all about. That is, if there really is any love out there after all.

Posted at 10:49 PM

January 29, 2006

Finally! Finally someone has written about the massively damaging effects of "boot camps" and "tough love" rehab programs for teens. The sad part is that such programs will still continue unhindered, sucking money from parents who want to hand off their 'problem' rather than try to understand why their child is having problems. Hopefully this will be the start of a great deal of attention on this issue. These dangerous, destructive programs can be shut down and the kids can be provided with more effective and supportive programs instead, but only if people make this a major issue that legislators must face. It's our kids! We have to work to help them. If not us then who?

The Trouble With Tough Love
by Maia Szalavitz

It is the ultimate parental nightmare: Your affectionate child is transformed, seemingly overnight, into an out-of-control, drug-addicted, hostile teenager. Many parents blame themselves. "Where did we go wrong?" they ask. The kids, meanwhile, hurtle through their own bewildering adolescent nightmare.

I know. My descent into drug addiction started in high school and now, as an adult, I have a much better understanding of my parents' anguish and of what I was going through. And, after devoting several years to researching treatment programs, I'm also aware of the traps that many parents fall into when they finally seek help for their kids.

Many anguished parents put their faith in strict residential rehab programs. At first glance, these programs, which are commonly based on a philosophy of "tough love," seem to offer a safe respite from the streets -- promising reform through confrontational therapy in an isolated environment where kids cannot escape the need to change their behavior. At the same time, during the '90s, it became increasingly common for courts to sentence young delinquents to military-style boot camps as an alternative to incarceration.

But lack of government oversight and regulation makes it impossible for parents to thoroughly investigate services provided by such "behavior modification centers," "wilderness programs" and "emotional growth boarding schools." Moreover, the very notion of making kids who are already suffering go through more suffering is psychologically backwards. And there is little data to support these institutions' claims of success.

Nonetheless, a billion-dollar industry now promotes such tough-love treatment. There are several hundred public and private facilities -- both in the United States and outside the country -- but serving almost exclusively American citizens. Although no one officially keeps track, my research suggests that some 10,000 to 20,000 teenagers are enrolled each year. A patchwork of lax and ineffective state regulations -- no federal rules apply -- is all that protects these young people from institutions that are regulated like ordinary boarding schools but that sometimes use more severe methods of restraint and isolation than psychiatric centers. There are no special qualifications required of the people who oversee such facilities. Nor is any diagnosis required before enrollment. If a parent thinks a child needs help and can pay the $3,000- to $5,000-a-month fees, any teenager can be held in a private program, with infrequent contact with the outside world, until he or she turns 18.

Over the past three years, I have interviewed more than 100 adolescents and parents with personal experience in both public and private programs and have read hundreds of media accounts, thousands of Internet postings and stacks of legal documents. I have also spoken with numerous psychiatrists, psychologists, sociologists and juvenile justice experts. Of course there is a range of approaches at different institutions, but most of the people I spoke with agree that the industry is dominated by the idea that harsh rules and even brutal confrontation are necessary to help troubled teenagers. University of California at Berkeley sociologist Elliott Currie, who did an ethnographic study of teen residential addiction treatment for the National Institute on Drug Abuse, told me that he could not think of a program that wasn't influenced by this philosophy.

Unfortunately, tough treatments usually draw public scrutiny only when practitioners go too far, prompting speculation about when "tough is too tough." Dozens of deaths -- such as this month's case of 14-year-old Martin Lee Anderson, who died hours after entering a juvenile boot camp that was under contract with Florida's juvenile justice system -- and cases of abuse have been documented since tough-love treatment was popularized in the '70s and '80s by programs such as Synanon and Straight, Inc. Parents and teenagers involved with both state-run and private institutions have told me of beatings, sleep deprivation, use of stress positions, emotional abuse and public humiliation, such as making them dress as prostitutes or in drag and addressing them in coarse language. I've heard about the most extreme examples, of course, but the lack of regulation and oversight means that such abuses are always a risk.

The more important question -- whether tough love is the right approach itself -- is almost never broached. Advocates of these programs call the excesses tragic but isolated cases; they offer anecdotes of miraculous transformations to balance the horror stories; and they argue that tough love only seems brutal -- saying that surgery seems violent, too, without an understanding of its vital purpose.

What advocates don't take from their medical analogy, however, is the principle of "first, do no harm" and the associated requirement of scientific proof of safety and efficacy. Research conducted by the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Justice tells a very different story from the testimonials -- one that has been obscured by myths about why addicts take drugs and why troubled teenagers act out.

As a former addict, who began using cocaine and heroin in late adolescence, I have never understood the logic of tough love. I took drugs compulsively because I hated myself, because I felt as if no one -- not even my family -- would love me if they really knew me. Drugs allowed me to blot out that depressive self-focus and socialize as though I thought I was okay.

How could being "confronted" about my bad behavior help me with that? Why would being humiliated, once I'd given up the only thing that allowed me to feel safe emotionally, make me better? My problem wasn't that I needed to be cut down to size; it was that I felt I didn't measure up.

In fact, fear of cruel treatment kept me from seeking help long after I began to suspect I needed it. My addiction probably could have been shortened if I'd thought I could have found care that didn't conform to what I knew was (and sadly, still is) the dominant confrontational approach.

Fortunately, the short-term residential treatment I underwent was relatively light on confrontation, but I still had to deal with a counselor who tried to humiliate me by disparaging my looks when I expressed insecurity about myself.

The trouble with tough love is twofold. First, the underlying philosophy -- that pain produces growth -- lends itself to abuse of power. Second, and more important, toughness doesn't begin to address the real problem. Troubled teenagers aren't usually "spoiled brats" who "just need to be taught respect." Like me, they most often go wrong because they hurt, not because they don't want to do the right thing. That became all the more evident to me when I took a look at who goes to these schools.

A surprisingly large number are sent away in the midst of a parental divorce; others are enrolled for depression or other serious mental illnesses. Many have lengthy histories of trauma and abuse. The last thing such kids need is another experience of powerlessness, humiliation and pain.

Sadly, tough love often looks as if it works: For one thing, longitudinal studies find that most kids, even amongst the most troubled, eventually grow out of bad behavior, so the magic of time can be mistaken for the magic of treatment. Second, the experience of being emotionally terrorized can produce compliance that looks like real change, at least initially.

The bigger picture suggests that tough love tends to backfire. My recent interviews confirm the findings of more formal studies. The Justice Department has released reports comparing boot camps with traditional correctional facilities for juvenile offenders, concluding in 2001 that neither facility "is more effective in reducing recidivism." In late 2004, the National Institutes of Health released a "state of the science" consensus statement, concluding that "get tough" treatments "do not work and there is some evidence that they may make the problem worse." Indeed, some young people leave these programs with post-traumatic stress disorder and exacerbations of their original problems.

These strict institutional settings work at cross-purposes with the developmental stages adolescents go through. According to psychiatrists, teenagers need to gain responsibility, begin to test romantic relationships and learn to think critically. But in tough programs, teenagers' choices of activities are overwhelmingly made for them: They are not allowed to date (in many, even eye contact with the opposite sex is punished), and they are punished if they dissent from a program's therapeutic prescriptions. All this despite evidence that a totally controlled environment delays maturation.

Why is tough love still so prevalent? The acceptance of anecdote as evidence is one reason, as are the hurried decisions of desperate parents who can no longer find a way of communicating with their wayward kids. But most significant is the lack of the equivalent of a Food and Drug Administration for behavioral health care -- with the result that most people are unaware that these programs have never been proved safe or effective. It's part of what a recent Institute of Medicine report labeled a "quality chasm" between the behavioral treatments known to work and those that are actually available. So parents rely on hearsay -- and the word of so-called experts.

Unfortunately, in the world of teen behavioral programs, there are no specific educational or professional requirements. Anyone can claim to be an expert.

Posted at 2:13 AM

January 28, 2006

Is anybody out there? <echo ... echo ... echo>

Posted at 10:32 PM

January 27, 2006

I didn't realize it had been a whole twenty years until I read this article today. Twenty years ago, as I was a freshman in college starting my third quarter, I was watching the live broadcast on TV of the launch of the space shuttle Challenger. I saw every moment, from the countdown to the blastoff to the unexpected and shocking explosion as the booster rocket exploded and took the entire shuttle with it. IT was a surreal moment, and I remember every minute of that experience clearly.

In recent years, as I've been back at college, there have been times that the Challenger explosion has been mentioned in one context or another by a teacher, and each time the students mention how they recall seeing it because they were watching it at school - in kindergarten or first grade. That invariably makes me feel old and really displays the real difference in my age from most of my classmates, but it also strikes me as significant in that it was a defining moment for our generation. Just as you could ask my parents' generation what they were doing when they heard that John Kennedy had been assassinated, people of my generation can usually tell what they were doing when the Challenger exploded. That day, often that exact moment, is ingrained in their mind more clearly and most lastingly than just about any other moment they share with anyone else. It's amazing.

So today, twenty years later, I salute those brave astronauts who gave their lives in pursuit of expanding our horizons and exploring the heavens. Their loss has been etched into the minds of a generation, and their sacrifices will not be forgotten.

Remembering Challenger
Lessons learned 20 years after space shuttle disaster

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (AP) -- Twenty years ago, space shuttle Challenger blew apart in jets of fire and plumes of smoke, a terrifying sight witnessed by the families of the seven astronauts and by those who came to watch the historic launch of the first teacher in space.

The disaster shattered NASA's image and the belief that spaceflight could become as routine as airplane travel. The investigation into the accident's cause revealed a space agency more concerned with schedules and public relations than safety and sound decision-making.

Seventeen years later, seven more astronauts were lost on the shuttle Columbia, leading many to conclude NASA had not learned the lessons of Challenger.

But after last summer's successful return to flight under the highest level of engineering scrutiny ever, many space watchers are more hopeful.

"Don't we all learn as we go?" said Grace Corrigan, who lost her daughter, teacher Christa McAuliffe, in the Challenger accident. "Everybody learns from their mistakes."

Joining McAuliffe on the doomed January 28, 1986 Challenger flight were commander Dick Scobee, pilot Mike Smith and astronauts Ellison Onizuka, Judy Resnik, Ron McNair and Greg Jarvis. (Watch widow June Scobee Rodgers talk about her husband's legacy -- 5:01)

"It was one of those defining moments in your life that you will always remember," said Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, who flew on the shuttle mission preceding Challenger.

"Because in 1986, the space shuttle was the symbol of technological prowess of the United States and all of the sudden it's destroyed in front of everybody's eyes." (Listen to CNN's Miles O'Brien reflect on the day that changed us forever)

The two shuttle disasters, as well as the deaths of the Apollo 1 crew during a 1967 launch pad test, taught the space agency how to improve the herculean task of launching humans into space, NASA administrator Michael Griffin said recently.

On Thursday, NASA workers paused for their annual Day of Remembrance in honor of those lost in all three accidents. On Saturday, a ceremony remembering the Challenger accident is planned at Kennedy Space Center. (Full story)

Challenger was brought down just after liftoff by a poorly designed seal in the shuttle's solid rocket booster, which has since been redesigned and has performed without problems. It will be used on the next-generation vehicle with plans to return astronauts to the moon and later to Mars.

"We learned how to design solid rocket boosters ... with no further failures," Griffin said. "We got that from the Challenger crew, so that is part of the learning process, I'm afraid."

The Challenger disaster came in an era of tighter budgets, smaller work forces and a constant need for the space agency to justify the shuttle program that followed the heyday of the Apollo moon program. NASA had hoped sending a teacher into space to give a lesson would win back some public interest and show how routine shuttle flights could be.

The success of the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs had led NASA to believe that spaceflight eventually could become as commonplace as an airplane ride, said Stanley Reinartz, the former manager of the shuttle project office at the Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. He made the decision not to take engineers' concerns about the Challenger's O-ring seals to the highest reaches of NASA management.

"Things can go wrong," Reinartz said of the decision to launch. "You don't get away from it. It's always there."

Nelson said he is confident that the current NASA leaders have learned the lessons of management hubris from their predecessors. Griffin grounded the shuttle fleet last summer after foam fell off the tank of Discovery during the first shuttle flight after Columbia. It was a chunk of foam debris that doomed Columbia by knocking a hole in its wing.

Seven more shuttle astronauts were lost when Columbia broke to pieces upon re-entering the Earth's atmosphere February 1, 2003.
"The problem that NASA has had that caused the destruction of both space shuttles is the same ... -- arrogance in the management of NASA so that they were not listening to the engineers on the line," Nelson said.

But some critics wonder how long the 2-year-old reforms and attitude changes implemented after Columbia will last until, once again, dissenting opinion is discouraged and NASA managers override the concerns of their engineers.

In a series of telephone conference calls the night before Challenger's liftoff, engineers from NASA contractor Morton Thiokol recommended against a launch because data showed that cold temperatures compromised the O-rings' resiliency. The temperature at launch time was 36 degrees Fahrenheit (2.2 Celsius).

Under perceived pressure from NASA managers, Thiokol managers reversed themselves and went against the recommendation of their engineers not to launch, according to the investigation by a commission appointed by President Reagan.

"The presidential commission made very powerful and strong recommendations on how the system needed to be fixed," said Roger Boisjoly, a former Thiokol engineer who had opposed the Challenger launch during the conference calls. "Initially NASA installed every one of those (recommendations), but in the ensuing years proceeded to dismantle them."

Griffin said he is reminded of the early days of the nation's air transport system when scores of test pilots died in plane accidents during the early part of last century.

"The knowledge we gained was gained only through many, many losses," Griffin said. "That is the perspective through which we must look at our losses in spaceflight."

Posted at 1:12 AM

January 26, 2006

Grrrrr.

I just finished watching the latest episode of Smallville, the 100th episode. The ads leading up to this have made clear that a major character was supposed to die, and it was made pretty clear in the ads that it would be Lana Lang, Clark's love interest played by Kristin Kreuk. To me this was perfect. Lana has been a whiny bitch from the start of the series, and regardless of whether she's attractive or not, who wants Clark Kent (played by the gorgeous Tom Welling) to be stuck with a bitch that does nothing to deserve his love and protection. But honestly I was skeptical about whether Lana would truly die. I mean, Smallville is notorious for misdirection when it comes to characters dying, even small characters, so even though the ads made it look like Lana would die I had serious doubts.

So it wasn't a big surprise that Lana, even though she does die, actually ends up living because Clark has a one-time opportunity to jump back in time and change things. Of course we're told that "fate" has to have balance, so Clark's father, Jonathan Kent (played by John Schneider) dies instead. Of all of the characters who should die, Lana should have been gone ages ago, and of all of the characters who shouldn't die, because they're written well and acted well. It may be true that Clark's father dying when he is eighteen fulfils the classic storyline of the Superman story, but Jonathan Kent was certainly the last of the cast who should have been bumped off.

So I'm pissed off at the show. I'm sick of the bullshit drama between Clark and Lana, and obviously that is just going to keep on going, and what do I get for continuing to put up with that crap? A perfectly good, in fact an excellent character, is struck from the show. How typical. This may be the pivotal moment that leads to Smallville jumping the shark.

Posted at 9:57 PM

January 25, 2006

Wow, we actually had snow yesterday and today. Today it even lasted and didn't melt away.

After this warmer-than-ever winter I simply defy Fuehrer Bush to claim that there's no evidence that there is a global warming problem. I'm torn between being thrilled not to have to shovel snow and being worried that the effects of global warming could be so drastic (usually scientists cite temperature increases of a few degrees per ten years, but this winter's temperatures have been easily 10 or 20 degrees above normal).

It's supposed to be in the 40's in a couple of days again, with rain and everything. It's odd weather for the end of January. But maybe this is the sign of things to come. Only time will tell.

Posted at 12:45 AM

January 24, 2006

So my grandma thought that today was Sunday, even though she had just gone to the YMCA yesterday, which she only does on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. She went out on the porch to look for the paper, and failing to find it that early she called one of our neighbors to see if their paper was late, too. Of course that neighbor, who is only a few years younger than my grandma's 91 years, set her straight that today was Tuesday, not Sunday. This, of course, upset my grandma horribly since she felt as though she'd made a fool of herself, and she kept mentally beating herself up for half of the day, regardless of my attempts to get her to let it go. Amazingly my grandma didn't start getting herself together for church, which would be normal for a Sunday. She simply had it in her mind that she was looking for the Sunday paper and she was stuck on that one thing. It's amazing the ways that her memory fails as she's getting old - not in a way that she simply thinks it's Sunday and goes through her SUnday routine, but only the specific aspect of forgetting which day it is when she's thinking about the newspaper. Strange.

My grandma does lose track of which day of the week it is now and again, although she's not usually this far off. The thing that kills me is that I've suggested that we could just take a marker and "X" off each day on her calendar as it passes. Lots of people do that, and I don't see it as a big deal. I've suggested it before and received the same response as today - not yet. My grandma doesn't want to do such a thing, which would be a convenience for her, because (I think) she's embarrassed, but I don't know what there is to be embarrassed about by marking off the days on a calendar that only she and I see, particularly when marking off the days in such a fashion is something that even young people do. But then again I should have long ago given up trying to figure out why my grandma won't do the acceptable thing or support a logical suggestion.

Posted at 12:12 AM

January 23, 2006

My concerns from a week ago (that I'd have to videotape one show or the other of Surface or 24, my two current favorite shows that are broadcast on the same night) were fortuitously unfounded. Surface is on at 8 PM and 24 is on at 9 PM. Perfect! So that's a huge plus.

I'm getting more and more into both of these shows, but I was surprised and disappointed when I recently learned that Surface has only three more episodes and it will be done - not just finished for the season, but over entirely. Just a one season deal and no more. 24 completes a full storyline each season, but I at least know that it will be back with a new 24-hour day come the following season. Surface was clearly planned as just a one-season thing, and while I'm glad to have it while it lasts, I'm sorely disappointed that it can't have a further storyline developed to keep it going.

Hopefully NBC (and maybe other networks) will take note of how well received Surface has been. It would be nice to see some well-done science fiction shows on more than just the SciFi channel.

It also occurred to me a week or so ago that the networks should consider fantasy shows in their new line-ups. With the successes of The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia I would think that somebody would think about doing a fantasy series, something done seriously, not as a comedic romp or such. It would take very good people to pull it off, but a fantasy series could be incredible. Heck, the best and most revered stories of all literature are fantasies: The Iliad, The Odyssey, Beowulf, the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Arthurian legends, and more.

So hey, all of you network execs who read my site, take some advice and give fantasy a try. And figure out how to make a new season of Surface. You've screwed up so much else about TV viewing that I think you owe me at least that much.

Posted at 11:12 PM

January 22, 2006

Considering all of the things that have happened in my life, I should be used to disappointment. Still, I was disappointed when Steve called to tell me he was canceling the D&D gaming session we had planned to have. I accepted it easily, considering Steve sounded like death (or a 70-year chronic smoker). In fact I would have cancelled the game myself based on how sick Steve sounded. But even though I support taking a week's break, that doesn't mean I'm not disappointed to have not had the chance to relax and socialize with my friends.

Oh, and television on Sundays is simply abysmal. I think that I may turn Sundays into reading days, set aside to just have light music playing in the background while I read a good book, never even thinking about turning on the TV for a single minute of the day.

Speaking of TVs, mine is in its death-throes. The picture is fucked up along the top four inches or so (on a 27" TV), and it looks like the tube is on its last days. It's an older set, so it's not surprising, but I'm not excited about losing that TV. I certainly don't want to pay the outlandish amounts that a decent-name TV will cost me for a similar size. Maybe it won't be as bad as I think; I haven't really shopped around yet or anything. I just don't have a good feeling about the whole thing, and even if I find a good TV at a good price, it's still an expense I really don't want to deal with.

Posted at 1:06 AM

January 21, 2006

"Republicans to criminalize masturbation. News at 11."

... any time now ...

Posted at 11:00 PM

January 20, 2006

Honestly, after half a dozen years back at college, it is pretty much no shock at all that the majority of people graduating from colleges and universities around America "lack the literacy to handle complex, real-life tasks such as understanding credit card offers." They also can't do math, can't spell for shit, and are barely able to apply basic grammar skills. Let's not even get into what "knowledge" they have about history or politics or science. So this article isn't shocking, just amazingly disappointing and depressing.

Keep in mind - this is the coming generation. These are the leaders of tomorrow. Sheesh. We're all doomed.

Study: College students lack literacy for complex tasks

WASHINGTON (AP) -- More than half of students at four-year colleges -- and at least 75 percent at two-year colleges -- lack the literacy to handle complex, real-life tasks such as understanding credit card offers, a study found.

The literacy study funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts, the first to target the skills of graduating students, finds that students fail to lock in key skills -- no matter their field of study.

The results cut across three types of literacy: analyzing news stories and other prose, understanding documents and having math skills needed for checkbooks or restaurant tips.

Without "proficient" skills, or those needed to perform more complex tasks, students fall behind. They cannot interpret a table about exercise and blood pressure, understand the arguments of newspaper editorials, compare credit card offers with different interest rates and annual fees or summarize results of a survey about parental involvement in school.

"It is kind of disturbing that a lot of folks are graduating with a degree and they're not going to be able to do those things," said Stephane Baldi, the study's director at the American Institutes for Research, a behavioral and social science research organization.

Most students at community colleges and four-year schools showed intermediate skills. That means they can do moderately challenging tasks, such as identifying a location on a map.

There was brighter news.

Overall, the average literacy of college students is significantly higher than that of adults across the nation. Study leaders said that was encouraging but not surprising, given that the spectrum of adults includes those with much less education.

Also, compared with all adults with similar levels of education, college students had superior skills in searching and using information from texts and documents.

"But do they do well enough for a highly educated population? For a knowledge-based economy? The answer is no," said Joni Finney, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, an independent and nonpartisan group.

"This sends a message that we should be monitoring this as a nation, and we don't do it," Finney said. "States have no idea about the knowledge and skills of their college graduates."

The survey examined college students nearing the end of their degree programs.

The students did the worst on matters involving math, according to the study.

Almost 20 percent of students pursuing four-year degrees had only basic quantitative skills. For example, the students could not estimate if their car had enough gas to get to the service station. About 30 percent of two-year students had only basic math skills.

Baldi and Finney said the survey should be used as a tool. They hope state leaders, educators and university trustees will examine the rigor of courses required of all students.

The college survey used the same test as the National Assessment of Adult Literacy, the government's examination of English literacy among adults. The results of that study were released in December, showing about one in 20 adults is not literate in English.

On campus, the tests were given in 2003 to a representative sample of 1,827 students at public and private schools.

It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Posted at 10:11 PM

January 19, 2006

I need to change. I have to change. I can't keep going like this, but as much as I know that I have to, I don't have any idea how to start. But I guess that "admitting you have a problem is the first step", so maybe that in itself is exactly how to start.

Posted at 10:20 PM

January 18, 2006

... help me Obi-Wan. You're my only hope.

Posted at 10:28 PM

January 17, 2006

I was thrilled today to see that help is coming - nearby even - for gay kids who are homeless or struggling on the streets. The start of all of this is a planned survey to find out approximately how many gay kids are out there in Cleveland and the surrounding area and then finding out what their situations are.

Gay street kids, whether they've run away or been kicked out of their homes or any of the other many reasons they find themselves on the street, are prevalent throughout the U.S., much more than people are willing to admit. And since the majority of support services for the homeless and runaway teens are Christian-based, the few organizations that could help gay street kids either don't know (or care) how to deal with their problems and in many cases outright turn them away. This survey is a huge first step, particularly in conservative Ohio, because even with rough numbers it can be shown how significant the troubles for gay youth truly are. With that info existing organizations may, in some cases, be convinced to train their staffs to help gay kids and understand their problems, and additionally, new organizations, sponsored by gay rights organizations, can be established to provide safe-houses where kids can go, knowing that they'll be safe and understood.

If I ever make the money to do so, this sort of thing - helping gay kids who are homeless or struggling or abused yet still at home - this is where I would put my time and money. There is nothing else that I feel evokes more heartfelt and determined feelings from me. I have, in fact, even considered that after I finish all of my college education(s), I may go, not into teaching English or Writing, but into some organization that works solely to help troubled and abused gay kids. I don't actually think I can fully explain how important it is to me that such kids get the help and care and love that they so rightly deserve.

Anyhow, this article in Cleveland's Plain Dealer explains the basic plans (and funding) for the initial study. I hope that the efforts continue nonstop until every kid is found and helped. None of them can be left to suffer alone - none.

Counting Gay Youths Who are Homeless
- Survey could lead to a drop-in center

An ambitious plan would document the sexual identities of young homeless people to reach a group advocates say is hidden from society.

The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Community Center of Greater Cleveland will coordinate some time this summer visits to homeless hangouts to offer medical referrals and to survey youths ages 14 to 24. Cuyahoga County would provide some money -- as much as $83,000.

Some advocates believe a number of Northeast Ohio's young homeless are gay, at greater risk than many other street kids, and with fewer ways to get help. Based on the new research, the center would consider running a special drop-in center for homeless gay youth.

The study would be among the first in years to examine the issue, said Craig A. Bowman, executive director of the National Youth Advocacy Coalition in Washington D.C., which represents almost 200 lesbian, gay and bisexual organizations nationwide. Research on the subject largely ended in the late 1990s when the gay community shifted its focus to gay marriage and adoptions, Bowman said.

"To me, these are our kids," said Sue Doerfer, executive director of the center. "If we're not going to watch out for them and take care of them, who is?

Street kids are elusive, even in the invisible world of the transient. The Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless estimates there are more than 4,000 homeless people in the region on any given day.

No one is sure how many teens are on their own. Those younger than 18 spurn shelters because they fear county foster care. Some teens subsist by flopping from one apartment to the next -- often trading sex for a place to live.

Flopping also keeps teens under the radar of organizations that define being homeless as sleeping somewhere you usually wouldn't, such as in a car or on the street.

Numbers for homeless youth and homeless gay youth vary wildly. A December study of Illinois' youth homeless by the University of Illinois at Chicago said 10 percent are either gay or questioning their sexual identity. Older studies have put the number as high as 35 percent.

Gay youths often leave home for the same reason as other teens: abuse, depression or drugs. Gay youths are also on the street because families kick them out because of their sexuality.

Advocates have tried addressing security concerns. Brian Davis, executive director for the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, recommended Cuyahoga County place transgendered individuals, who live as the opposite gender, in hotels away from regular shelters. That hasn't happened.

Doerfer says shelters such as the YMCA's Y-Haven refused an offer to train workers to handle gay residents.

Chip Joseph, executive director of Y-Haven, said there hasn't been a problem for gays at Y-Haven, where he thinks around a half-dozen of his 133 men are gay. "The numbers aren't that big and we seem to integrate gay and heterosexual populations pretty well," said Joseph.

Advocates for the homeless say the center's research project will never get an accurate count of homeless youth. Also, it will be difficult to get a real answer about sexuality from a group who, in many cases, may be deeply damaged or confused about who they are.

But Jim McCafferty, director of the Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services, said he is eager to reach out to homeless youths and believes this will help.

Ideally, he would like to see the gay community work with these teens and explain to them that foster care is a safer and more accepting place than the streets.

Posted at 12:15 AM

January 16, 2006

Today we nationally honor the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the greatest champion of peace and equality of his generation, challenged for the honor only by the likes of Gandhi and the Dalai Lama. Today we revere both the man and his words, his works and his hopes, his passion and his vision. For myself I have always seen Dr. King as a hero, iconic of the best leaders of history and transcending all others in his dauntless pursuit of one world of shared humanity.

As is usual on Martin Luther King Day, I am posting one of Dr. King's powerful speeches, one that I find particularly appropriate to the events that currently surround us. The selection below is the bulk of his speech upon receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. His words ring boldly and true now just as they did just over forty-one years ago. I truly wish that the world would be mindful of these words and work together to achieve Dr. King's vision "that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality."

Thank you, Dr. King, for all that you did during your time on Earth. I hope we can follow in your massive footsteps and live up to your expectations.

I accept this award today with an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind. I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the "isness" of man's present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal "oughtness" that forever confronts him. I refuse to accept the idea that man is mere flotsom and jetsom in the river of life unable to influence the unfolding events which surround him. I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality.

I refuse to accept the cynical notion that nation after nation must spiral down a militaristic stairway into the hell of thermonuclear destruction. I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right temporarily defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. I believe that even amid today's motor bursts and whining bullets, there is still hope for a brighter tomorrow. I believe that wounded justice, lying prostrate on the blood-flowing streets of our nations, can be lifted from this dust of shame to reign supreme among the children of men. I have the audacity to believe that peoples everywhere can have three meals a day for their bodies, education and culture for their minds, and dignity, equality and freedom for their spirits. I believe that what self-centered men have torn down men other-centered can build up. I still believe that one day mankind will bow before the altars of God and be crowned triumphant over war and bloodshed, and nonviolent redemptive good will proclaimed the rule of the land. "And the lion and the lamb shall lie down together and every man shall sit under his own vine and fig tree and none shall be afraid." I still believe that We Shall overcome!

This faith can give us courage to face the uncertainties of the future. It will give our tired feet new strength as we continue our forward stride toward the city of freedom. When our days become dreary with low-hovering clouds and our nights become darker than a thousand midnights, we will know that we are living in the creative turmoil of a genuine civilization struggling to be born.

Today I come to Oslo as a trustee, inspired and with renewed dedication to humanity. I accept this prize on behalf of all men who love peace and brotherhood. I say I come as a trustee, for in the depths of my heart I am aware that this prize is much more than an honor to me personally.

Every time I take a flight, I am always mindful of the many people who make a successful journey possible - the known pilots and the unknown ground crew.

So you honor the dedicated pilots of our struggle who have sat at the controls as the freedom movement soared into orbit. You honor, once again, Chief Lutuli of South Africa, whose struggles with and for his people, are still met with the most brutal expression of man's inhumanity to man. You honor the ground crew without whose labor and sacrifices the jet flights to freedom could never have left the earth. Most of these people will never make the headline and their names will not appear in Who's Who. Yet when years have rolled past and when the blazing light of truth is focused on this marvelous age in which we live - men and women will know and children will be taught that we have a finer land, a better people, a more noble civilization - because these humble children of God were willing to suffer for righteousness sake.

I think Alfred Nobel would know what I mean when I say that I accept this award in the spirit of a curator of some precious heirloom which he holds in trust for its true owners - all those to whom beauty is truth and truth beauty - and in whose eyes the beauty of genuine brotherhood and peace is more precious than diamonds or silver or gold.

Posted at 10:12 PM

January 15, 2006

The season premiere of FOX's always good series 24 was tonight, and I'd have to say that after having watched every season of the show so far, this was the most explosive and immediately involving start of any of the five seasons. Usually, even as much as I like the show, it takes me a few episodes before I really get into things, before things really seem to get past set-up and backgrounding and get moving along. Tonight, within the first hour, a very solid background was layed, all past characters were reintroduced nicely, and a series of powerful events were presented which made all sorts of intrigue possible. This looks to be possibly the most amazing season yet. I continue to be amazed at the high quality of the writing and acting in this show. It seems very credible, very real, and the cinematography always seems much more on the level of feature film work rather than television production. If you can't tell, I'm pleased to have 24 back for a new season. It's one show I look forward to watching every week.

One other show I thoroughly enjoy, as I've mentioned once before, is the new NBC series Surface. Who would have thought that NBC could do a sci-fi show? And without making it a comical joke or a sex-filled soap opera. It's amazing. The CGI is well done but the writing and acting are quite impressive, very believable and mysterious. I unfortunately missed the show from two weeks ago, the first episode after over a month's break. The good news is that the SciFi channel has been playing Surface as well as NBC, although SciFi's broadcasts are always at least a week behind the NBC releases. Tonight, just now in fact, I finished watching that episode I'd missed before, and it filled in a couple gaps from where I'd left off in November and what I saw last week. So now I'm all set for the new episode tomorrow, and I'm looking forward to it.

Of course 24 and Surface are both on tomorrow night at the same time, just as they will be for months to come, so I need to devise some recording scheme for at least one of the shows. It's a pain, really, considering there aren't many shows during the week that I do indeed watch with interest. You'd think they could schedule them apart, just for my sake, wouldn't you? (Hee-hee). Anyhow, Monday nights should be something to look forward to for a while. That's cool. The geek in me is very satisfied.

Posted at 12:09 AM

January 14, 2006

So here goes with another very late entry, but the evening was well worth it, even if I am rather exhausted.

I joined Steve and Mark at Steffen's house again tonight to play some D&D and move our group of adventurers forward toward bigger and better things. Last week we managed an unbelievable win against half a dozen huge monstrous spiders. We were way out of our league and should have been spider food, but circumstances (and good tactical attacks on our part) worked in our favor and we not only survived but killed all of these nasty vermin. That success brought us a lot of valuable treasure and a whole heck of a lot of experience, enough to set our characters up to advance to the next level (which means they get more life points, more skills, and maybe more spells or better attacks, depending upon whether they're a wizard or a ranger or whatever). We'll have to get back to civilization (probably our home town of Awad) to train in order to achieve this new level, but we have passed the big hurdle, which is having the necessary total experience points to reach the next step. Today was, to some extent, a bit of an anticlimax after the long, desperate battles of last week. There was much more role-playing, interacting with semi-friendly creatures rather than fighting them, asking questions, searching through old ruined buildings, doing reconnaissance of the area. It was all good, necessary work, but not as exciting as before. and now, with a lot of new information and new curiosities, we're heading our characters back to Awad for training - and maybe more.

Awad may be in trouble, considering that repeated magical messages that we've sent (or expected) from various people in Awad have not been answered/received. For all we know the city may be a smoldering ruin when we return, but even if that's not the case, I'm quite sure that there are big problems awaiting us. That's something we don't exactly need at the moment, but like real life, we don't get to choose when rough stuff needs to be faced, so we'll just have to deal with it as it comes. And that will be soon, since we may reach Awad sometime during gameplay next week (and if not then almost surely during the following get-together). I'll hand it to Steve (who's been the Dungeon Master, the person who creates the background story and lays everything out for our characters) - he has made an incredibly rich world with exacting detail, and he's b een conscious of not only what's going on around us but what would be happening in various places in our absence. There's truly a universe of various things going on in all of the parts of Steve's world, and he spins it all together to weave quite a complicated and intriguing story.

We played late tonight, getting as far along with things as we could, but by 1 AM we were all dragging a little bit (Steffen particularly, who's schedule is usually to work very early in the morning and sleep starting fairly early). After we broke down the gaming maps and supplies and stuff and packed off to head our separate ways, we ended up talking for quite a while. In fact Mark and Steve and I even continued to talk for nearly an hour outside in the cold, beside our cars after we had left Steffen to close up his house and go to sleep. And after an hour in near-freezing temperatures I was wide awake for my drive back to Sandusky.

I didn't get back here to the house until after 3 AM, and I've checked e.mail nd surfed the web a bit - even read a couple very short new chapters for a couple of stories I follow online, but now that I've wound down I'm mightily exhausted and ready to drop off dead to the world in sleep. It was a good night, and these weekly gaming sessions are coming to mean more and more to me as time goes on. I'm glad I had the chance to get back into this group and game with them. It's been a big boon to me, if not for the gaming fun itself then surely for the socialization and relaxation.

But now it's time to sleep. Ah sleep! How wonderful that sounds.

Posted Written at 5:14 AM

January 13, 2006

Surely there's great irony in the fact that today, Friday the 13th, is the fifth anniversary for this website. It's fitting in fact. I had great hopes of being able to finally launch version 3 of the website, replete with commenting and searching and all sorts of the features I've been missing (not to mention a new layout and new graphics), but as much as I wanted to launch all of that today, I'm not anywhere close to putting up any part of that. Sucks, doesn't it?

So instead, let's focus not on how the site hasn't been remodeled but upon where it stands now. One thing that I've noticed is that my hits have hit a plateau. New visitors have diminished somewhat and repeat visits are down as well, to a point where I'm getting about as many hits in one month as the next. In fact last year had almost the same number of hits as the previous year, and that's due to notable decreases in the second half of the year after strong (busier than ever) months earlier in the year. That all coincides with my exceptionally long and strong bout of depression that hit me starting in late June. It makes sense, really. My posts became less positive and, really, less interesting during all of the depression, and who wants to read that crap anyhow?

So today marks five years. No fanfare. No fancy graphics. No amazing new stories or poems. It's disappointing in a way, but honestly it doesn't bother me as much as I'd expect. In fact, I'm probably just as happy to have kept going for five years without fail as I am disappointed not to have more to show for it. It's sort of a balance in the end, and while that's not very grandiose, I still feel like I've accomplished a lot - particularly considering where I started, both for my expertise and for my emotional state way back then. I was deeply messed up five years ago, and while I'm still fucked up with depression, there's simply no comparison to the traumatic suffering I was experiencing then. It may not seem completely obvious, but I've really come a long, long way. So yea me! Let's see where I'm at after another five years.

Posted at 10:10 PM

January 12, 2006

The house across the street was burglarized a couple of days ago, and now the neighborhood is up in arms, calling each other to warn them to put bars on their basement windows and keep lights on around the outside of their houses. These people never would have been able to deal with the Old West End in Toledo, where I last lived (and they certainly never would have been able to bear downtown Akron, where it was disconcerting if you didn't hear gunshots every couple of hours). I've been robber before, twice, so I have no desire about going through that again, but I look at the people around me in this neighborhood and both laugh and grimace at the sheltered lives these people all lead. They're panicked by the intrusion of the gritty, real world into their midsts, and they are blindly optimistic that keeping a porchlight on will stop someone from breaking into a house.

Am I justified in my view of this situation or am I overly jaded and cynical? Maybe it's both ...

Posted at 12:10 AM

January 11, 2006

I thought that maybe it was just because I was depressed yesterday and had a headache, but I am completely underwhelmed by Apple's new product announcements at yesterday's MacWorld Expo Keynote speech. Of course I'm still depressed and still have a headache, so maybe that is part of my problem. I'm simply feeling none of the excitement and interest I usually have about the MacWorld announcements. Boo. : (

Posted at 12:04 AM

January 10, 2006

So much for things getting better ...

Posted at 12:01 AM

January 9, 2006

Damn, these constant headaches are a drag. I hope that yesterday and today are the extent of it. The last thing I need is a throbbing, half-blinding pain that won't go away for weeks (like I had a couple months ago).

Posted at 10:00 PM

January 8, 2006

My grandma's back and you're gonna be in trouble (Hey-naa, hey-naaa, my grandma's back).

Yes, my grandma has returned after three weeks visiting my sister. She is clearly glad to be back home (she gets very homesick after being away even the shortest amounts of time), and while it's nice to see her, I can't help feeling like I didn't have nearly enough of a break to really be able to relax and recuperate. It doesn't matter how I feel, though. She's back and my responsibilities to look after her are clear, so until spring, when she will probably go to visit my mom in Florida, I'll have to tow the line.

My sister flew back with my grandma so that the trip was easier and less worrisome for my grandma. Chris, my sister, will just be staying here briefly, already leaving Tuesday afternoon, but we'll have a short visit tomorrow and the next morning (maybe even lunch). We've already talked a bit tonight and had a nice meal together, but I've been tired and hit with a bad headache all day, and my sister is tired from her trip and recuperating from a cold. My grandma is possibly more energetic than either my sister or me, largely because of her excitement at being home, but she also is clearly tired, unable to follow conversations very well and dozing off the moment she sets down in a chair.

I've been trying to get my grandma to change for bed, which is a half hour process for her including brushing her teeth and putting in eye drops and a whole host of other things, but she ignores my suggestion every time. She'll eventually be completely exhausted, having fallen asleep over and over in her chair while 'watching' the TV, and after spending her half hour routine getting ready for bed she'll be wide awake again, having to wind down before going to sleep. It's aggravating that she won't listen to me, particularly since she knows that this scenario is exactly what will happens (since it is pretty much what always happens), but she still simply won't listen. It's aggravating, really. Even a two year old will listen to you some of the time. Not this 91-year old grandma, though. That would be too easy.

Posted at 9:47 PM

January 7, 2006

I've enjoyed reading Dan Savage's writings for years, often in the form of his advice columns but also as the occasional commentary piece. In a recent advice column of his he responds to a reader who is upset about an earlier column that Dan wrote that questioned the "virgin" birth of Jesus. This first part of the column was tongue-in-cheek, a set-up for a look at amusing anec dotes about how people first lost their virginity, which is very much Dan's style for commentary, but this reader couldn't accept the humor and felt personally attacked. Maybe he was right to feel offended, but I feel he was taking things too far - and clearly he missed the joking nature of Dan's column because he seems to have felt that Dan's words were practically an outright attack.

Whether this man was right or wrong to be offended (although I would surely say he's a little too uptight about it), Dan's response is perfect. It expresses not only a good response to the situation but also a perfect explanation of why many gay people have become critical of anyone who says that they are a Christian as a defense for spewing hatred and intolerance. There are certainly a lot of good Christians out there, people who follow the philosophies of Christ's words, but the people who most vocally announce that they are Christians usually have no place in their hearts for the concepts of "Love thy neighbor" and ""Judge not, lest ye be judged." Dan Savage makes a good case, one which I can never articulate so well and so concisely. His words clearly speak my feelings on the matter.

The intro to your column about losing your virginity—it went into the birth of Jesus—was craptastic. Did you have to go there? Did you have to degrade Jesus and Mary?

Before you write me off as a Fox News–watching, Wal-Mart-shopping, Bush-supporting Bible thumper, please note that I am a liberal Democrat living in a blue-collar city in a blue state. I voted for Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, and Kerry. But I also try to live a Christian life. Your statements were sacrilegious. Jesus and Mary deserve a little respect.

—Your Friend

I don’t see how it’s disrespectful, degrading, or theologically incorrect to point out that if Mary was a virgin when she conceived, and if you don’t buy off on the virgin birth (the idea that Jesus somehow passed out of Mary’s uterus and down through her vaginal canal without disturbing her hymen), then Mary’s hymen broke when the Kid was born. Isn’t the whole point of the Jesus Thang that He was the Word made flesh? And if Mel Gibson can portray His death in detail so gory it bordered on the pornographic, how can an aside about the mechanics of His birth be off limits?

And finally, to Rob in Albany who felt my aside was proof of my intolerance and hypocrisy: Joking about Christianity isn’t evidence that I’m intolerant—hell, I’m perfectly willing to tolerate Christians. I have never, for instance, attempted to prevent Christians from marrying each other, or tried to stop them from adopting children, or worked to make it illegal for them to hold certain jobs. I don’t threaten to boycott companies that market their products to Christians, and I don’t organize letter-writing campaigns to complain about Christian characters on television.

It would indeed be hypocritical for me to complain about fundamentalist Christians who’ve done all of the above to gay people if I turned around and did the same thing to Christians—but, again, I’ve done no such thing. Intolerant? Hell, I’m a model of tolerance! Oh sure, I joked about the Virgin Birth because I think it’s silly and sexphobic. And I’m free to say as much, however unpleasant it is for some Christians to hear. Fundamentalist Christians, for their part, are free to think homosexuality is sinful and unnatural, and they’re free to say so, however unpleasant it is for me to hear. But fundamentalists aren’t willing to just speak their piece, Rob. Nope, they seek to persecute people for being gay, and that’s where their low opinion of homosexuality—which, again, they have an absolute right to hold—transubstantiates into intolerance.

Posted Written at 5:23 AM

January 6, 2006

I must be insane. I'm actually contemplating setting up a parallel website, this site staying as it is and updating daily and the other site formatted using a basic WordPress template but with all of this site's content placed in it. I'd update the parallel site, too, but until I could get a format/template that looks acceptable, this site's current layout would be the prime face and destination of the URL.

The benefit of such a plan would be that all of the content would be ready to go, which in itself will be a big effort out of the way. On the downside of course, would be putting forth that big effort, all without fully realizing the complete upgrade and revision I want.

It seems, even to me at times, like I'm being a perfectionist about this whole site remodel, but I'm honestly completely underwhelmed visually by what I can do. Until I either find better, more attractive and functional templates (or until I better learn to program using PHP and CSS, which is not going very well), I don't see a way to get anywhere near what I want for this site.

There has to be a way to do this that I'm somehow missing. I know that most template-based blogging software is simple and plain for a purpose, but surely there's an alternative that I'm not thinking of. I sure wish I'd get a flash of inspiration and figure it out ...

Posted at 10:10 PM

January 5, 2006

I shaved today for the first time in a week, the longest I've let my beard grow for literally twenty years. Usually I shave every day or at least every other day. I can't remember when I've ever gone more than three days without a shave. This past week, though, I was a bit lazy (and a bit sick, although that's pretty much been gone the past few days), and after a few days I became a bit curious about how the beard would look.

I did this same thing twenty years ago, towards the beginning of my second year in college. I let my beard grow for about three weeks that time, mostly due to curiosity. Just as was the case then, this most recent experiment was quite unappealing. I'm not surprised by this either, since I pretty much dislike facial hair on anyone, anywhere, anytime. I don't like the look of it on other people and I don't like the look of it on me. And I certainly don't like kissing men with facial hair - it's scratchy and unpleasant. So as I've always felt before: facial hair is bad. Period.

So now I don't think I'll ever really be curious about this again. Twenty years without any modicum of improvement says it all. Facial hair will never be something I like.

I was surprised at how well the beard shaved off. I had to trim it off and then actually shave so that the long hairs didn't get caught in my electric razor, but all things considered it went pretty smoothly (no pun intended). I do hate shaving, quite honestly, because it takes a good chunk of time each day and because it tends to irritate my skin occasionally, but I have yet to hear of any options beyond daily shaving. There may be all sorts of hair removal solutions for unwanted body hair (exfoliants, waxing, electrolysis, laser removal), but you can't use any of these methods on your face. I'd be all for a permanent process that would remove all of my facial hair. If someone could invent something like that then I would expect them to grow rich quickly. Surely I'm not the only person who hates to shave every day.

If it wasn't obvious already, the day was boring and uneventful. I spent a few hours trying a few new ideas on the website redesign efforts, but it was all a waste. Still, even with good new ideas, nothings working well enough to satisfy my expectations. I did some tax work and some filings for financial aid today, too, but that (not surprisingly) was completely uninteresting as well. If today was any example, I may soon prove that it's possible to die from boredom.

Posted at 1:20 AM

January 4, 2006

I try not to quote articles from the news two days in a row, but this one simply can't be resisted. Apparently there truly is a "war against Christianity", but it has little to do with Christmas. I'd love to actually see this case go to court, even though it seems like that is unlikely. It would be an interesting debate, both intellectually and theologically.

Did Jesus exist? Court to decide

ROME, Italy (Reuters) -- Forget the U.S. debate over intelligent design versus evolution.

An Italian court is tackling Jesus -- and whether the Roman Catholic Church may be breaking the law by teaching that he existed 2,000 years ago.

The case pits against each other two men in their 70s, who are from the same central Italian town and even went to the same seminary school in their teenage years.

The defendant, Enrico Righi, went on to become a priest writing for the parish newspaper. The plaintiff, Luigi Cascioli, became a vocal atheist who, after years of legal wrangling, is set to get his day in court later this month.

"I started this lawsuit because I wanted to deal the final blow against the Church, the bearer of obscurantism and regression," Cascioli told Reuters.

Cascioli says Righi, and by extension the whole Church, broke two Italian laws. The first is "Abuso di Credulita Popolare" (Abuse of Popular Belief) meant to protect people against being swindled or conned. The second crime, he says, is "Sostituzione di Persona," or impersonation.

"The Church constructed Christ upon the personality of John of Gamala," Cascioli claimed, referring to the 1st century Jew who fought against the Roman army.

A court in Viterbo will hear from Righi, who has yet to be indicted, at a January 27 preliminary hearing meant to determine whether the case has enough merit to go forward.

"In my book, 'The Fable of Christ,' I present proof Jesus did not exist as a historic figure. He must now refute this by showing proof of Christ's existence," Cascioli said.

Speaking to Reuters, Righi, 76, sounded frustrated by the case and baffled as to why Cascioli -- who, like him, came from the town of Bagnoregio -- singled him out in his crusade against the Church.

"We're both from Bagnoregio, both of us. We were in seminary together. Then he took a different path and we didn't see each other anymore," Righi said.

"Since I'm a priest, and I write in the parish newspaper, he is now suing me because I 'trick' the people."

Righi claims there is plenty of evidence to support the existence of Jesus, including historical texts.

He also claims that justice is on his side. The judge presiding over the hearing has tried, repeatedly, to dismiss the case -- prompting appeals from Cascioli.

"Cascioli says he didn't exist. And I said that he did," he said. "The judge will decide if Christ exists or not."

Even Cascioli admits that the odds are against him, especially in Roman Catholic Italy.

"It would take a miracle to win," he joked.

Posted at 1:00 AM

January 3, 2006

I don't even need to make a single comment about over-zealous, self-righteous, ridiculous Christian Conservatives when they do stuff like this. What more could I possibly say?

Barbie Accused of Being Part of the Transgender Movement

The Concerned Women for America were … well, concerned. Outraged, even. Was Barbie becoming part of the transgender movement?

On Dec. 30, CWA, a leading Christian conservative group, noted on its Web site that on the Barbie Web site, www.Barbie.com, "there is a poll that asks children their age and sex."

You can see a screen grab of the poll here.

The age choices were 4 to 8 but children "are given three options for their choice of gender": I am a Boy, I am a Girl and I Don't Know.

Bob Knight, director of CWA's Culture and Family Institute, said Barbie manufacturer Mattel was being influenced by the "transgender movement."

To pose "this transgender question at little girls, they've really crossed the line," Knight said, who added that "bisexuality gender confusion" is the Web site's agenda, which is "very dangerous."

The concern comes after a conservative boycott of Mattel's American Girls dolls. The American Family Association and the Pro-Life Action League protested that some American Girls dolls were wearing "I Can" wristbands, which support Girls Inc. Girls Inc. is a national, nonprofit organization that promotes education and self-esteem programs, as well as sex education, and supports abortion rights and the acceptance of gays and lesbians. The Mattel-Girls Inc. partnership ended on Dec. 26.

But Mattel, which also manufactures Barbie, said the Barbie incident is much ado about nothing.

"This was just an innocent oversight," says Lauren Bruksch, a spokeswoman for Mattel. As a rule of thumb, Bruksch said, the questionnaires at barbie.com always try to have a neutral answer or nonresponse option. For gender, this third option should have been "I don't want to say," rather than "I don't know." The Web site has since been fixed.

Knight had said CWA would contact Mattel to investigate the matter, but Bruksch said Mattel first heard of the complaint when ABC News called for comment.

Posted at 10:47 PM

January 2, 2006

For as many hours as I've been putting into trying to develop a new version for this website, complete with commenting and other such currently-expected features, I'd have been just as well off to have spent no time at it at all. Every template I try to modify, every concept I try to develop, and every feature I try to add just ends up looking like crap and working less than ideally. The looks are the biggest problem, really. If I could design as I have in the past, using Dreamweaver and putting all of my graphic design skills to work, I could create something beautiful, but since I'm trying to develop the new site using Wordpress, thereby getting commenting and such built in, I have to develop 'the look' using templates that work with PHP and CSS and sadly only come up as code in Dreamweaver, not graphics. Thus any experiment to make changes is long and drawn out and usually develops more flaws that successes, and unfortunately I just end up getting frustrated. If I could come up with a work-around to gain commenting then I'd design the site anew on my own. I already have ideas for how to redesign the site to add some new features on my own. I have some great new ideas for an improved layout and design as well. The damn commenting is the one thing that eludes me, and it's driving me nuts. I've wanted the damn commenting for about three years now, and I still can't figure out how to work it into the site. It simply drives me nuts to waste my time like this.

Posted at 11:05 PM

January 1, 2006

Oh good. Yet another year full of heartaches and disappointments. Lucky me.

Posted at 10:06 PM

previous | archives index | next
home | archives | bio | stories | poetry | links | guestbook | message board