Yeah, it's a little warm

"Don't melt," my best friend warned me on Sunday. Sunday, which was about 10 degrees cooler and, when the humidity was under 50% still.

Yesterday was pretty warm, I will say that. The temperature gage in the car said it was 103 at one point (but I'm pretty sure it didn't really get above 95 ambient temp). So, I wore light clothing, cotton undies, and sunscreen. I, for one, was fine with the heat (still am, we're in Day 2 of the Extreme Heat Advisory), but I've noticed a few people aren't.

But that's just how things are in this area. If it's raining, some not-insignificant portion of the population is whining about the rain. If it's cold, some portion is whining about the cold, and the anchors on the news are asking the weather man when it's gonna warm up. If it's overcast and 65 degrees, some portion is whining about there not being enough sun. If it's sunny and warm, some segment is whining about how it's too hot or too bright or too... humid. Because in Seattle, most people can't tell the difference between humidity and sweating.

I've figured out why this is: Seattle is full of people who always need something to complain about, and the weather is a perfect topic because you can't do a damn thing about it except either enjoy it or whine about it. (Personally, I'm more interested in complaining about the complainers than this gorgeous weather!) So, it's the same people who keep saying "it's too hot" or "it's too cold" or "I hate the rain", wah wah wah. The SAME PEOPLE! All the do is whine. And you know, I can't handle it, Seattle! Grow up! If you don't like the fact that we have seasons here, move somewhere that doesn't like California or the Yukon Territories!

Anyway, this so-called Heat Wave (and as much as people on the East Coast or in the Midwest or especially the South will tell us that we're whiny pussies for thinking that four days of 90+ degree heat and 50%+ humidity, it is unusual for the area), is actually quite pleasant for us sun worshippers who really only live here because this is where our families settled down. Of course, once it's over, we're gonna whine, wondering where the sun has gone.

Remember this?

:D

Why do poor people get to have things?

I encounter this argument constantly when discussing social issues. Some right wing asshole will whine about how a woman using food stamps to buy her groceries is clacking away on her Blackberry with her recently manicured nails. "I can't afford that $400 phone, so how can someone on state assistance afford it? Shouldn't they be putting that money into their grocery bill?"

Or -- and this one is my favorite, I encountered it while I was in college full time, working two jobs, and receiving food stamps so that I could pay my rent and feed myself -- "do you have a cell phone? internet? cable? Surely you could use the money for that on food instead of using my tax money".

People who have never been poor don't understand one basic aspect of being fucking poor: you get really good at getting shit for free. Using my own example, I had a cell phone and internet access, yes, my parents paid for my phone, and I was using free dial-up from a service that offered dial-up to people for free without any sort of registration. I made plenty of sacrifices (this was in 2006 people! I was still using dial-up until 2007!), and actually wasn't spending money on these things.

And of course, the woman with the newly manicured nails and "expensive" cell phone (this example I heard on a radio show once), probably got the phone for free when she signed up for the cell phone plan, and there are other ways to pay for a manicure than with money. Maybe she had a girlfriend who worked in a nail salon and offered her a trade. Maybe she worked in a nail salon making minimum wage and one of the perks of her job (a perk that didn't do anything to feed her children) was free manicures.

People who have never been poor make a lot of assumptions about people who are poor. A lot of them. Chief among those is that poor people aren't allowed to have nice things. Ever. It doesn't matter where it came from (a gift from a parent or relative? free gift with purchase? it's actually one of the shittiest phones offered by the company she signed up with?), poor people aren't allowed to have nice things. They should sell those things and use that money to feed themselves. Except that there aren't a whole hell of a lot of things that you can do without phone or internet access (or a car if you live in a 'burbs), but still you hear the whining "why are poor people allowed to have things?"

It's actually really annoying to have someone who has no clue about your circumstances try to lecture you on what your priorities should be. My income is pretty minimal right now, but I have to have a phone so that I can keep in contact with my customers. I have to have internet access so that I can maintain my business. It's not right to make assumptions about someone circumstances when the only real qualification you have to lecture someone on priorities is having a little bit more disposable income.

A commentary about car commercials

Kia, the South Korean car company, has a new commercial out. I don't know if you've seen it, but the basic gist is that the company has been around for 15 years. C'mon, what do people anthropomorphise more than their cars?

I would say that there's some kind of cultural divide going on here, but I'm pretty sure that's a load of crap because we all know that an American ad agency came up with that commercial. Which makes me wonder if American ad companies really know anything about Americans. Seriously, what were you like when you were 15? I know what I was like, and I do not trust a car company that is willing to boast about being 15.

At 15, you're way past the cute phase. Not only that, you're not far enough past puberty that your body has evened itself out. Acne, hair's still uneven, you're all awkward. Yeah, those are all qualities I want in a car. The upholstry's in places it's never really been before, the car's got acne; sure it's got a GPS unit, but all it ever says is "you're not the boss of me!" Your car hasn't acted this way since it was three, and the worst part about it is the thing's not even old enough to drive!

Awesome. A car that's not old enough to drive. Do you really want to advertise that?

RIP MJ

Michael Jackson, the undisputed King of Pop, died today. I was doing a color facial, when I got a text message from a friend. Later, when I was outside BS-ing with my client (and very good friend) when her fiance came outside and told us it was confirmed, he was dead. When I got home, I played "Thriller" on the big stereo.

Because I can't post the video, which is undoubtedly the best music video ever, it's in the link. But here's a group of prisoners in the Philipines practicing the Thriller dance.

Now, I know, not everyone loved MJ like I do, (and some are downright creepy in their devotion, I just love his music), but today is a sad day in music as we know it.

Jon&Kate plus divorce lawyers

It seems like everywhere I look lately, whatever source isn't covering the shitstorm in Iran (it's like a sandstorm, but with bullets and protesters screaming, in Farsi, "Death to the Dictator"), is babbling on and on about Jon and Kate Gosselin of that terribly-horribly-awful really bad show, "Jon & Kate plus 8" (which has evolved into "Jon & Kate plus 8+, Jon's mistress, Kate's temper, and divorce lawyers) -- j'accuse Yahoo! News.

What I don't understand about this whole thing, is why these people have subjected and exploited their children to be on the teevee, knowing full well how the lives of multitudes of child actors have turned out (only "Blossom" has had a productive life). But what really baffles me is why people care so much about Jon and Kate Gosselin.

For those who are better at avoiding entertainment news than I am, Jon had an affair, Kate got her picture on the cover of some rag spanking one of her dozens of children and that child "screaming in pain" (according to the Entertainment Tonight clip that was played on The Soup this week), and they're going to allow their messy divorce to be fodder for their stupid tv show.

First of all, this isn't interesting, *coughYahoocough*, everybody's family is fucked up. I've been through tons of dramatic family bullshit, but I don't think it should be on the teevee to entertain people whose lives are temporarily not that fucked up. Secondly, they're not providing a service, they aren't providing an example. And instead of delivering even the entertainment value of a day time talk show or soap opera, all that's really going on for the audience is plain old fashioned schadenfreude, the most amusing and ironic part of which is that they show is owned and aired by the ABC/Disney "Family" channel.

I don't know how exploiting your children and the pain of your partner for your own personal celebrity and gain equates to family values in a post-9/11 world, but I do know that despite whatever drama goes on in my family at least I have the character not to allow the falling out to go down on live television. There's a possibility that all of this is just a publicity stunt, or that those children are just actors, and Kate is really a washed up soap actress teevee who got plastic surgery after her last remaining Daytime Emmy disintegrated from exposure to sunlight; that Jon is just a reject from American Idol who managed to get a really good agent... but still. What the fuck, America?

Haven't posted in a while...

To my loyal readers: I apologize.

I haven't had a lot of time to blog cause I've been working the MK business and enjoying the sun. OMG. Sun. In SEATTLE of all places! (And in completely unrelated news, started my Yoga Teacher Training.)

But, in case you've been living under a rock (or don't use the Twitters), here's the Tweet-Stream for the demonstrations and whatnot going on in Iran. All I can really say is: INTENSE. There's a lot of random chatter, but the images and videos are ...just read it. #IranElection

I'll try to generate some content in the next couple of days in regards to domestic issues (I'm gonna leave the Iranalysis to the experts).

For now, I must escape into Mythbusters.

I have never had an abortion

I just want to be upfront about it. Never having been through that does not make me better or smarter or more catious than those women who have been through it. It doesn't make me more righteous in the eyes of some deity who may or may not give a fuck about the contents of my uterus. I have never had an abortion, not even a pregnancy scare. I've been lucky. I got a good education, and I had a mom who was open about the whole birth control thing.

However, I have made the choice. If I ever did become pregnant I would have an abortion. There are a number of factors, and I assure you that it's not a decision I made lightly, but it is my choice to make and no one else's. Similarly, I do not have the right to make that decision for any other woman.

Why, exactly, did I just tell you that? Why would I post something so private on the internet like that? Especially this topic?

Well, ladies and gentlemen, we can't stay silent on this topic. The women I know who have had abortions didn't come to those conclusions lightly, and they shouldn't be shamed for undergoing a legal proceedure that made it possible for them to be the women they are now. They are, and were, in the words of Dr. George Tiller, "emotionally, mentally, morally, spiritually and physically competent to struggle with complex health issues", and shouldn't be treated as though they are or were anything other than that.

I went to the vigil for Dr. Tiller in Seattle tonight. The sun shown on all of us there: women and men, of all ages, creeds, and colors. Some children were enjoying the opportunity to walk barefoot in the wading pool at Cal Anderson Park. All of these people are pro-choice, anti-violence, and believe that women have the right to make up their own minds about what goes on in their bodies and it's not a question of whether abortion is moral or not, it's a question of who we value more, who contributes more: the woman with the uterus, or the zygot/fetus that inhabits it. Do we value women who are not only able to create and sustain human life, but also contribute to society as entrepreneurs, comedians, scientists, educators, and yeah, moms? Or do we value a glob of cells that can do nothing and be nothing without the woman inside whose uterus that glob of cells becomes human?

As a society, we need to decide which is more important. For me, women are more important. And I'm pretty sure you feel the same way, whatever your moral givings or misgivings are in regards to abortion. Most people in this country think that abortion should be legal at least some of the time. Those who don't are often times liars and full of shit, because they'll also back the forced sterilization of women of color, or forced abortions for the women who are essentially slaves in the Marianas Islands (*coughcoughTomDelaycough*). Those who don't believe that women are more important than globs of cells will kill doctors. That's not pro-life.

Most people frame this as two-sided issue, but as it is with many complex issues (such as healthcare), there are far more than two sides. The main groups in this are pro-choice individuals (callously called "pro-abortion" by some), pro-life individuals, and the anti-choice wing-nuts with whom pro-lifers are often confused. Being pro-life does not mean that you are a wing-nut who will kill a doctor for your ideology; it doesn't mean that you picket doctor's offices and health centers and try to intimidate women into not having their abortions.

Being pro-life, actually, is pretty similar to being pro-choice. Most pro-life people that I know seek to protect the life of the mother and the future-child. They believe in preventing unwanted pregnancies just like pro-choicers do, but think that adoption is a better solution. The pro-life people that I know do, however, think that there are some circumstances where abortion is at least an understandable action to take (although, they may not like the idea).

The thing here is that people who are pro-life have a lot more in common with people who are pro-choice than those who are anti-choice. Pro-choice people value life. Anti-choice people don't. The assassination of Dr. Tiller should be evidence enough of that. In fact, you can be pro-life and pro-choice. It's really easy, you just say "I believe that whatever a woman does with her uterus and its contents are her business", and if you want to add "I personally would not have an abortion", that's completely up to you, but it's time that we came to a real consensus in this country and decided that, in reality, a woman contributes a whole lot more to society when her right to bodily autonomy are recognized and encouraged.

As I've said before, if you don't like abortion, don't have one. I'm pretty sure most people reading this are enlightened enough to realize, however, that their experience isn't universal and that whatever they feel is the morality or immorality of abortion, the truly moral thing to do is to respect women's rights and not let anyone else choose for them either abortion or carrying a pregnancy to term.

Now say it with me, I know you can do it: whatever a woman does with the contents of her uterus is her business.

If you're pro-life too, add that last bit.

And, oh yeah, sometimes women who have abortions would rather have kept their pregnancies, but those pregnancies went awry. So don't judge a woman who has had an abortion.

Today in FUCKING OBVIOUS

Poor people have to pay more for basic necessities.

While I'm glad that someone is finally writing about this most obvious fact of poor life, it's so fucking obvious I'm kinda pissed at the class privilege that comes out in this article. Groceries cost more in poorer areas of town; not having a washing machine means you have to pay to do your laundry -- if you live in an apartment building that has a washer/dryer on site, not only do you have to pay the electricity to run the machine, you also have to pay for use of the machine; transportation costs more and EVERYTHING takes longer to do. Time is money people! And most middle class people don't realize these facts of poverty.

Just read the article.

New art at RachelSetzer.com

Check it out.

Oh boy! Class privilege survey!

Stolen from Daisy.

How many privilege-steps would you have to make?

Step into Social Class (this is an updated version)
A Social Class Awareness Experience
Will Barratt, Meagan Cahill, Angie Carlen, Minnette Huck, Drew Lurker, Stacy Ploskonka
Indiana State University
© 2007

(NOTE: it is taken for granted that you are in college or did attend, since this test was first given to college students.)

Introduction:

An activity designed to help the participants gain awareness of the vast range of social class that exists within themselves and others. This has been updated based on the wide range of feedback we received as this was becoming a popular experience.

Equipment:

A big room with space to move for all participants
Chairs to sit for discussion

Rules:

Pay attention to how you feel. Angry, sad, happy, winner, loser . . .
No talking – we will talk about this a lot when it is over
Line up here and take a step forward of about 1 (one) foot or one foot length for every fact that applies to you.

For blogs, bold the following facts that apply to you:

Part I, when you were in college:

Father went to college
Father finished college
Mother went to college [She dropped out before I was born and finished via correspondence courses when I was in high school.]
Mother finished college
Have any relative who is an attorney, physician, or professor. (no blood relatives, but do have in-laws) [Well, was a lawyer...step relative...]
Were the same or higher class than your high school teachers
Had more than 50 books in your childhood home
Had more than 500 books in your childhood home
Were read children's books by a parent
Had lessons of any kind before you turned 18 [Voice, junior high]

Had more than two kinds of lessons before you turned 18
The people in the media who dress and talk like me are portrayed positively [I don't know how to answer this... yes and no]
Had a credit card with your name on it before you turned 18
Your parents (or a trust) paid for the majority of your college costs [I wish]
Your parents (or a trust) paid for all of your college costs [I wish]
Went to a private high school
Went to summer camp
Had a private tutor
If you have been to Europe
Family vacations involved staying at hotels [But they were few and far between]
Your clothing was all bought new before you turned 18
Your parents bought you a car that was not a hand-me-down from them
There was original art in your house when you were a child [It was my art.]

Had a phone in your room before you turned 18 [I even had a cell phone a month or so before I turned 18]
You and your family lived in a single family residence [Eventually]

Your parent(s) owned their own house or apartment before you left home
You had your own room as a child [Most of the time.]
Participated in an SAT/ACT prep course
Had your own TV in your room in High School
Owned a mutual fund or IRA in High School or College
Flew anywhere on a commercial airline before you turned 16
Went on a cruise with your family
Went on more than one cruise with your family
Your parents took you to museums and art galleries as you grew up [Pacific Science Center REPRESENT!]
You were unaware of how much heating bills were for your family [I did know, however, that there was a time when a lot of our food came from a food bank.]

...

Discussion:
What were the feelings that you had during this experience? Were you angry? -- Honestly, no. I was shocked at some things because I wondered if anyone actually got to go on multiple cruises, and own an IRA or mutual fund as a child. I suppose if I had done this with other people I'd gone to college with I might have reacted differently.

Part II, in childhood:

If your body does not bear long-term signs of malnutrition.
If you had orthodontia.
If you saw a doctor for anything other than emergencies or school-mandated shots. [Frankly, I consider not being able to walk an emergency, but chiropractic is a luxury... as is having a mother who has some clue about medicine]
If you heated your home with clean-burning fuels or had properly vented heating.
If you grew up in a house without vermin.
If you had running water.
If you had a basement or foundation under your house.
If you had an indoor toilet.
If your parents and immediate family were outside the criminal justice system.
If you yourself remained outside the criminal justice system.
If your parents had a new car.
If you never went barefoot so that you could ’save your shoes for school.’
If your parents never argued in front of you about having enough money for food to last out the month. [Aaand another step back because I only had the one parent who cried silently in her room because she was scared about not having enough money for food to last out the month.]
If you ate hunted and fished meat because it was a recreational activity rather than as the major way to stock a freezer.
If your laundry was done at home in a washer rather than in a lavandaria. (Laundromat.)
If your hair was cut by a professional barber or hair stylist instead of your parent.

31 privilege points! Go mom!

Daisy wonders why the test doesn't seem to care about family relationships. I have to say that I was kind of insulted that the test assumed that my parents were together in order to argue in front of me about money. Now, not all of the bolded points were true for me throughout my entire childhood, (there were fleas in one of the houses I grew up in; for most of my childhood we lived in multiple family residences and moved around a lot for various reasons), looking at this I have to recognize that I was very lucky as a child, and have been since.

The other thing is that my mom had the opportunity to be extremely resourceful. Yes, we technically went to museums because my mom made sure that we were members of the Pacific Science Center, and going there was a real treat; we were also involved in Girl Scouts (which I was told, as a kid, was also a privilege) so we were able to go on educational outings for a reasonable price with my troop (but I usually missed out on school field trips because we didn't have the money, but I only learned that that was the reason years and years later when I started being able to connect the dots), and because my mom was troop leader, I'm certain that she often organized events that were more affordable in consideration of our circumstances as well as those of other girls' whose families were in similar straits.

So, I don't know... privileged, yes. Lucky, yes. But there wasn't a second that I took it for granted. I even remember looking at the prices of things before I told my mom that I wanted it. Now, I recognize how lucky I was because I didn't really know what was going on most of the time.

Anyway, them's my thoughts... feel free to share your own.

I'm not sure what this means

Should I feel old, cool, or some other emotion when a line from an Offspring song is used as the subtitle of a story on the Rachel Maddow Show?

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

A break from random blogging for some content

I can't tell you why the only content I've been posting today are images and little snippets that only really amuse me; I can't tell you because I don't know. I'm having a slow day... and not slow as in the day isn't going by very fast... just mentally deficient and sleepy so I'm baking a loaf of bread and sitting around the house because it's been a while since I've done either of these things.

Another thing I haven't done in a while is put in my two cents about some things that I've been hearing a lot about on the televisions and internets (aside from swine flu, which the CDC has now confirmed 9 cases in Washington state with another 36 "probable" cases -- I'm still not worried, frankly and my advice remains: wash your damn hands).

So, I'll start with Justice Souter's impending retirement. President Obama has to appoint a woman to replace Souter. That's pretty much all I have to say. I've been working too hard lately to pay much attention to judicial nominations, but I'm sure that you are bright enough to have your own comments on Souter below.

Next: Asher Roth. I was over at my non-maternal twin's house last week and heard the song "I love college". Now, as far as hip-hop and rap go, I don't know Akon from Wy-Clef (although, I totally dig the studio versions of Kanye's "Heartless"), but I know a douchebag when he brags about getting a drunk 19-year-old naked (and as memory serves, when I was 19 that was no big feat... hell, it still isn't). Racialicious has an even more in-depth take on this guy than him simply being a douche: he's presenting his white upper-middle-class privilege rapper style as an alternative to blackness. There's a quote of Roth where he goes so far as to say:

“Culturally, Em[inem] was almost a black guy. My background is more stereotypically white.”

Make of that what you will (white=not poor, not picked on, privileged), but personally, I'm pretty fucking offended. I don't know what this guy thinks he's trying to say, but the majority of poeple living in poverty are white (because the majority of the population is white, dur), so when he says "stereotypically white", I really don't know what he's trying to say except that he thinks he's better than people whose backgrounds aren't "stereotypically white", whatever that means.

Finally, last week, Iowa Congressman Steve King wasted some valuable tax-payer time ranting about various kinds of -philias as a reason why Congress shouldn't pass the new Federal Hate Crimes bill (named for Matthew Shepard). Well, take a look...

Now, King wants to exempt pedophiles from being dubbed a "protected class" under new hate crimes legislation because, as we all know, pedophile is a sexual orientation. (And he can't follow the rational thought on the other side.) I also don't think it dignifies a congressman to call someone's sexual organs "plumbing" on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Feel free to throw in your two cents on any of this in the comments...

Dear World...

Dane Cook is not funny. Please stop giving him comedy specials, lead roles in movies, and any recognition whatsoever because he is not funny and hasn't been since 2001.

Thank you.

And now for something completely different

Monday Doggy Blogging

Stew, and his dad, are both natural skeptics (although, it's hard for a pug to be skeptical), so everything I say is met with this expression.

Oh no! Swine flu in Washington! Everybody PANIC!!!

Oh wait, not really. 14 suspected cases.

May I remind you that as of July 2008, the population of Washington State was 6,549,224. If we round up to 7,000,000, 1 in every half million people in the State of Washington may have been infected thusfar. That is, if those cases of swine flu really are swine flu. According to the CDCs' website on this thing, there haven't been any confirmed cases of swine flu in the state of Washington yet.

Moreover, there have been 141 confirmed cases in the country, with 1 death. That is a less than 1% mortality rate, and this thing isn't exactly spreading like wildfire. It's been going on for a week and we've had fewer than 150 confirmed cases. In a week. That's not very much, if you're at all familiar with air-borne pathogens.

Okay, so, let's do some math here.

We'll say the population of the US is holding steady at 300,000,000 (three hundred million), and we'll say that there really have been 150 cases. That means 1 person in every two million people in this country has caught the swine flu.

Now, two million is 2,000 thousands. So what do these numbers mean? I'll use some local examples.

• Safeco Field, where the Mariners play, holds somewhere around 50,000 people. So, if you cram four people into every single seat in Safeco Field, ONE PERSON in the entire four-times-over-capacity staduim will be infected with this swine flu.
• In the city of Seattle, (population just under 600,000) less than one third of a person would be infected.

So, yeah, as the numbers currently stand, one in every two million people in the whole country has swine flu. And, I know, with more people infected, the rate of infection will go up, of course. But let's just say that the virus capable of causing a pandemic is a teeny-tiny-teeny-little underacheiver when it only infects 141* people in 5 days. I'm pretty sure Wilt Chamberlain spread faster than that.

That's not to say you shouldn't take precautions. You should ALWAYS wash your hands with hot water and soap, and if you're immune-compromised you should do it more often. Keep the rest of your body clean, including your fingernails, and if you bite your fingernails (like my Schmoogie does) FUCKING STOP IT! It's gross, and you're going to get sick.

Take your vitamins, get enough sleep, cover your mouth when you cough or sneeze, eat a balanced diet, and all of those other things your mom got on your ass about when you were a kid. Moms are the CDC's infantry, you know. Also, don't lick or kiss your classmates or coworkers (especially if they are sick), and again, wash your damn hands. (Most people don't seem to realize that our hands touch everything, and that everything everywhere is covered in germs. I repeat: YOUR HANDS ARE COVERED IN GERMS.)

So, enough with the panic, alright? The Seattle Erotic Arts Festival is this weekend. Go enjoy some penis art instead of freaking out about a virus that is affecting 1 in every 2,000,000 people in this country.

__________________________________
*Yes, I realize I am flaunting my American privilege by with this statement. There have been 331 cases in 11 countries, according to The Who... I mean, the WHO. Now, I don't have a calculator big enough to figure out how many billions of people that is per case (bearing in mind that there are 6 billion plus people on this damn planet, and over 200 countries). So, when we look at the global outlook on this stupid thing, we find that the panic is even less founded than previously thought. Just wash your goddamn hands, okay?

Monday Friday Doggy Blogging

Glamor pug! Digital image (natch), photoshopped for the Ye Olde Pugge on a Chaire look (in the photography world, we call that sepia toning). This'll be going in my "what I did over the weekend" file. But it's just so adorable (a-DOOR-AH-bluh) I had to post it today... plus I didn't post any Stewart on Monday cause I was really busy being away from my computer.