Friday, April 25, 2008

Objectification and Homo sapiens sapiens



Is there ever an exchange between two potential romantic partners in which one of them does NOT objectify the other (or him/herself)?

I'm starting to think the answer is no.

Articles like this one or this one only serve to confirm my hypothesis.

Usually it's the woman getting objectified, even if she's doing it herself.



But men do it too, if they think it will win them the prize.



I'd like to have more faith in . . . [I'll say] "humans" (for the sake of gender-neutrality--since men aren't the only ones who objectify . . . )



But my faith dwindles with every passing single year.

Sometimes, when a gal says yes to your invite to go dancing, all it means is that she wants to go dancing (and that you don't seem too gross).

Why do you have to turn it into a mating ritual? That puts me on guard, and then I feel like I have to divide my attention from dancing to warding off your meddling hands. Not fun. And buying me drinks--while all fine and good--isn't fair if you're just trying to get me drunk. Not nice.

Do you really think it matters to me that you think I'm cute? Do you think that this repetitive proclamation will eventually get me to collapse into your bed? C'mon man, be more creative than that! How 'bout we exchange some witty repartée en français ou bien auf Deutsch? Why not ask me what I think about our cultural view of aesthetics? Or our ethical duty to animals and/or the environment? Don't you want to know my opinion of the trendification of green?

No, you don't. You just want to get me drunk and prostrate. Schade. Pauvre petit.



I feel disturbed. Maybe angry, but that sounds extreme. But maybe angry.

If being objectified by men is universal for women, however, then I shouldn't be bothered by it. N'est-ce-pas? It would mean that it's built into men's DNA; that it's just a normal biological process whose purpose is to propagate the species.

But then again, if human science can extend people's lives waaay beyond what it probably should be, build nano-robots that can control a person's actions from inside their veins, and selectively inhibit the re-uptake of neurotransmitters, then you'd think that "normal biological processes" would have less impact on human behavior than they would on, say, a pig's.

Which I suppose begs the question: are male Homo sapiens sapiens* biologically more akin to Sus scrofa scrofa than are female H.s.s.?

It makes one wonder.

*excluding you

Saturday, April 12, 2008

Limbo

Maybe I shouldn't watch movies. At least not the serious kind. They make me think/feel too much.

Limbo was the title of the John Sayles flick I saw this evening.

I won't get into its specifics, other than to say that it was well-written and -acted, though the ending was frustrating. This blog entry isn't about the movie Limbo.

But apparently I'm sensitive or easily manipulated, because once the dvd returned to the main menu, I was left there on the sofa feeling...left. Or maybe not so much left as just...isolated. Which, come to think of it, I guess I am, here in Bumfuck.

But sometimes, after watching a movie with a frustrating ending (that kind of leaves you in, uh, limbo), you just want to curl up on someone's lap and let them pet your hair. Or offer to make you a cup of tea. Or make tea for someone who isn't just you.

For a moment, I had to remind myself it was April, because I started to get that panicky mid-October feeling.

Thank god for April. Though June would be okay, too. June 14, to be exact.

Until then, everything is in limbo.

Monday, April 7, 2008

clueless

I had forgotten how clueless young men can be.

First, this man-boy day-of-canceled salsa dancing with me because his buddy showed up unexpectedly (from where he lives two hours away).

Then, last night, he asked for a ride home after work. (We work together--which has its own set of issues.) 3 a.m. I say sure, whatever. In the car on the way there, he calls up his friend (a different friend) and invites him over (for what, at 3 a.m., I can only imagine). Arriving at his house, he closes his cell phone and turns to me, "are you sure you don't want to come in? The whole crew is coming over; it'll be fun..."

I reply, "I was just paid to be social for five hours; I don't really have it in me to continue being social with people I don't know. Maybe if it was just you, that would have been different."

To which he laments, "Oh well, at least I tried. I'll call you later this week?"

Clue. Less.

I think I'm over being crushed on by a 22 year-old boy.

Friday, April 4, 2008

you can't say I didn't try

Ah, to be single in Eugene!

I've been going a little batty lately, what with the routine of school, dogs, school, dogs, and school. You can only do that so many years until you start to crave some unbastardized social interaction (e.g. chillin' with your studio mates during Wednesday night happy hour doesn't count).

This very young man and I had scheduled an actual date for tonight. We were to go salsa dancing. This was to be my intended relief from stir-insanity, at least temporarily. (I didn't tell him this, of course.) This afternoon, he called to inform me that "a friend from out of town is showing up around 8," but we could still "hang out" before then. Do I want to go to Sweet Life around 7?

Sure, whatthefuck, a human's still more interesting to talk with than is a dog.

Sweet Life, 7 p.m. (where I still spot a couple people from Lawrence Hall--they're effing everywhere, dammit!). 8:20 p.m. date's over. I washed my hair and dressed "strategically down" for that?!

Not wanting to waste the hair goop and cute-casual look, I cruise around for something to do. Perhaps the salsa dancing is starting soon? No, it turns out it starts at 10, and it's only 8:30. But it's the first Friday of the month, and that means the art galleries are open late and serving free alcohol. So I stroll around from gallery to gallery, killing time. Sadly, most of the alcohol is long gone.

9 p.m. Still downtown, still with hair goop, and still wearing my "trendy" tennis shoes. Go home to the dogs? This is where any sensible single person would say, "yeah, the night's a wash." But I'm determined to have fun, dammit! I decide to hang around until salsa starts. So I stop in at the bar where I work (as a KJ once a week), and chat up the door guy for, yes, a whole hour. AND, I manage to escape before the reggae band starts, without spending a dime on liquor.

Get to the salsa joint, but there are only three people there. The music's blaring and there's fog-machine fog. Crickets on the dance floor. I feel intimidated. I stand around for 5 minutes, hoping more people will show up, but finally decide to head back to the bar. "I'll come back in half an hour," I reason. As I walk out, a man with two women enters. The man looks familiar--ah yes, we went on a single date last summer and never spoke with each other again.

Guess I'm not coming back here tonight.

No point in wasting time and money at the bar. May as well just go the fuck home.

So despite my efforts, it's yet another Friday night with the dogs and a screaming tea kettle.

If I had more testosterone, this is the point in the story when I'd punch a wall, or go buy a jug of cheap vodka and drink myself into oblivion.

But no.

At least the dogs are happy to see me.

p.s. the very young man, I found out, is 22. (He volunteered the info; I did not ask.) Not quite young enough to be my human spawn. But almost.

Thursday, April 3, 2008

Where ever shall I live???

I've been having a certain amount of mild anxiety about deciding where to live after I graduate in June. Pittsburgh has been at the top of my list, mainly because I can afford to buy a house there, and because it's still a city without being overwhelming, unlike NY or LA.

It's got great universities (i.e. some intelligent life), museums, and (I'm told) artery-clogging ethnic food. But I have a feeling that, even if I move there and buy a house and grow a garden and establish a life, I'll be single forever. I'm not sure there are many like-minded single men in my dating demographic there.

So I'm trying to decide what's more important: dating, or owning my own home. Does it really come down to this? Let's see, where else might I find like-minded folks? NYC? yes. LA? yes. Philly? perhaps. Portland? probably. Seattle? likely. San Francisco? most definitely. Just about every major city in Europe? yes.

Now which of those places is affordable, in terms of housing? Hmm...no, no, probably not, not really, no, no way, nein.

So what do I do? Live the rest of my days handcuffed to a mortgage, and get buried in an unmarked grave somewhere along the 405? And maybe, while I'm still alive, have a satisfying relationship or three? Or pay off my school loans and buy a house with a yard where my pit bull can run, while saving up enough cash to be able to die in a fancy retirement home (and maybe even have a headstone), but date one football-obsessed douchebag after another until I swear off men in favor of dogs?

It's a very difficult decision.

On another note, I'm being pursued by an adorable young man who is so young, I daren't even ask his age. I could probably be his mother. I don't think it has occurred to him that I might be in my 30's. Though (for various reasons) there's nowhere this could possibly go, it's spring, and I'm enjoying the attention while it lasts.

Monday, March 10, 2008

Procrastination & work.

Driving home from my job tonight, some random thoughts occurred to me:

1. This car battery charger has been my best investment of the past year.

2. People: a good thing to interact with every once in a while. Even though final review is on Friday morning 3/14 and there's too much to do between now and then, taking a few hours for work (the other kind of work) can be a good thing--especially if you work as a karaoke DJ in a downtown bar. Beer doesn't hurt, either.

3. Procrastination--I'm doing it right now. Though sleep, perhaps more than AutoCAD, would be most productive at the moment, considering the considerable deficit (and now, alcohol consumption) I'm operating on.

4. Cookies: I like.

Thursday, December 20, 2007

A Definitive Study of Your Future as a Husband

As an assignment for my art class last term, we were to find a used hardcover book that we were to then "alter" in various ways: masking words to reveal a new story, painting over pages, cutting through pages, collage...the options are endless. I had planned on buying a book at Goodwill for this purpose, but I ran out of time and ended up plucking one off my shelf. It was written in 1964 as part of a series on different careers (A definitive study of Your Future: in Accounting, Advertising, Aerospace...Trucking, Veterinary Medicine, X-Ray Technology etc.); this one's titled A definitive study of Your Future as a Husband, by Dr. John L. Schimel. (I found it a couple years ago at Goodwill, thinking it would make a good coffee table book--but until this fall, I'd never actually read any of it.)

Once I started to actually peruse its pages, plucking out words for my story-within-a-story, I realized that John Schimel actually has something useful to say (even in 2007). He doesn't talk about the importance of being "a provider" or the "head of the household" so much as he simply addresses human behavior, how it's shaped by culture, and how we might be more authentic to ourselves and to others. He spells out the insecurities that "young people" allow to affect the quality of their lives, but he does so in a simple, no-nonsense way; we don't see that in most of the "you were damaged by your childhood and it will take a lifetime to become whole" self-help books today. Something about this guy's tell-it-like-it-is modus operandi makes this how-to book seem more like a no-BS passport into what makes people tick. For example, if you're anxious in social situations, the solution is to place yourself in more social situations, and to take small risks. It's not about paying for years of therapy to find out just why you're anxious and resolving your daddy issues before you can ever be socially competent. Everybody's anxious--you'd know that if you got out more and just talked to people, dumbass. (He doesn't say dumbass.)

The more I gessoed over its pages, the less I wanted to:

We all carry cards of identity, not in our pockets but written on our faces, inscribed in our characters and in our speech and attitudes. The most precious and difficult to achieve is one that says: "Simply Human." That's the one you get after you recognize and accept your own fears, shortcomings, and weaknesses. When you learn to recognize these in others and to do something about it, you are far ahead. (p. 118)
What is it, then, that I'm so worried about? Why has this architecture program "caused" me so much grief? And WHAT is so friggin' daunting about completing incompletes? (Ah, we could have a field day with that one, I'm sure...)

You cannot develop real intimacy with anyone if you are engaging in a life-long struggle to hold down and conceal unacceptable wishes, or what you may regard as shameful anxieties. If you can talk about them, you will certainly find out a great deal about others and yourself, as well as discover and make friendships. (p. 116.)

It's like "they" have been saying all along: To let in love (or friendship or enlightenment or cake), you've got to release fear.

Just let go. Love the bomb. Eat cake.



Wednesday, December 19, 2007

celestial fiddles


A former roommate left her "sexy" magnetic poetry set when she moved out. What a delicious waste of time!

In the name of Pro-cras-tin-a-tion, I "wrote" a magnetic poetry haiku:

giant sturdy wood
makes sweet celestial fiddles
like warm fresh pudding

(I really need to find better ways to spend my time...)

Sunday, December 16, 2007

pudding dreams


When I was a kid, I used to have dreams about stumbling upon money trees. I'd go hog-wild--jumping about, grabbing cash for future spendage on bikes and sugar cereal and puppies and cabbage patch kids. But I'd inevitably wake up before getting any goods. Bummer.

Last night, I dreamed of pudding. A few weeks ago, I bought a shit-ton of pudding, and of course it's long gone by now. But in my dream, I opened the cabinet and found that there were still a few 4-oz. cups of vanilla left (vanilla's not my favorite flavor, so I must have forgotten about it in there). Vanilla pudding is better than no pudding, so it was like finding a $20 in your winter coat pocket, after pulling it out of summer storage.

The night before last, I dreamed of incomplete classes. Specifically, that I had completed them without heretofore realizing it--and it was only when I looked up my unofficial transcript on them there internets that I realized they were complete. What a relief! Then I woke up. Goddammit.

Complete incompletes, money trees, pudding... what's it all about? I'm sure Freud would have an opinion.

Thursday, November 8, 2007

Tapioca pudding


Quite possibly, the world's most perfect food.

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

exchange between a long-lost high school friend and me, recently reconnected via facebook

friend: . . . Wow, you are studying architecture :) that sounds very interesting. What made you decide on that field? You are almost done . . .

me
: Started taking interior design classes at night in fall of 2003, applied to my grad program in December '03, and started here in June 2004 (as interior architecture, but later switched majors to architecture). It's been a struggle, and since I've been here, I've been Dx'd with a couple disabilities I never knew I had (ADD, Asperger's), but for which the university is providing very little accommodation. Already sick of architecture [because of it]. Actually am considering teaching middle school, if I can manage to graduate. :)


friend: It sounds like you have developed some compensatory strategies to succeed. I think you would be a great teacher :)

me: . . . a note on the "compensatory strategies," since for some reason I'm feeling like I can't let the issue dangle/leave it where it lies--

The reason for not having been Dx'd until my 30's is partly because of this ability to pseudo-compensate (with brains, "follies of youth," physique, etc). But the fact is that youth and beauty start to lose their charm quickly once you're in your, say, mid-20's. By 30 [for women], relying on these things to make up for, say, chronic lateness, impulsive statements, poor decision-making, and a general tactlessness becomes downright distasteful.

Brains can only take you so far in social situations, relationship, and grad school. And then there's abstract reasoning, which isn't a major component of restaurant work or temp jobs, so I never knew it was a deficiency. Until structural behavior class. (Damn you, Algebra!! [shakes fist])

I guess I feel like I haven't compensated well, for what I want to accomplish at this point in my life, which is why I'm writing this extended diatribe/confessional. [Relationship has always been an area in dire need of help, but before, I just chalked it up to having moved around a lot as a kid, and I thought that I'd eventually grow out of my immature/eccentric ways of relating. It's funny how the things you always thought you'd "grow out of" never really go away unless you actually DO something to change them. Kind of like acne that way, too. Damn you, Skin Gods!! [shakes fist])

That's all. Just needed to clear things up [more for me than for you], since I can't have anyone thinking that I'm [gasp] fully functional, or something.

love love,
Dani

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

I pledge allegiance to my stuff in the United States of America.


The new neighbors' old Ford Mustang is being delivered to our shared driveway right now, cradled and coddled like Jon Benet Ramsey at a beauty pageant. (They also have a full-sized van, an Acura, and a monster pick-up truck.)

Went over there last weekend to welcome them to the neighborhood; the couple and their five young children moved in about a week ago. After initial pleasantries, the conversation went something like this:

me: Oh, and don't mind the dogs--Humfrey looks scary but he loves people, and Foxy is just all bark. Though I still wouldn't recommend that your kids stick their hands through the fence.

neighbor mom: Yeah, we're used to dogs. Actually we had two dogs until about a week ago.

me: Oh no! I'm sorry!

n.m.: Oh it's nothing like that. They managed to escape from the back yard, and they killed a cat . . .

me: d'oh!

n.m.: Yeah, and the pound wanted to charge me all this money and I was gonna have to do all this stuff . . . I'm in school--I can't be dealing with fences and special collars and all that. And what if they got out again? Then what?

me: . . . Hm, well it's a dog's instinct to chase cats; the key is to not let them escape, I guess.

n.m.: I just can't deal with all of that--I've got five kids and this is my last year of school, and we'll be moving in June anyway, so I just told the pound that I couldn't do it.

me: [this is where I fill in the gaps, and start hating my neighbor] Hmm . . . Humfrey got out of the yard this past summer. He got in a scuffle with another dog, but luckily the dog was fine and the people didn't press charges, otherwise I would have had to do all the same sort of stuff. But he's like my baby, so I would've just done it.

n.m.: [smirks briefly] Well we're from Guam, and in Guam, dogs are . . . it's just different. Dogs run around everywhere and they're just . . . around, you know?

me: [stares blankly] Well anyway, welcome to the neighborhood . . . I gotta get back to . . . homework . . . and stuff . . .
Euthanize your dogs for being dogs, but coddle your car. And keep breeding. Who's livin' the American Dream now, mofos!!?!

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

predictions for the [near-] future of culture

  • sustainability sustainability sustainability

  • ephemerality/temporality

  • chaos? order? a balance between the two? a completely imbalanced proportion of each? a certainty: both will be present

  • along these same lines: refuge/safety

  • still along these lines: confusion, [real or perceived] mental illness (as a cultural obsession), a sense of loss (of the inarticulable, or of the [non-religious] "soul")

  • politically: redemption vs. fascism

  • capitalistically: resistance vs. complacency
These are my predictions. The signs are already among us.


Monday, October 22, 2007

Holy shit. It's all burning down.


Ramona has been evacuated. My brother Eric, his girlfriend Juliet, and my nephew CJ went to Juliet's aunt's house in Escondido, but they've since been evacuated again. Eric couldn't get their cats to come out of hiding, so ten minutes after the mandatory evacuation orders (and with flames approaching), he left them in their apartment.

My mother and her dogs drove to my aunt's place on the coast in Encinitas. But now Encinitas is being told to prepare to evacuate, too.



Even animals in the Wild Animal Park have been evacuated.

Breaking news
Ramona photos

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Fear

Humans are weird. So many worry so much about what other humans think of them that they forget what they think of themselves. We’re mostly all posers.

It would be incredibly liberating if we would just say what we think and think what we think and feel what we feel without hurting feelings or fearing rejection. Then again, maybe we’re not advanced enough for that; maybe we’d hurt each other’s feelings too much. Maybe it’s just the fear part that I’d like to do away with.

Fearfearfearfreafreaefarfreafreaffearfreafareafarerffareafarefaarferefreafear.

What would happen then? If we stopped being so fucking afraid of each other.

(Within reason: it’s okay to be afraid of the Crazies. But only the truly Crazy—psychopaths and homicidal maniacs and CEOs. Neurotics don’t officially count as crazy, so nothing to fear there.)

Gawd, it would be so much easier to breathe. So much easier to fall asleep.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

empathizing vs. systemizing

from http://www.eqsq.com/:

What is EQ SQ theory?

Empathizing

Empathizing is the drive to identify and react appropriately to the way another person is feeling. Further, the ability to empathize allows you to care for others and to predict their behavior.


Systemizing


Systemizing is the drive to analyze the variables and understand the rules governing a system. The ability to systemize allows you to predict and control the behavior of a system. Further, systemizing refers to the drive to construct systems.

The Empathizing-Systemizing Theory of the Male versus Female Brain


This theory states that, on average, more males than females tend to be systemizers and more females than males tend to be empathizers. There is evidence to support female superiority as empathizers in decoding non-verbal communication, picking up subtle nuances from tone of voice or facial expression, or judging a person’s character. The male advantage in systemizing is also documented with findings that more men than women study and enter careers requiring math, physics and engineering.

The Danger of Stereotyping


The key to the empathizing-systemizing theory is that your sex does not determine your brain type. In fact, it highlights the danger of assuming that what is true for the majority is true for all. Studies show clearly that there are plenty of women who can systemize and men who can empathize.

Respondent Average EQ Average SQ Brain Type
Males 39.0 61.2 Systemizing
Females 48.0 51.7 Empathizing
Your Score 33 88 Systemizing


Brain Types of Experimental Control Groups
Respondent Extreme E E Balanced S Extreme S
Males 0% 17% 31% 46% 6%
Females 7% 47% 32% 14% 0%

What does your score mean?

Monday, September 10, 2007

I'm a fundamentalist bigot.

This blog is and always has been intended as a way for people who already know me to keep up with what I'm doing & thinking, since I live in bumfuck Oregon (away from everyone who matters to me). It's also just a way to develop my ideas, and to document some of the mundane absurdity that abounds, in my dry-witted, sometimes sarcastic way.

Thing is, sarcasm and dry wit don't translate easily to the written word. So it's evidently possible that those who don't know me in real life may read this blog without picking up the intended irony, or without hearing its dry delivery. In the past week, I've been labeled a racist, a classist, a homophobe, and "mainstream." I've also been implicated as a "breeder"and a political conservative, and based on these assumptions, my political views have been labeled "ridiculous."

Granted, my writing style is perhaps more nuanced/less straightforward than that of the NY Times. (Good thing I don't write for them.) But those who don't actually know me may do well to withhold judgment, or to ask for clarification, before "opining" here. I don't think I should have to defend or explain my views to people who misinterpret my writing, but (for those who know me) it goes without saying that I'm pretty much the opposite of a fundamentalist bigot.

The irony about political correctness is that, in the effort to foster acceptance by not offending anyone, candid discourse virtually ceases to exist. Yet without candid discourse, we can't have understanding, and without understanding, there can be no acceptance. As long as we're in an adolescent PC phase, we'll never be able to move beyond 'prescribed politeness' into 'intrinsic acceptance' when relating to people who don't look/act/earn/talk/believe/think/love as we do. Political correctness is the linguistic equivalent to affirmative action: a means to an end that will eventually [ideally] become unnecessary. Those who cling to their PC-ness-- integrating it into their identity and criticizing those who move away from (i.e. beyond) it--are the ones who are suspect. They may, in reality, incite more harm than the openly-abashing/ignorant bigots who never cared to learn PC terms in the first place. They've turned their covert prejudice into a socially-acceptable vernacular, allowing it to spread like wildfire, and effectively closing the door on real progress. Our covert racism has become so rampant and culturally-acceptable, in fact, that our schools are now more segregated than they've been since the 1960's.

Political correctness exists because almost everyone's intrinsically unprejudiced acceptance of others has been replaced by the isms we inevitably learn (directly or implicitly) while growing up. We worry that language (ever in flux) will betray those isms, so most of us speak by prescription. It's safer that way--if everyone agrees to use the same term, then nobody can be labeled ignorant, rude, or racist. But it doesn't mean they aren't.

What's PC is simply a reflection of current cultural prejudices. If there were something inherently truthful or pure about the PC terms with which the dominant culture chooses to describe others, then a) PC terms wouldn't change over time, b) we'd use consistent terminology to describe the dominant cultural group. But instead we're taught to use the word "colored," until it becomes off-color and someone tells us to instead say "negro," which goes out of fashion when people start saying "black," but when it becomes uncouth to admit you dream in technicolor, the preferred term becomes "african-american," even if the individual being referred to is neither african nor american. If we're correct now, then will the term we invent ten years from now be incorrect? And why, if we label one group "african-american" and another "latin-american," do whites not call themselves "european-americans"? Why is it less acceptable to call one person "black" than it is to call another person "white"? We can't devise a mix-n-matched nomenclature and then credibly proclaim that one mix is better than another. This is how political correctness touts our collective biases.

The point is, if I use non-PC words like "black" and "white" to describe [the socially-constructed-yet-altogether-real-in-our-cultural-consciousness idea of] race, it doesn't automatically make me a racist. (Another irony is that when I veer away from the PC, it's usually the dominant culture that takes offense. Most black folks I know don't give a damn whether you say 'black'. And a lot of people identify as 'queer', but when I used the term around a straight, PC person, she got offended.)

My effort here was to show that those who get all caught up in being politically correct (without thinking about what their words actually mean or why they're saying them) ultimately do more harm than good. Political Correctness is a means to an end; that end is peaceful co-existence and acceptance. If unknown PC-mongers want to judge me based on my use of un-PC language, and despite knowing nothing about me, then I'm sure they'll find plenty to criticize in this entry alone. But that'll be quite a hypocrisy pill to swallow.

Tuesday, September 4, 2007

Obama


Received the rare email from my mother today. It was a form letter, likely mass-emailed from her via Barack Obama's website:

From: Mom
Subject: Barack Obama

I just joined Barack Obama's campaign for president. Want to join me?

[http addie here]

I share the same goals as Barack Obama: ending the Iraq War, honoring our commitment to our veterans, achieving energy independence, yadda, yadda, yadda...

I know the political process sometimes seems superficial and worse. But Barack Obama gives me hope for a better America and a better world. [string crescendo here]

So please take a moment to learn more about Senator Obama and join the campaign:

[http addie here]
[tympani drum here]
[cymbal crash here]


From: Dani
Subject: Re: Barack Obama

I have a major issue with Obama. On first glance, it may seem petty--but think about it, 'cause it's pivotal:

He has two young children (ages 6 & 9), and he's running for president. If he wins, how does he expect to take care of his kids? To share in their parenting? Will he be there when his kids need him? And if so, will he be there when his country does?
Where will his priority be--in leading the nation, or in parenting his children? Neither choice is good enough.

If a *woman* running for president had a six year-old and a nine year-old, how would Americans judge her? As the leader of the free world, the president should set an example. That example should not be, "it's okay to bail out on parenting [if you're a man, or if you have a high-profile job]."

I don't yet know for whom I'll vote, but I know it won't be for Obama.

-Danielle
Unfortunately, this glaring conflict of interest may well be completely beyond the realm of my mother's comprehension. Her concept of "parental responsibility" leaves much to be desired (from this daughter's perspective). Yeah, I'm bitter, but resigned. No, she doesn't read this blog. But yeah--she actually might not get it.


Friday, August 31, 2007

saggy jeans

In 2007, it's not PC to craft separate laws for blacks and whites, so why not instead legislate the way one group dresses? They're a disenfranchised lot, anyway, so it's not like they have the wherewithal to fight back. Hm, what pretense should we file it under? How about "indecent exposure"? Since whenever we white folk are exposed to someone who doesn't look like us, it's just not decent.

If I lived near any of these towns, I'd wrangle up a throng of citizens, including lots of white girl/boy-next-door types, and protest outside the city hall. Wearing saggy jeans.

(Wait-a-sec--we DID this, in the New York subway. But people thought it was "funny" and "weird," and nobody got outlawed. I wonder if it had anything to do with being white.)

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Desperately seeking humor within pathos.

Suggestions?

Hm, perhaps this is a start:

Your garden-variety existential angst.

Those who possess the capacity for critical, independent thought—and who have wandered the depths of solitude for any significant stretch of time—are those whose hearts despair most tragically. The rose-misted lenses through which The Droves [those fortunate fools!] perceive the world have been punched from their frame. With these empty spectacles do the remaining sorry few suffer their absurd existence, unable to relieve it, having long since been overthrown by the mediocre majority.

But perhaps these tragic thinkers are the true fools—for why on earth would they not have replaced those lenses ages ago?

Could any of this be related to having watched Donnie Darko today?

Thursday, August 9, 2007

email sent to a friend who is about to move from Portland, Oregon to Los Angeles, California

I started reading City of Quartz last night--noticed that you list the book among your favorites on myspace. (Oh the irony!)

I've only gotten to page 37 so far, but I thought you would enjoy some short passages whose margins I have || 'd or * 'd:

"Setting aside an apocalyptic awakening of the San Andreas Fault, it is all too easy to envision Los Angeles reproducing itself endlessly across the desert with the assistance of pilfered water, cheap immigrant labor, Asian capital and desperate homebuyers willing to trade lifetimes on the freeway in exchange for $500,000 'dream homes' in the middle of Death Valley." p. 12.

"He compared L.A. and Mexico City (which he knew well) to volcanoes, spilling wreckage and desire in ever-widening circles over a denuded countryside. It is never wise, he averred, to live too near a volcano." p. 14.

"Los Angeles, it should be understood, is not a mere city. On the contrary, it is, and has been since 1888, a commodity; something to be advertised and sold to the people of the United States like automobiles, cigarettes and mouth wash." - Morrow Mayo quote on p. 17.

"To move to Lotusland is to sever connection with national reality, to lose historical and experiential footing, to surrender critical distance, and to submerge oneself in spectacle and fraud...Los Angeles (and its alter-ego, Hollywood) becomes the literalized Mahagonny: city of seduction and defeat, the antipode to critical intelligence." p. 18.

"Yet we must avoid the idea that Los Angeles is ultimately just the mirror of Narcissus, or a huge disturbance in the Maxwellian ether. Beyond its myriad rhetorics and mirages, it can be presumed that the city actually exists." p. 23.

"...Adamic chronicled Los Angeles of the oil-and-God-crazy 1920's. To him it was an incredible burlesque mirror of the philistinism and larceny of Coolidge America ('additional proof of the accuracy of Marx's generalization that history repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce')." p. 32.

"Alfred Döblin--the famed literary portraitist of Berlin--would actually denounce Hollywood as a 'murderous desert of houses...a horrible garden city'. (When asked to comment on the suburban lifestyle, he added: 'Indeed, one is much and extensively in the open here--yet, am I a cow?')" p. 34.

So there you have it, my chosen passages until page 37. There is, of course, no ulterior motive in sending this. But if I have perhaps [re-]awakened your critical sensibility (however ephemerally) before your rapidly-approaching descent, then I'll be satisfied. Promise me you won't let it engulf you; a mind is a terrible thing to let succumb to osmosis. Or dehydration.

kiss kiss,
*DaNEe*
(written bubble-like on the palm of your hand, in purple ink)

potentially-fictitious email exchange regarding a potentially-fictitious third party living in a probably-fictitious megapolis

1: Remember So-And-So? I just got back from a trip where I had the opportunity to spend a day or so with him.

2: How was hanging out with So-And-So? I liked him. Any flirtation between you two?
Stay cool and leave a low carbon footprint.


1: Hanging out with So was...pleasant. To answer your question, there has always been flirtation between us. He has just happened to have been involved in some relationship or another every time we co-existed in any one location--except during this most recent visit. And so...the flirtation had remained solely as such.

I have, during the sagesse of my 30's, refrained from "getting involved" with anyone (for even the slightest duration of time) for the past two years. That is, until I spent that day with Mr. And-So. And though I [mostly] believe him when he says his "intentions are pure," our dearth of communication after I returned home reminded me why I've eschewed male companionship and its integral emotional complexity since 2005. But to be fair, I had no expectation that our encounter would represent/elicit anything other than what it simply was, especially considering the 1,000-mile abyss sprawling between us. But of course--the expectations of the mind are of trivial concern to the longings of the heart.

Sometimes, I wish I were born a boy. Much simpler that way.

So now, it's just about waiting out the heart's most recent folly, and coming to terms [again] with the very real possibility of my future as Cat/Dog Lady. And so it is...

If it's yellow,
I am indeed
Letting It Mellow.

Sunday, August 5, 2007

roommate fallout


Mature person sought to share 2-bedroom house with big back yard. One large bedroom available, furnished with twin bed and desk/chair. Built-in shelving and two closets. House has one small shared bathroom (shower, no tub), washer/dryer. $350/month + half water/electric. Trash and wifi included. Refundable deposit is $350.

½ block from campus.

Two dogs and two cats live here. You must love animals, have experience living with them, and be responsible--my last roommate left the gate open and let the dogs escape from the yard a few times; that wasn’t good.

One dog is an older lab/heeler mutt and the other is a younger pit bull. The pit bull is gentle and affectionate with people but he doesn’t get along with animals he doesn’t know. The older dog barks at people she doesn’t know, like the mail carrier and, when she’s in the yard, people walking down the alley. Once she meets a person, though, she’s very sweet. On the plus side, she makes a good guard dog.

I’m a grad student in my 30’s. I’m quiet. I’m messy. I tend to have clutter, but I try not to have too much grime. The animals shed. In the winter, the dogs sometimes track mud into the kitchen. If clutter bothers you, you won’t like it here. On the other hand, I won’t get on your case about your clutter, so there’s that.

If you’ve made it this far, then that’s impressive. There are, however, a couple more things to mention. 1) I’m actively eco-friendly. You should be too. 2) I’m politically active and left-leaning, and have found that it works better when my roommate and I are on the same page. 3) I’m not religious. It doesn’t matter to me what your religion is, just as long as we can agree on numbers 1) and 2). Lastly 4) It doesn’t matter to me what you eat. I happen to not eat mammals, though I will, on occasion, eat fish and poultry.

The room is available now. There is no lease, but I’m looking for an honest, nice, and financially solvent person who wants to be here at least through the end of fall term, if not longer. Thanks.

rabenous squirrel

This
squirrel

just did this
thumb destroy
.
squirrelis dead now.












I didn't do it.

Saturday, August 4, 2007

Monkey Bizniss

Maybe it’s the forced complacency and shepherding that, ironically, induce contemplation among the masses traveling via air. Maybe it’s just the hours of waiting. Or for some, maybe it’s anxiety from being severed from their most precious fluids: what else is a gal to do when her Tom’s of Maine is checked in cargo?

Caveat: this commentary excludes business travelers, who have numbed themselves with the ritual—remove shoes, belt, isolate keys, laptop, wait, turn off electronic devices, fasten seatbelts, hold pee, traytables in upright position, disembark, attend meeting, repeat—and instead applies to the casual flyer—college student going “home,” lower/middle manager returning from her one week on a beach, adolescent making rounds with divorced parent, etc.: those with traytables remaining in upright positions, affording the luxury of independent thought, rather than expense reports and marketing presentations. Yes, that was one sentence. Those…whose souls will change, or have changed, as a result…of air travel.

The departure flight provided ample fodder for contemplation/obsession, as I was prevented from carrying my diminutive suitcase on the plane: too many fluids. Predictably, I had cut it too close for checked baggage, arriving at EUG at 5:35 a.m. for a 6 o’clock direct flight to LAX. Instead, I was placed on a flight departing at 6:40, routed north through SEA, to arrive at LAX four hours later than initially planned.

I was on time for the return flight. Leaving LAX at 9:30 p.m. and arriving at EUG at midnight was not as conducive to recording errant musings as had been the morning flight/s. They exist here as mere, uh, reflections of their former selves—bastardizations of recollections, past realities, and hindsight that is often—but not always—20/20.

Before I continue, I’d like to note that someone I care about has recently been committed to a mental institution. S/he has been there for almost two weeks. A release date is, at this point, not in sight. This person, though slightly eccentric and endearingly neurotic, was not, until two weeks ago, what most people would consider “crazy.” Why am I mentioning this? I don’t know. Maybe it’s to remind myself (and the reader) that the tightrope we walk between sanity and insanity is much more fragile than most of us care to admit. This paragraph would be completely acontextual were it not also a reminder that our problems are not as tragic as we think. I can’t think of an antonym for “contextual” that doesn’t involve multiple words, so why is “acontextual” not in the dictionary?

What follows are excerpts from my notes of the morning of 7/28:

What would happen if I finished my incompletes for school? Hm, then I’d need to get a job. And then I wouldn’t be able to stay at home with the dogs in the garden. And if I got a job, I might get fired from it, and if I got fired, that would mean [by some convoluted logic] that I’m useless. I want to be useful—but more likely it’s that I want to be needed. That’s why I stay with the dogs; they “need” me. Or I need them. To need me? Is this why I’m spending cash I don’t have in order to fly down for a family reunion? Because I need to feel needed? Is that why family reunions happen? Because people need to feel needed? Is that why they have children?

Alaska Airlines doesn’t recycle the plastic cups. How many plastic cups get thrown out on how many flights on how many days of how many years? I want to write a letter. Send the CEO my cup. Why are we in Iraq? Petroleum. What are plastic cups? Petroleum.

Yesterday at the mall (after an unsuccessful attempt to procure electronic consumables at Circuit City), I was overwhelmed (or maybe underwhelmed) by how stupid people are. There is honestly no way to express this in a more diplomatic or kindly way that wouldn’t dilute the sentiment. I’m not sure why the revelation didn’t occur to me in this, its broadest form, until recently. Yes, we all know that people are dumb. But I’m not so sure that many people realize just how dimwitted the masses are. Hopefully, some of the mediocrity is simply veiled apathy. (It’s sometimes hard to tell the difference, especially in Circuit City employees.)

Why has it taken me 33 years to recognize our idiocy? I don’t think that it’s my own getting wiser. Is it just where I live? Would I share my sentiment were I still living in NYC? There is, of course, the chance that I’m the incoherent one, which may explain why certain corporate peons can’t understand anything I say when I call their customer service numbers. But even if most people are dumb, why do I care?

It’s not about whether people agree with my ideology. Most of us think that those who disagree with us are simply ill-informed, ignorant, or dumb. Why then, should I care whether other people seem intellectually challenged? They probably think the same of me, so it all comes out in the [brain]wash, anyway.

On a different, but related topic—how close are most people to insanity? What does it take to push a normal person into neuroses, psychoses, or over the edge? Primates are, for the most part, social animals. Yet we exist in an increasingly alienating society, despite (or in spite of) our increasingly sophisticated technology. The Internet, a dog, or a couple o’ cats cannot completely redress human alienation. We’ve separated ourselves so much from our peeps that, like a monkey separated from her troop, we’re forgetting how to function in society. We’re collectively breeding a new species: antisocial, requiring immediate gratification, and highly skilled at following rules (robots?). Natural selection dictates that only the callous and numb will thrive.

August 4 commentary: Yikes.

Return flight of 7/31 & post-return flight musings:

Will roommate show up on time to pick me up? Probably not. I don’t want to go back to Eugene. It’s like that room in Sartre’s No Exit. (Though not exactly, since I did just exit for a few days. But that only served to illuminate how purgatorish Eugene really is.) But this is a public blog, not a bitchfest.

Human animals can be perplexing. Though we’re not, really. We’ve just created a perplexing and complex environment for ourselves. Were we all still swinging from vines in the rainforest, punching people who annoyed us and fucking people who didn’t, we’d probably be much happier. But that’s a given. As monkeys trying to navigate cities and governments and careers and mixed cultural messages, we’re pretty confused. Why does the human-monkey brain yearn for both complexity and chaos? Boredom? It’s unfortunate that boredom manifested asphalt-infested parking lots like Los Angeles. No offense to Lala-lings—it’s not your fault. I’m sure the place has many redeeming qualities. Just not that many. Of course, I’m biased. This monkey digs in dirt daily, grows vegetables and fruits, and hangs out in hammocks strewn between trees. So uncivilized!

The irony is, I may very well end up in a place like LA, if I ever manage to extirpate myself from purgatory. I’d like to think that, with my “expertise,” I’ll help to bring order to the chaos, or chaos to the order, or just help to get a decent light rail system in place—but that would be naïve. I’m just one monkey, and sociologically-speaking, I’m kind of at the fringes of the clan. What is a group of monkeys called? A clan? A troop? A society?? Here’s another: what’s a baby monkey called? We’ve got cubs, pups, calfs, and goslings. Monkling? Doesn’t sound right. (These questions were posed to the nice couple sitting next to me on the SEA-LAX flight. Though clearly wanting to be helpful, they came up empty.)

Where was I? Oh yes, we’re confused. We tell others that we “don’t play games,” we’re “no bullshit,” “say it like it is,” etc. Some will even say they “have no baggage.” (Those are the most confused of all.)

It’s not that we don’t mean what we say, but rather, we just don’t know what we mean. It’s that monkey-brain complexity at work. We want certain things in our lives, but the action we often take would suggest otherwise. This wouldn’t happen if we were dogs. If a dog doesn’t like you, it’s probably because she’s afraid of you. That fear may not make sense to humans—just because one guy was an asshole to the dog doesn’t mean that all guys will be—but the dog’s gonna bark at every guy who walks down the alley nonetheless. She’s not gonna get all cuddly-wuddly with the guy, and then wait for him to act like an asshole before she barks at him. No bullshit: fight or flight. Dogs don’t cuddle up to people they’re afraid of.

On the other hand, dogs don’t invent reasons to be afraid of people. They don’t care how ugly you are, they’ll lick your face regardless. They’ll generally forgive minor transgressions in short order. Face-licking is more fun than barking at assholes, in any event.

I may be digressing a bit here: monkey-brain complexity is the topic. Monkey brains are more complex than dog brains. Monkeys generally want the same things as dogs, they’re just more sophisticated about getting them. And monkey troops (clans?) tend to be bigger than dog packs, so there’s more allegiance-shifting and ass-kissing going on. At the very least, a monkey wants to be accepted, even if it means going unnoticed most of the time. At best, a monkey wants to be the pimp-daddy—the top monkey-dog, making lots of monkeylets with bunches of hot monkey-mamas. I imagine some monkeys are more content to chill somewhere in the middle, probably because that’s less work—no need to strut your stuff all the time, and perhaps less need to keep all those allegiances and alliances straight. Then again, maybe the hardest place to be is just under the shadow of top-monkey—you gotta kiss a lot of ass, yet bite a lot of backs, to stay within Top’s top 8. And you don’t even get the hot monkey-mamas, unless you’re really sneaky about it.

I like that middle ground. If you can find another monkey who also likes to hang out there, even better. It’s like you’re the pimp-daddy monkey of your own little two-monkey clan. Or pimp-mommy. Top won’t mess with you, since you’re just two monkeys. And because you and your other monkey have an understanding, there’s a lot less back-biting and a lot more monkey-business going on.

That line between sanity and insanity? You think I’ve crossed it.

In short: too many of us are scared little monkeylets, vehemently defending our status/territory/ego, when instead we could just be monkeyin’ around.

Saturday, July 21, 2007

change of forum / dump Vick cont'd

There's no tedious welcome message in this, my first, post here. That's because I've dumped the friendster blog and moved here. So aloha and all that stuff.

Our most recent adventures involved a letter emailed to Nike, imploring them to dump NFL Celebrity Michael Vick as a result of his recent indictment for dogfighting.

I also wrote a version of the following letter to both the local paper and the New York Times:
Dear Editor;

Training and baiting animals to rip each other to shreds is pretty horrific and inexcusable. If NFL celebrity Michael Vick's indictment for dogfighting leads to a felony conviction, he should receive the maximum sentence. If instead he prances off with a slap on the wrist, dogfighting might just gain some market share in the 12-20 demographic.

But here's the rub: a $350,000 fine and a suspension are a drop in the bucket for Vick, who rakes in over $23,000,000 a year. How, then, might Vick’s indictment become a bane to dogfighting? One thought--make the penalty outweigh the payback. For Vick, that might mean losing his sponsors (e.g. Nike) and getting the boot--permanently--from the NFL. Then, institute a substantial cash reward for each tip leading to a dogfighter’s arrest--funded, of course, by fines from people like Vick. With dollar signs in their eyes, dogfighters will be at each other’s throats.

Sincerely,
Danielle
"Punish the deed, not the breed."

Et hop!
There went my 15 minutes of fame.

RG Letters
NYT Letters