I've become a germophobe since moving to New York, particularly while riding the subway.

As I grip the handrails, I swear I can feel microbes crawling around under my palms. Salmonella. Influenza. The common cold. I think about all the people who must have touched that rail before me and how clean or dirty their hands must have been.

I realize that most reasonable people will wash their hands after urinating, defecating, handling raw meat, masturbating, and doing lord knows what else, but at least a few people don't.

And that's really all it takes, isn't it? Just a few people.

Ick.

This summer, television and radio personality Glenn Beck launched his own, unaccredited, college (?) - Beck University.

According to Inside Higher Ed, Professor Stoner is slated to teach a course on charity, but instead says he plans to focus mainly on Constitutional issues. Specifically...

"... he said in a brief interview that the lectures are all focused on general issues related to the Constitution and the development of American traditions. His first talk will be about federalism, his second on the separation of powers, and the third on individual rights."

So in other words, at Beck University, you can relearn your high school social studies curriculum. Or at least Political Science 101. I have to be honest: It worries me a little bit if this is new knowledge to Glenn Beck's baccalaureates.

Also, Professor Stoner is the only actual professor (one of three, actually) teaching at Beck University. Just a thought.

It's just the curse of being a girl

I have to confess, I haven't posted nearly as much as I would like to because I've been busy. Dealing with job hunting, roommate issues, getting ready for school, and working a part-time temp job in the meantime, but I felt like writing now because of something that happened today.

I had my MFA orientation this morning, and it went splendidly. Afterwards, I had to head to the Post Office for a money order. As I exited near the corner of Nostrand Avenue and Avenue J, I heard kissy noises fired in my direction, followed by a "Hey, sexy!"

Slightly shaken, mostly angry, I turned to find the source of the offending noises, a squat little troll sitting in the passenger seat of a dark-colored, sedan-type car. He continued with the kissy noises as I looked at him for half a moment. Then, appropriately, I flipped him the bird and started walking towards the Metro station.

He was clearly Not Happy that I had rejected his generous "compliments" in such a flippant manner. The troll taunted me as I continued walking: "You can shove that up your ass, sunshine!" and the like. This is what we females are supposed to consider "just a compliment"?

Oh, and did I mention that he was actually following me in his car as this happened?

I have to admit: I was a little bit afraid because in that instant, I didn't know what this dude was going to do. I continued down Nostrand Avenue towards the train stop, trembling with rage, my mouth filling with saliva, ready to hock a loogey in this guy's direction if he came within spitting distance of me. Eventually, he got stuck at a red light and I escaped into a crowd. Relief.

I understand that catcalls are an unfortunate aspect of being female and living in a city, but still, it angers me that women must accept second-class status, particularly with regard to personal safety. We shouldn't have to shrug off some douchebag's backasswards idea of a compliment, we shouldn't have to carry pepper spray or look over our shoulders every few steps.

Perhaps my actions could have provoked this Neanderthal to violence. I'm lucky that didn't happen, but I don't regret my actions, either. If you can, I encourage every woman finding herself in a similar predicament to do the same thing I did. Respond. Let the offender know that you do not appreciate his harassment, that you are not some passive object existing only for his viewing pleasure. Flipping the bird is certainly not the most creative response to a catcaller, but catcallers, by their very nature, are uncreative beings.

If I have to give the self-described pickup artists credit for anything, it's for having at least a little more creativity than their wolf-whistling counterparts.

The New York Times had an article the other day on electronic gadgetry etiquette.

I have my own code of etiquette that I try to follow when it comes to picking up phone calls and texting.

• If you are hanging out one-on-one with somebody, it is rude to pick up a phone call and hold an extended conversation, unless it is an emergency. There are some situations where it might be acceptable to pick up the phone, for example, if you're meeting up with another friend and need to give them directions or tell them you're running late. Otherwise, you should give your real-life friend your time and attention. I was once driving to the mall with a friend who picked up a phone call and proceeded to have a 25-minute conversation with another friend. I found that extremely rude.
• There are, however, some situations where it might be more acceptable to pick up the phone when you're with another person. An emergency is obviously one of those exceptions. A quick, important, non-emergency phone call is also acceptable. If you and your friend are going to meet up with somebody else, it's probably OK to call the person you're planning to meet up with, if say, you need to give them directions or tell them you're running late.
• The family dinner table is never an appropriate place to text. It may be different with your friends, tough.

And finally...

• It is never, ever, ever acceptable to text while driving. This one should be a no-brainer. Pull over. You may insist that you're good at it and that you can do it without crashing, but remember that there are other people on the road. Driving requires your full attention.

I'd vote for Ted Bundy, too!!

Wandering the Internets on my way back to New York City the other day (Sidenote: Greyhound buses offer free wi-fi!), I stumbled upon a super-edgy fellow going by the name of Dick Masterson.

As I browsed his blog, Men Are Better Than Women, I found posts titled "Women Would Vote for Hitler" and "Every Women Is A Cheating Whore."

Because I'm a woman, I was naturally cheating even as I typed those very words. Or was I? After all, Masterson says, men have integrity and women don't, so men tell the truth while women lie. So I must be lying about cheating. Right?

Anyway, it's tempting to believe that Dickie boy was seriously burned by a woman at some point in his life. Or maybe burned by several women at multiple points in his life.

Or maybe he wasn't breastfed long enough as an infant.

Or maybe he's just mad that one of those lying, cheating whores won't cheat with him.

But most likely, he's just figured out that the quickest route to fame is to be a public asshole and to say outrageous things that he understands will upset the majority of the population.

Sure, it could be satire, but if it is, it's satire of the "Woman! Get back in the kitchen!" variety. That is to say, it doesn't make fun of existing power structures and really only serves to make privileged white guys like Masterson feel "edgy" for repeating tired old tropes that were passé by the 1960s.

And if he's serious? If he really, truly feels that way about women? Well, I honestly feel a little bit sorry for him. It must be pretty miserable to carry around that much angst and hatred for people different than yourself, be they women, handicapped people, racial minorities, or queer folks.

Or maybe I'm just too lazy to expend that kind of energy necessary to expel that much vitriol against other people. After all, I am a woman, so besides being whorish, I must be slothful, too.

p.s. He may be a bit of a dick, but at least Roissy's blog is somewhat entertaining.

p.p.s. Hitler was not "raised by a single mother." Hitler had a troubled relationship with his father and purportedly turned to German Nationalism as a way to rebel against his father, who died when Hitler was nearly 14 years old. Yeah, and male sheep are called rams (if they're intact) or wethers (if they're castrated). But since I hail from Stafford, I have an unfair advantage in knowing that.

Ugh. Twilight.

The wonderfully intelligent Erin Alyssa has a post up about the recent vampire craze (see True Blood and Twilight for notable examples) and her own personal distaste for it. She compares the vampire craze to 19th-century Orientalism.

An excerpt...

I taught Orientalism twice as a teaching assistant, and it was one of my favorite social and artistic movements to discuss. Orientalism was a trend in the 19th century when cultural producers, particularly artists and writers, created an “imaginary orient,” if I can borrow from Linda Nochlin, a sort of screen onto which they could convey Western desires. Because the subject matter of these pieces of art and literature were of the Middle East, it was okay for the women to be nude, fine for the men to be violent, and more than okay for there to be lascivious sexual acts. This Western constructed view of the Orient as sexually free, lavish, and idle was detrimental to the Western world’s opinion of the inhabitants of the Middle East.

Though I do not worry about what will happen to people’s opinions of fictional vampires, I find parallels between Orientalism, and the exoticizing of the “other” (in this case, Eastern inhabitant) and the recent vampire phenomenon. The values that these vampire phenoms represent, even as constructs, are problematic, as they appear to be the opposite of what we claim we’d like for our own society.

Though there has been a push in recent years for equal rights between the sexes, and some people even think feminism is outdated and no longer necessary (which cannot be further from the truth) in vampire land (in this case, Twilightvampire land) Edward can emotionally abuse and borderline stalk his defenseless girlfriend and instead of this behavior being creepy and inappropriate… it’s considered romantic… because he’s a vampire. Does this make sense? No, and it’s even more disturbing when young girls quote passages of this garbage to defend and rationalize staying in their own abusive relationships. Good for you, Stephanie Meyer.

Personally, Twilight annoys me because I cut my teeth on Anne Rice novels as an adolescent, and her vampires certainly don't sparkle, but Erin makes some very excellent points. Go read!

Creepy man at the Halsey Street J last night...

"So are we going to your apartment or mine?"

Me: "You're going back to your apartment, and I'm going back to mine. Separately."

Man: "What if I pay you?"

Me: "Especially not if you pay me!"

Country mouse, city mouse

"We grow good people in our small towns, with honesty and sincerity and dignity."


It's been almost two years since a certain once-VP hopeful spoke those words during a speech. At the time, that rankled me - even though I was (and let's be honest, still am) "small town folk." But today, I want to return to those words to share with you an anecdote that contradicts this "Small town folk = good, city folk = bad" mentality.

Dave came down to Brooklyn on Friday for a Sondre Lerche concert in Greenpoint. We had to take the J train to Lorimer Street, walk a couple blocks to the G train, and take that to Greenpoint Avenue.

As we walked down the stairs to the platform for the G train, we noticed a sort of peculiar scene. There was a young man standing on our side of the platform. He looked to be about our age. The way he was dressed, he looked like he had just come from a run or a workout. On the opposite platform were a teenage girl and a little boy, probably about eight or nine years old. Dave and I guessed that they were brother and sister.

The boy was visibly distraught, his face scrunched up into painful contortions, tears flowing freely. His sister was trying to comfort him, to little avail. The man on our side of the platform waved to him, trying to cheer him up. "It's gonna be OK, man!" he said. But the boy continued to cry.

Without much prompting, the young man ran up the stairs and reappeared on the other side of the platform, alongside the girl and boy. He dropped to the ground and pressed his ear against the edge of the platform, listening. Then, he leapt down from the platform and grabbed a small action figure that was lying near the train tracks. Evidently, the boy had dropped it, the source of his anguish.

When the man leapt back up onto the platform and handed the toy back to the boy, his face lit up. The tears evaporated, and he smiled. The man walked back up the stairs and returned to our side of the platform. Dave and I chatted with him for a bit before we went our separate ways. He introduced himself as Aku (I probably spelled that wrong) and said he saw the whole scene unfold. He had never jumped down onto the tracks like that before, and he described how his heart was pounding as he did it.

None of this is to say that people in small towns suck, though some people sure like to strongly imply it for political reasons. Underlying it is the suggestion that, if we grow good people in our small towns, then what kind of people do we grow in our big cities? Or anything in between? The point is, it's stupid to put people into boxes like "Good" or "Bad" according to their origins and not their actions.

I miss Connecticut, but New York is OK.

Craziness in Connecticut

First up, Hartford Mayor Eddie Perez was found guilty of bribery and first-degree larceny by extortion, among some other charges. Nice!

Everyone loves a story about underwear-clad criminals, right?

Some West Hartford-related creepiness...

And finally, a story about a Meriden nail salon owner who was ordered to stop doing tattoo removals. Why, you may ask? Because she didn't have a medical license!!! See, in order to laser into people's skin, you apparently need to have some kind of medical credentials. Crazy, right?

What really kills me, though, is this part:

In April, a woman went to Nailtique to have a tattoo removed from her left ring finger, she wrote in a complaint filed with the state health department. Afterward, her hand hurt and swelled. Three days later, she was admitted to the hospital overnight and given antibiotics and pain medication. The woman wrote that she had third-degree burns and had seen surgeons because she was unable to close her hand completely.

"I now have complaints regarding the quality of care and question whether or not this establishment is licensed to perform this procedure and whether or not they should be doing this in the Meriden mall," the woman wrote.

You thought that a tattoo removal offered for $100 in a nail salon in the mall was legitimate??? Yeah, the lady definitely shouldn't have been doing tattoo removals, but I also don't think it constitutes victim-blaming to suggest that perhaps this complainant was a bit of a dumbass herself.

Ahh... I love my home state...

Here's some interesting news

Abortion rights groups have long opposed ultrasound laws, which are typically enacted by anti-abortion legislators in an effort to dissuade women from having abortions. Personally, I haven't opposed laws mandating women should have the option to view the ultrasound, but if she doesn't to look at it, then you can't physically force her to look at it.

But perhaps pro-choice groups can rest a little easier. The New York Times reports today that ultrasounds seldom actually have the effect of changing a woman's mind about abortion. The NYT interviewed women and staff at clinics in Alabama for the story.

Staff members interviewed at three of the seven abortion clinics in the state estimated that 30 percent to 70 percent of women chose to see ultrasound images. But they said it was uncommon for women to be dissuaded.

It had happened occasionally, they said, when a sonogram revealed a multiple pregnancy or when a woman was already deeply unsure about her choice...

“About half of women opt to view them,” said Diane Derzis, who owns the Birmingham clinic. “And I’ve never had one patient get off the table because she saw what her fetus looks like.”

One woman even reported that she found it reassuring...

“It just looked like a little egg, and I couldn’t see arms or legs or a face,” said Tiesha, 27, who chose to view her 8-week-old embryo before aborting it at the Birmingham clinic. “It was really the picture of the ultrasound that made me feel it was O.K.”

Interesting...

The Supreme Court is not a fucking beauty pageant.

For as strongly as I support a woman's right to choose abortion in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, a pregnancy gone wrong, or any number of other difficult life situations, there are indeed some pro-lifers who I really respect. It's a small number, but they're out there. (This is where I give a shout-out to the lovely Ms. Kelsey Hazzard, of Secular Pro-Life.)

There really are some pro-lifers out there who are genuinely interested in helping needy pregnant women. That is totally cool! Much as I may disagree with their views on whether or not abortion should be legal, I greatly respect that some people are actually willing to follow through on their rhetoric and help women who would rather not have abortions. (There are some very legitimate criticisms of some crisis pregnancy centers that I'll have to save for another time.)

Alas, Gingi Edmonds does not fall into the aforementioned category of pro-lifers I respect. I recently discovered the writings of Ms. Edmonds on Facebook. She is an avid anti-abortion activist and a self-proclaimed freelance photographer based out of California. (By the way, for a truly awesome freelance photographer, contact Jeremy White. He will not bother you about politics.) Edmonds also apparently holds very anti-gay views and as far as I can tell, has not an intelligent thought in her head. I'm not saying that to be mean, either! Just check out this post that I'm about to disembowel.

As those of us who follow politics instead of sports know, President Obama recently nominated Elena Kagan to fill Justice Stevens' spot on the Supreme Court. Kagan appears to be pro-choice, so abortion opponents are screaming about that, but not Gingi!

Apparently faced with a dearth of any original or constructive criticism of Kagan, Edmonds decided to exit onto the low road and attack Kagan for her lack of glamour and conventional feminine beauty.

Edmonds muses:

How can she be an aware and insightful interpreter of these complex and modern times if she's never heard of Crest Whitestrips?

What? Really? ... I mean... Seriously? Even if that was an attempt at satire, it was pretty bad satire, unless that's what passes for comedy among anti-abortion activists.

Let's read on, shall we?

All joking aside, I think the fact that she looks like a foot is extremely relevant. A person's cleanliness and tidiness (combed hair, brushed teeth, clean clothing) are a clear indicator of mental orderliness and tidiness. We don't have to view her un-Constitutional and pro-abortion record to get an indication that she is not fit to be in a position of leadership in this country.

To clarify, I don't like her simply because she's unattractive. I can accept that Elena Kagan is an ugly bull dike. But an ugly, pro-abort, socialist bull dike? Never.

Umm... There doesn't actually appear to be any evidence that Kagan lacks basic hygiene. Sure, she doesn't fit our ridiculous standards of conventional feminine beauty (Speaking of those who live in glass houses, neither does Edmonds), but she doesn't look dirty or unkempt. A quick Google image search reveals that Kagan actually looks rather well-groomed and tidy. And while we're judging a person's character based on superficial images found on Google, I think Kagan looks downright jolly.

Gingi, if you want to see some people who really don't give a shit about their appearance, I invite you to come to Enfield Superior Court any day between Monday and Friday. If you're lucky, you might see a DUI defendant wearing pajamas or an obviously unwashed domestic violence defendant wearing a t-shirt that reads "Fuck the police."

But maybe Edmonds is onto something. Maybe women who support abortion rights are uglier than women who oppose them. Just check out the heinous wench whose pic I posted above. :-P

Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!

Are you aware of this? Everybody Draw Mohammed day was initiated in response to the death threats that South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker received after airing an episode that purportedly showed the Muslim prophet Mohammed. The Muslim religion apparently forbids depictions of their prophet, and well, we all know how extremists get sometimes...

Well, Comedy Central censored the second part of the episode in question, which, in my humble opinion, is complete bullshit. I respect all people equally, regardless of faith, race, sexual orientation, or any other silly arbitrary qualities. (That is, of course, until they do something individually to piss me off, but let's not talk about Sarah Palin anymore). But I also think that hack job Comedy Central did on South Park amounts to nothing more than cowardly self-censorship.

Yes, some people used EDM Day as an excuse to be racist piles of shit, but there should be no prohibition on poking fun at religious differences among people and certainly no prohibition (self-imposed or otherwise) on simply depicting a religious figure. (And by the way, anybody who watched the South Park episode in question would know that they also depicted Buddha snorting cocaine, which is way more blasphemous than just showing a cartoon Mohammed.)

And I firmly believe that we must push those boundaries, push those envelopes. Nothing must be so sacred that we are willing to kill for it. I also believe in laughter. I think we should all be able to occasionally laugh at the differences amongst us. It keeps us human, keeps us humble. And if you can't laugh, you might cry; which would you rather do?

So with that, I'd like you to have a look at the little cartoon Mohammed guy in this post. I have little artistic ability, but my wonderfully talented boyfriend Dave has it in spades. He whipped up this little guy yesterday for Everybody Draw Mohammed day. Pretty obviously unoffensive, I'd say.

My $0.02 on the Blumenthal-Vietnam controversy

As some of you may know, Connecticut's Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal, was recently accused of lying about his military service after this NYTimes article. Essentially, they're saying he said he was in Vietnam when he wasn't. Blumenthal is running for Chris Dodd's Senate seat, and he's up against a clusterfuck of Republicans, including Linda McMahon and Rob Simmons, and Peter Schiff, who is... Well, who knows what the fuck Peter Schiff exactly is. The Tea Party endorsed him, even though he's not really a raving nut, but I probably still won't vote for him, although part of me strangely kind of wants to vote for him. (Of course, I'm moving to New York in about a month, so I may not vote in this thing anyway.)

So anyway, back to Blumenthal. I want to stress that I have no opinion on this, but I do want to share this little anecdote. I was covering the Memorial Day parade in Enfield last year, and there I happened to spy Mr. Blumenthal. I ambled over and started talking to him, so I could get a few quotes for my story. Mostly happy horseshit like, "This parade is great" and "We should honor our veterans."

He said something to the effect of "When I was in the Marines during Vietnam," and I off-handedly followed that up with, "Oh, did you go to Vietnam?" to which he replied that, no, he had not gone to Vietnam. He had simply served in the military while the Vietnam War was happening. I thought so little of that remark that I didn't even put it in my story. (I also thought it might sound kind of stupid to write, "Blumenthal, who served in the military during the Vietnam War but never went to war...")

So... There you have it: My Dick Blumenthal-Vietnam story. Make of it what you will. Or don't. Whatever.

Eating healthy has made me into a food snob, apparently.

The Hartford Courant reports that today is the ground-breaking for Connecticut's first Sonic restaurant, to be located in Wallingford.

On the one hand, it's about damn time, since they've been airing their commercials for years in this state with the nearest Sonic being in New Jersey.

On the other hand, I have a really hard time getting excited about another shitty fast food establishment.

Nothing but incoherent rage

Ugh. Talk about sexualizing little girls! I hate to be harsh (Oh, who am I kidding? I LOVE to be harsh!), but I think these girls' parents and dance teacher/s ought to be tarred and feathered. And then arrested for promoting child pornography. Or something. There is just no universe in which this is appropriate. Seriously.

"White privilege doesn't exist, so shut up about it already!"

On the heels of SB 1070 (Sorry, guys - I'm not opening that can of worms here), AZ Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law a bill prohibiting classes "that advocate ethnic solidarity, that are designed primarily for students of a particular race or that promote resentment toward a certain ethnic group."

Specifically, the bill targets the African-American, Mexican-American, and Native-American studies classes offered by the Tucson Unified School District.

From the link:

State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district's Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people.

Public schools should not be encouraging students to resent a particular race, he said.

Yeah, because it's totally a class in school that teaches minority students to resent white people.

He went on to say, "It's just like the old South, and it's long past time that we prohibited it."

If you don't understand what is wrong with that statement, then I suggest you brush up on your American history, specifically, your antebellum American history.

Crazy people everywhere

Check out this nut.

The FBI recently paid a visit to 27 year-old Erlyndon Joseph Lo at his Plano, TX, home. Why, you might ask? Why, for threatening a women's clinic. But it gets better. (Of course, it does!)

On Friday morning, Lo went to the Plano federal courthouse and filed a court document saying that at noon that day, he was planning to go to the Southwestern Women's Surgery Center in the 8600 block of Greenville Avenue in Dallas and "use deadly force to defend the innocent life of another human being," according to court documents.

You know, I almost wanted to play the vagina card and ask why you don't see any women pulling these types of crazy stunts... Until I remembered Shelly Shannon, who attempted to kill Dr. George Tiller in 1993.

For a double dose of crazy, check out Lo's own web site.

Abortion is WRONG in EVERY case, even when a woman is raped and she did not want to have a child, EVEN WHEN SHE WILL DIE IF SHE HAS THE CHILD, AND EVEN IF THE WOMAN WILL SURVIVE ONLY IF SHE KILLS THE BABY. That is the OBJECTIVE AND ABSOLUTE TRUTH. THAT IS THE ONLY CORRECT ANSWER.

Now, you know somebody is an extremist when they say something like that, especially in caps-lock.

If you visit that page, be warned: It contains massive, barely coherent blocks of poorly written text. It is completely beyond me how this guy could have finished law school when he can barely write a comprehensible paragraph.

Oh, just imagine if he and Orly Taitz got together! The fun that could be had!

For those who love spicy food...

Upon flipping through some old issues of Bust magazine, I realized something: Bust publishes recipes!! Of course, I cut them all out and pasted them into my rapidly growing cookbook. Dave and I recently made this really, really delicious jerk chicken, so I want to share it.

It's pretty easy. You make this marinade, throw the chicken in overnight, and then grill it or broil it. We chose to go with the former because it was a lovely weekend, and who doesn't want to fire up the grill when it's warm and sunny?

The marinade... Mix half a coffee cup of malt vinegar or balsamic vinegar (I chose the latter), a heaping handful of chopped onion, a regular handful of chopped garlic, a smidgen of dried thyme and dried oregano, and a giant plop of your favorite minced chiles. (Wash your hands after handling these! Or better yet, use gloves! Definitely don't rub your eyes right after!) Add a pinch each of ground cloves, cinnamon, and nutmeg, a healthy dose of salt and pepper, two good shots of Worcestershire sauce, and a couple shots of vegetable oil or olive oil. Mix this all up, toss your chicken in there, and leave it overnight.

A few notes: I know those aren't precise measurements, and honestly, I was kind of confused as to what 'coffee cup,' 'handful,' 'plop,' and 'pinch' should have meant. I kinda just winged it. As for the chiles, I used seven habanero peppers and three serrano peppers. We love spicy food at the condo. I chopped them all up and mixed the habaneros with a little honey before I mixed it into the marinade. To be perfectly frank, I went home that night genuinely worried that that amount of habanero could make one of my friends ill, but I was quite relieved to find that that was definitely not the case. We also tried this marinade with fish. It was spicy, but also nice and mild. (However, I think we may have overcooked the fish a little.)

Anyway, the chicken turned out to be really tender and extremely spicy (but not spicy enough to make anybody sick). If you love spicy food, I would highly, highly recommend you try this recipe. :)

In "The Cost of Sexual Freedom," Pegah Patra reminisces about romance in Iran, where women wait for the men to come calling, and marriage proposals, apparently, are a dime a dozen. She then laments contemporary courtship rituals in the United States, writing:

The last time I walked into a club with all my single girlfriends it occurred to me that I had just entered into a casting room and I was about to audition for some sort of sexy horror movie. Not only was every girl's breast implants barely covered by their tops but their short skirts made me want to take off my skinny jeans because I seemed too conservative and felt the pressure to fit in.

By stark contrast, she writes, in Iran, the courting couple's families get together before the couple walks into a room by themselves to decide whether they want to carry on the relationship. According to Patra, "although they both might feel aroused by the attraction they have for each other the man never loses his respect for the girl."

Patra goes on to mourn those 17% of men who remain unmarried today, compared with 6% in 1980 and then compares women to farm animals before concluding that this is the fault of feminism for making sex so easily available and pining for Gone With the Wind-style courtship. "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?" and all that bunk.

I don't even know where to begin... Well, first of all, if you're looking for your soulmate in a bar or club, you are probably going to be sorely disappointed. There's nothing wrong with bars (you know, aside from how frickin' expensive they all are), but the last time I checked, most folks I know go to bars to hang out, drink, and sometimes listen to a band or do some stupid shit. Plus, bars are full of pervs, creeps, and weirdos. Sure, you could find an excellent romantic partner in a pub. I'm not saying it's impossible, but if you're counting on it, you're probably going to be disappointed. The only thing I'm really hoping for when I walk into a bar is a good selection of beers, preferably a nice IPA.

Obviously, I think that sexual freedom is a good thing, generally speaking. Yes, it has its pitfalls, but I think it's pretty nice to live in a country where we enjoy relatively easy access to contraceptives, where we don't stone women for having pre-marital sex, and where we don't execute people just because they happen to enjoy sex with folks of the same gender.

As for the pitfalls, well, Patra speaks of men who dump women if they don't put out by the third date. She also writes, "Even if a girl is sexually open and available there is no guarantee that the man won't disappear without any reason or explanation within a short period of time."

You want to know something really crazy? Women do that, too! Yes, Pegah! There exist in today's society women who actually enjoy no-strings-attached sex, women who might dump a guy if they find him boring in the sack, and women who do "put out" by the third date! (We won't tell her that some women eagerly and willingly have sex even on the first date.)

Now, personally, casual sex really isn't my "thing," but who am I to tell somebody else they're wrong for enjoying it? Stay safe, take the necessary precautions, and make sure it's all consensual. That's all I ever ask of anybody. (Oh, and please be adults, too.) Though some old-fashioned folks may lament our society's acceptance of pre-marital sex (like people never boinked before marriage in the 1950s), frankly, I think it's a good thing. It's optional, of course, but for many people, it's important for bonding in a relationship and for determining whether that relationship has long-term viability.

As to that 6% versus 17% statistic (of men aged 40 to 44 who have never been married), I say we cut the fellas a little slack. It's (somewhat) more socially acceptable for women to reject marriage, and I know I'm not the only feminist to advocate this. Marriage is a lot of work (or so I hear). It's for some people, but it's not for others. The truth is, some men very much desire marriage with a person they love, and some women very much fear marriage. Why pressure anybody into choosing a lifestyle they don't want?

I'm also interested in how our social acceptance of gay folks might have impacted that statistic. Consider a few things here: approximately 10% of the general population is estimated to be gay; it's more acceptable now to be "out of the closet" than it was in 1980; and many, many gay men in the past would marry a woman in the hope of convincing either themselves or their families that they were straight (OK, this still happens, unfortunately). Taken all together, it kind of makes sense that more men today would choose not to marry, many possibly for this very reason.

To be perfectly honest, I "get" a little bit of where Patra is coming from. Nobody should feel like they have to "compete" for the love of their life. Nobody should feel pressured into going further sexually than they really want to. And people should have the ultimate respect for their partners and partners' families. But Patra also makes the unfortunate assumption that romance and true love are merely a thing of the past when that simply isn't the case. For as long as there are cads and players, there will also be good guys who genuinely want a chance at love. It's easy to feel disillusioned, but remember that feeling sorry for yourself won't get you out into the world to meet new people and self-pity is hardly attractive in either sex.

Oh, and one more thing. Gone With the Wind? Please. Women were property in Civil War-era America, even the rich ones like Scarlett O'Hara.

What I've been up to these days...

OK, OK... So I knew I was going to not keep at least one of my New Year's resolution, and I neglected this blog for approximately two months. What have I been doing during the time I should have been blogging? Oh, just the usual... Doing the reporter thing, cooking with Dave, reading, writing, hanging with my friends, getting into grad schools, and just generally living it up in (now) sunny CT.

Wait... Did I say grad school? Yes! Grad school!

This fall I will head off to Brooklyn College in Brooklyn, New York, of course. I was recently accepted into their MFA program in Television Production. Why TV production? Well, I love TV. Don't you?

Call me crazy, but I was sad to leave school, and I am beyond psyched to be going back. Of course, I'm stressed, as well, but that's to be expected. More developments will follow, naturally! And now, back to your regularly scheduled blogging...

A few brief thoughts on the Tim Tebow Superbowl ad

I didn't really blog about the Tim and Pam Tebow/Focus on the Family commercial that was set to air during the Superbowl, but I guess I'm getting around to it now - after I've finally seen the damn thing. (I don't watch football. No, not even the Superbowl.) If you haven't seen the ad, you can view it here.

After all the controversy surrounding the ad, all the groups that were going to bat for FOTF and the Tebows, and all the groups that were demanding it not be aired, I have to say: I feel oddly let down. They never mention the word "abortion" even once, and to be honest, I expected more vitriol, more venom. Maybe even the word "babykiller."

Nope. "He's my miracle baby!" and "Hur hur! I'm a cool football player, and I'm tackling my maw!" They played it safe. Of course, you can head over to Focus on the Family's web site and read all sorts of extra nonsense if you want to, but my doctor says it isn't healthy to have such high blood pressure at such a young age, so I'm going to personally refrain from doing so.

On a personal note, I was never of the opinion that the ad should not be shown. Focus on the Family paid for the spot, and I do believe in free speech, even if it's lame and douchey free speech. My only qualm was with whether Pam Tebow would say she was counseled to have an abortion whie working as a missionary in the Philippines. Abortion has been illegal in the Philippines since 1930, so it's highly unlikely a Filipino doctor would have counseled such a move.

This fish is delish!!

Some of you may recall my New Year's resolution to learn to cook a few decent meals. I'm pleased to report that said resolution is coming along splendidly. Dave and I have been making ourselves a nice dinner about once a week, and since it's really kind of a team effort, I'm not finding it to be such a repulsive chore. Dave likes to handle the meat; he says it makes him feel "manly" or something like that. This works out just fine for me because I'm grossed out by the feel of uncooked meat and because I like to chop vegetables, perhaps a little too much.

Anyway, a few days ago, we made this really yummy fish recipe that I found on the Food Network's web site, and I wanted to share it with you guys. It was astoundingly easy, though I wonder if that may have been more because we weren't competing with six other people for use of the kitchen. In any case, here it is...

Chili-Rubbed Tilapia with Asparagus and Lemon

Ingredients

* 2 pounds asparagus, tough ends trimmed, cut into 1-inch pieces
* 2 tablespoons chili powder
* 1/2 teaspoon garlic powder
* 1/2 teaspoon salt, divided
* 1 pound tilapia, Pacific sole or other firm white fish fillets (I think we used Atlantic cod instead.)
* 2 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil
* 3 tablespoons lemon juice (I thought this was too much lemon juice, but that may have been because we only cooked a pound of asparagus and didn't adjust accordingly.)

Directions:

Bring 1 inch of water to a boil in a large saucepan. Put asparagus in a steamer basket, place in the pan, cover and steam until tender-crisp, about 4 minutes. Transfer to a large plate, spreading out to cool.

Combine chili powder, garlic powder and 1/4 teaspoon salt on a plate. Dredge fillets in the spice mixture to coat. Heat oil in a large nonstick skillet over medium-high heat. Add the fish and cook until just opaque in the center, gently turning halfway, 5 to 7 minutes total. Divide among 4 plates. Immediately add lemon juice, the remaining 1/4 teaspoon salt and asparagus to the pan and cook, stirring constantly, until the asparagus is coated and heated through, about 2 minutes. Serve the asparagus with the fish.

My reaction to the Scott Roeder guilty verdict

As I sit here in front of my laptop, tap-tap-tapping away and defrosting after a subzero morning spent in the parking lot of Planned Parenthood, I have to feel especially grateful for yesterday's guilty verdict in the trial of Scott Roeder.

If you don't know already, Scott Roeder is the anti-abortion extremist who walked into the Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita, Kansas, on May 31, put a gun to Dr. George Tiller's head, and pulled the trigger, before threatening witnesses and then fleeing the scene. Roeder was fortunately apprehended only three hours after the shooting, and on Friday, a jury of his peers found him guilty of first-degree murder.

The jury made the right decision. There was some concern by pro-choice groups that Roeder might be convicted on a lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter, but Judge Warren Wilbert rightly ruled that the jury could not consider that lesser charge in their deliberations. They deliberated for only 37 minutes, which shouldn't have been as surprising as it was to me. Still, I couldn't help but feel a huge wave of relief.

I firmly believe that if Roeder had been convicted on a lesser charge - or dog forbid, acquitted - not only would that have bolstered the convictions of those extremists who believe any measure of force is necessary to stop abortion, but he would have committed further acts of violence against abortion providers and clinic employees and volunteers. The possibility that he could face anything less than life in prison after openly admitting to murdering Tiller in his place of worship (something that even this "hardened atheist" thinks is a supremely dick move) frightened me. And it should have frightened you, too.

CNN's article on the story features some highlights of Roeder's testimony, and I'd recommend that you watch it. It's clear that he is a mentally unstable lunatic who truly believed that murder was justified to achieve his social and political ends. He is a threat to society, and thankfully, he will be removed from society now.

Now to be fair, most anti-abortion activists and organizations have condemned Roeder's actions, as well they should have. A few select voices refused to either condemn or condone what he did, and that's a bit unsettling, but I'll grant that most abortion opponents do want to work within the system to outlaw abortion. I still fundamentally disagree with them, but that's mildly respectable nonetheless. No abortion opponent should want this guy on their side, and I don't blame you few rational pro-lifers for disassociating yourselves with Roeder, though I have to wonder to what extent the inflammatory rhetoric used by many otherwise non-violent right-wingers could inspire similar actions in the future. It's something to be wary of, I believe.

Scott Roeder is not a martyr. He is a menace, and I'm glad to see that justice was dealt swiftly in this case. I can only hope now that he serves the rest of his life behind bars.

More chuch-state separation bullshit...

I could only characterize this bit of news as bizarrely inappropriate. Essentially, the U.S. armed forces have been using combat rifle sights inscribed with references to Bible verses in, of all place, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The inscriptions are subtle and appear in raised lettering at the end of the stock number. Trijicon's rifle sights use tritium, a radioactive form of hydrogen, to create light and help shooters hit what they're aiming for.

Markings on the Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight, one of the company's most advanced models, include "JN8:12," a reference to John 8:12: "When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, 'I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.'"

The Trijicon Reflex sight is stamped with 2COR4:6, a reference to part of the second letter of Paul to the Corinthians: "For God, who said, 'Let light shine out of darkness,' made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ."

The company has apparently been doing this for the last 30 years. Obviously, I'm not complaining about what the company chooses to do, but there is something unsettling about our soldiers using guns inscribed with Biblical references in a military conflict in the Middle East. Here is one extremely good point against it...

Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, says the biblically inscribed sights could give the Taliban and other enemy forces a propaganda tool: that American troops are Christian crusaders invading Muslim countries.

It certainly doesn't help our case that we're trying to foment peace and democracy in the Middle East and not engage Muslims in a holy war. That's for sure.

Ultimately, it may not be the most egregious violation of the establishment clause and it may not be outright proselytizing, but it's still not good. As Weinstein points out in this article, there is no question how Americans would react if references to the Koran were inscribed on rifles used by our military. My assessment: They would flip their shit and demand that the references either be removed or that the military contract with a different company. Why should Christianity get preferential treatment?

Plus, as my friend Kristen Tsetsi pointed out (albeit, on my Facebook page), it's worth considering that not all American soldiers are Christians, and that also, we're not engaged in a holy war.

Via Friendly Atheist...

April 18, 2010 is apparently "Pray4Trig" Day, in which participants pray for God to cure Trig Palin's Down Syndrome. I cannot make this shit up.

Atheists and others who hate God like to claim that He only “answers prayers” where divine intervention can’t be proven. They make websites about it, like Why Won’t God Heal Amputees? They say that God won’t answer the prayers of amputees because He isn’t real!

Okay...

With enough congregations joining up, I have no doubt there will be sufficient people with genuine faith in God (instead of lip service) to ensure that Trig Palin is healed of Down Syndrome.

Continue...

Also, it is known publicly that Trig Palin indeed has Down Syndrome. Science has no way to undo this condition, which is the result of an extra chromosome; but God can. When Trig Palin is found to be miraculously healed, everyone but the most hardened atheist will have to acknowledge God’s Majesty!

You don't say!!

I'm sorry, but this "hardened atheist" believes that folks with Down Syndrome can lead equally happy and fulfilling lives as people without handicaps. The only thing Trig Palin needs to be cured of is his mother.

History in the making.

The Prop 8 trial, Week 1 in review.

I certainly don't want to speak too soon, but if the defense is really citing Carrie Prejean and "Will and Grace" against eminent researchers? Weak. Really, really weak.

I love punctuation!

Some brilliant genius has finally come up with a punctuation mark to indicate sarcasm!

I'm not being sarcastic, either. This makes me genuinely excited.

Creationist lies, part one.

I often hear creationists attempt to debunk evolution by saying something to the effect of, "If evolution were real, you would see proof of it. You would see a half-human-half-monkey if evolution were really happening!"

Ok, ignoring the fact that evolution takes place over millions of years and therefore happens very, very slowly, they're just plain wrong. Want some proof?

Killer whales are evolving into two different species, scientists now say.

Creationism: 0
Evolution: 1

New Year's resolution success!! Part 1!!

As you may or may not recall, I made a New Year's resolution to learn to cook at least a few halfway decent meals. Well, my first experiment in this endeavor has been successful!

Wednesday night, Dave and I made this spicy chicken curry.

It could have used more chicken, maybe more jalapenos, and probably fewer potatoes. (Then again, maybe we just selected huge potatoes.) But overall, I was extremely pleased (and surprised) with the result. I know, I know... I probably shouldn't have been surprised that it was actually edible, let alone tasted good.

We're going to try to do this about once a week. Does anybody have a good recipe for salmon???

Not quite, Rush, not quite...

When I heard the other day that conservative blowhard Rush Limbaugh was hospitalized in Hawaii with chest pains, the jokes came way too easily.

"He had a nasty fall after tripping over his own ego."

"He was on his own personal fact-finding mission to Hawaii, and when he finally saw Obama's birth certificate, he had a heart attack."

No, I didn't wish for his death. I did, however, wish for his doctor to be a gay, black woman who volunteers for Planned Parenthood and ACORN in her spare time. At the very least, I hoped that he might "see the light" and have some kind of revelation about being a decent person, but alas, that never happened.

When Rush was released, he issued this very predictable statement: "The treatment I received here wa$ the be$t that the world ha$ to offer. ... I don't think there'$ one thing wrong with the American health care $y$tem. It i$ working ju$t fine."

You missed the point, Rush. Yes, I agree: America does have some very fine doctors and hospitals and medical technologies ... if you can afford them! The problem with our health care is not necessarily quality of care, but rather access to care.

Apparently, tests showed nothing was wrong with his heart, except, as my friend Mr. Dan pointed out, being 100 sizes too small. Time to let that hate start sitting on your chest again, eh, Rush??