The job

Open the book
Read what's on the page
But read it and weep
Because time won't stand still
Won't quit to play catch-up
We've got to run head long
Dive in
Crash through
There is only to tackle
No wasted breath
No room for error
How can drive be grown
In place of frustration/apathy/ignorance
What tools do I wield
To build the house
For a lasting home

Quiet

I know I have the best friend I could ever want,
But I ache with mortal emptiness.
It's a frightening void
Without shape or form;
I'm open to unwelcome influence.
I long to name it,
To embrace it until it's owned.
When I can wrap my arms around the nothing,
I can get it to talk.
I can lay down some rules.
We can agree or duel.
My soul can soothe and lighten
The damp, inky blackness of fear.

I don't need to be afraid,
But in being afraid
I shouldn't feel shame.
The two are mighty conspirators
Determined to silence the boldest heart.
But we cannot be silent.
Our bodies would be mere bystanders
In the massacre of our spirits, souls, and selves.

Silence is the bludgeon
Time uses to break our knees,
To hobble us into crippling inaction,
To press us into the service of those who hate us, at best,
And those callowed with indifference, in the most dire cases.

We will not be victims.
We will speak,
Though we may tremble.
We will speak
Over our fear and shame
Knowing that they are a miserable pain
Waiting to be drowned.
We will cover them,
And when we rise up from those waters,
We will know that strength,
Grace,
Hope, and
Wisdom
Are the fruits of our struggle.
And we will know
That fear and shame must be put to rest each day,
Each moment.

There is solace when we feel weak.
There is mercy and rest
For the timid heart.
But the refuge is not of bricks.
It is a lean-to
For brief respite in the storm.
The battle continues
And lest it worsen,
Or more seriously,
Pass over, leaving ruin,
We must leave comfort behind
And wade the deeps,
Walk in to seek those lost,
Dragged under,
More alone than ourselves.
When the ephemeral calm
Lays us to rest
We will have saved and been saved.
And we will know
It can be done again.

Clash of the titanic twits

Yes, one more Broadsheet article for the day. Anyone who knows me knows that I can not stand Bratz Dolls. They look like prostitutes. I'm also not fond of Barbie. So when I read about the Barbie v. Bratz lawsuit, my first thought was, let them fight to the death. Um, and how's that for trivia, Barbie has a middle and last name.

____________________________________________________________________
Barbie vs. Bratz XVII: The Reckoning
Brace yourself, America: The enduring struggle between the forces of Barbie and the forces of Bratz is gearing up for a final, epic battle -- albeit not fought on the blood-stained field of Golgotha but on the more traditional terrain of the courtroom.
Mattel, which first introduced the world to the miracle of structural engineering known as Barbie Millicent Roberts in 1959, is suing the living daylights out of Bratz creator Carter Bryant, a former Mattel employee, on the grounds of copyright infringement. Looks like there's only room for one lushly proportioned polyurethane poppet in town.
And in no uncertain terms! Wait till you see the frantic internal Mattel memos released as part of the court documents, describing the success of the Bratz brand as "a rival-led Barbie genocide." Yes, the G-word, conjuring horrible images of shaven-headed Skippers corralled in Barbie prison-of-war camps being terrorized by machete-wielding Bratz dolls (or maybe that was just my sister and me). Not content to let Barbie have the last word, MGA memos counter that Mattel planned to "litigate to the death" (italics mine) and that "this is a war, and sides must be taken."
It's interesting to note the context of these memos -- written in 2003, as the nation geared up for war and the militaristic language of "you're either with us or against us" was at its peak. But in 2008, with all of us sadder and wiser, all parties would do well to remember that most little girls have the sense not to view inanimate objects as role models, and instead think of the fate that eventually befalls the vast majority of these toys, Barbie and Bratz alike: They wind up bald, naked and covered in dog slobber in a pile beneath the bed, condemned forever to a dollie Gitmo of their owner's creation.
I think Barbie herself said it best: "Pizza party, anyone?"
-- Rachel Shukert

The revolutionary idea of the day is. . .

people should be able to marry whomever they choose! I'm a blogging fool today, but couldn't resist posting this article from Broadsheet:

__________________________________________________________________
Quote of the day: Mildred Loving
"We loved each other and got married. We are not marrying the state. The law should allow a person to marry anyone he wants."
-- Mildred Loving on her court challenge to Virginia's anti-interracial-marriage law, as quoted by the Washington Evening Star in 1965. The Supreme Court ruled in 1967 that Mildred, an African-American, and her husband, Richard, who was white, had the right to marry, legalizing interracial marriage throughout the country.
Loving died on Monday at age 68, the Associated Press reported Tuesday. She was predeceased by her husband, who died in a car accident in 1975, in which Mildred was also injured. Before their successful court battle, the couple was arrested and forced to move out of the state of Virginia to avoid jail time for the crime of "cohabiting as man and wife, against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth."
Publicity shy, Loving gave few interviews late in life. Yet she did make a statement last year on the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling to voice her support for gays' and lesbians' right to marry, according to the New York Times. Every June 12, the anniversary of the ruling, events mark Loving Day to celebrate the legalization of marriage by interracial couples.
-- Katharine Mieszkowski

Birth control nightmare. . .

This is a quote I read in the Planned Parenthood e-newsletter:

"To talk of condoms as 'safe sex' is a form of Russian roulette ... The AIDS virus is roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon. The spermatozoon can easily pass through the 'net' that is formed by the condom." — Colombian Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, head of the Catholic Church's Pontifical Council for the Family, who unscientifically argued against condom use in the developing world. He died on April 20 at age 72.

For the love of God. Like it's not bad enough just to tell people to respect the sanctity of sperm, this guy took it on himself to spread blatant misinformation about condoms. : (

Sex ed: forbidden?

So, I understand that my employer expects all computer use to be work related. I get that certain social networking sites are blocked simply because they offer the option of "chat/messaging" even though some actual "chat/messaging" programs are not blocked. I even get that some random sites I've attempted to access in the context of research are blocked because of perceived content (pornography etc.). But, why, specifically is "Sex Education" listed as a reason to block a site? If the forbidden topic were "You're at Work So You Don't Need to Be Looking this Up Here", I could understand. But to click on an article about Planned Parenthood's philanthropic work in Peru and be blocked because I might learn something about the birds and the bees (of which we have both here at my esteemed place of employ) seems ridiculous.

Of course, I also feel that it is ludicrous that certain sites are blocked because of "Gay/Lesbian Issues". What kind of crazed conservative developed this firewall? I can access the hateful, bigoted "Family Research Council", but heaven forbid I try to check out who's on the mainstage at St. Louis' Pridefest.

I just don't get it.

Crime Update

I was feeling crazed about the upsurge of crime, shootings in particular, in close proximity to my home. And, to add to this aggravation, I can find NO information about the latest incident which occured early in the morning on Sunday, April 27th.

The information I can gather is that 3 men left a local bar and in the process of walking home were held-up. Two of the men were shot with one of them critically injured. The incident occured about two blocks from my house. I am going to e-mail a staffer in the public relations department for further details, but I am amazed that I can not find ANY information from a single news outlet.

I will try to update this post when I find out the story.

I'm no arbiter of moral justice. . .

but what the hell is wrong with people? This whole Miley Cyrus/Vanity Fair photo thing us ut-ter-ly ridiculous. Girls who have grown up playing with prostitutes, oh, I'm sorry "Bratz dolls" are now feeling some bizarre moral superiority over a chic showing her back in a wierd, artsy, gay magazine. I mean, really, who reads Vanity Fair that will get a hard on for one square foot of fifteen year old flesh?

I feel slightly torn. I wish there was such a thing as decency and simple modesty. But I do not believe that one "artistic" photo can give any actual bearing on a person's real life. The fact of the matter is that our lives are our own and I wish that Miss Miley had told Disney to blow it out their asses. She could quit what she's doing RIGHT now and live like royalty for the rest of her life. When will it be too late to get out from under the commercial thumb of her creators? How many kids have gone away to college and self-destructed in the vacuum of freedom their parents' had sheltered them from?

Where do we get this puritanical sense of righteousness? I suppose part of this comes back to the whole "girls are mean" thing that's been so prevalent as of the last several years. When do we stand up and say stop? You have no right to pass judgement. You need to begin to make decisions about your own life, shallow and sheltered as it may be, way before you can destroy someone else's. Just cut it the fuck out.

As for the photo of Miley and dear old dad referenced in this other Broadsheet post, whoa, super creepy.
_________________________________________________________________
Girls on Miley Cyrus: She's a slut
There comes word today of what teenage girls really think about Miley Cyrus after the scandal over her bedsheet photo shoot: They say she's a "slut" and "whore." In today's New York Times, reporter Susan Dominus talks with a handful of New York City girls about the controversial Vanity Fair photos. The teenagers -- many wearing skimpy skirts, cleavage-framing dresses and tight baby tees, and painted with glitter and Barbie-esque blush -- describe Cyrus using words usually reserved for tagging the locker of the girl rumored to have slept with half the high school football team. Dominus frames their response perfectly:
Dressing sexy, as she and so many of her classmates do, was one thing. Dressing in bedding, seemingly otherwise unclothed, was apparently quite another: contemptible, an actual evocation of sex itself. It's a paradigm about this generation of teenage girls that's perplexing to anyone who's aged out of it: They exude sexuality, even as they've internalized a language of shame and anger around it, a language that makes anyone who crosses some ever finer line of appropriate behavior a slut or a whore.
-- Tracy Clark-Flory

Why I love the "Mr. Men Show"

Um, so I've found a new favorite cartoon. If you know me at all, you know that's saying something. I love cartoons but my new favorite is on at 8:00 a.m. on Cartoon Network. I had the whole set of "Mr. Men" books when I was a kid and I guess I still appreciate the goofy, simple, bright graphics along with the good-humordly stereotyped characters.

I recommend it to anyone getting up or going to be around that time. It's a nice break from death, dismemberment, reality, and politics.

Here's a link to a blog by a guy who really, really likes the show ; ) According to him, the show is also on at 12:30 p.m.
http://www.mrmenshowblog.com/mr_men_show_blog/

Some fun pics. . .

Constant crime

I'm not sure if I've just become aware of the glut of shootings/murders in this city I hold so dear, but within the last 2 weeks, four people have been shot within about ten minutes of my apartment. Three of the shootings were fatal. I feel overwhelmed and unsure of how to relate these events. I'm including links articles regarding each incident.

Monday, April 14 Man charged with shooting mail carrier in St. Louis
Monday, April 21 2 men shot to death near StL nightclub
Tuesday, April 22 Boy, 14, playing with gun kills teen

Disclaimer: I am not endorsing stltoday.com as a news source. I'm referencing their articles because they reported on each incident and seem to have the most current information.

My own bias towards law enforcement and media

I am gaining more perspective on the events of Monday, April 21 as mentioned in my post on Tuesday, April 22. I have had time to discuss the shooting that appears to have made a stronger impression on the community than I realized.

First, let me confess my own innate ability to utterly ignore or be ignorant of the feelings, opinions, beliefs, and/or misconceptions of the people around me. I tend toward righteous (I hope) indignation as my first response. After speaking with several people about the thoroughness of the investigation and the comprehensiveness of the media coverage, I think I have a greater appreciation for how the situation is being handled.

I never had any thought about avoiding the area where the shooting took place. I'm not sure how it didn't occur to me that some people would be a little more trepidatious to venture out for a good time so near the scene of an, as yet, unexplained attack. I never imagined that the discretion with which the other local business in the area were being treated, was actually in place to avoid labelling this up-and-coming neighborhood as a primarily gay area. And that avoidance is not completely unreasonable in light of the fact that there are some who might turn such a place into a barrel of fish and open fire. I'm still jusifying this behavior with my vision of in your face identity. I think back to stories I've hear of groups of gay men engaging in brutal fights with those who would dare to reproach them. A friend explained that he felt we've come a long distance in being able to be comfortable in public: hopefully far enough that we can avoid constant physical confrontations.

I'm also questioning my own tendancy to subscribe to some idea of the inherent incompetance of law enforcement organizations. I'm not sure if I'm just willing to leap to conclusions since this incident hit so close to home, or if my mistrust of governmental organizations is completely rampant after 7+ years of being lied to and manipulated. Ditto, my feelings on the media. Am I too quick to feel that there is inadequate coverage of a story I hold so dear, when there are constantly issues both under and misreported throughout America.

Finally, how do we treat these victims with the respect owed to fellow humans? I so easily jumped into the political implications behind this shooting. I did not take one moment to pray for their families and friends to be graced with God's peace and understanding. Where is the line between fighting against ideas and fighting for people?

Should the media report on possible gay connection in shooting?

There was a shooting early in the morning on Monday, April 21 in St. Louis, MO.

Here's the link to the most up-dated story I could find about the shooting.

Here's the problem with the coverage of the story. The two victims were male. They were found shot behind a primarily straight bar. But, the bar is closed on Sunday. The bars that were open on the block nearest the victims are primarily gay bars.

One of the first questions I asked a friend who works at a nearby bar was whether he thought it was a hate crime. On Monday, I had that same discussion with many other friends. I'm torn about the seeming lack of exploration of the possibility of hate as a motivation for the crime. Part of me feels like that should be on the forefront of the investigation, but part of me is thrilled that the story is not being sensationalized and turned into a sordid drama because the victims may or may not be gay.

Rumors will always spread in the wake of a major tragedy like this. Of course, rumors spread even more rapidly within a small, somewhat insular, community. I think that the rumors are the reason I would like more transparent coverage of the story. Some in the community have already decided that there must be some connection between the men being gay, and their being murdered.

Here are a few of the hearsay comments circulating in the city regarding this crime:
-The gentlemen could have met someone on the internet and decided to meet in person.
-The gentlemen may have been in town on business.
-Police don't think money was missing from the victims.
-Maybe they knew the shooter, since he/she would have to have been in such close proximity to have killed them.

These are all ideas that could lead to assumptions regarding the motive for the shooting which could cause any number of negative conclusions about both the crime and the scope of the investigation. I want a comprehensive analysis of the crime. I want that to be reported in the media clearly and without bias. So far when I have googled "gay shooting St. Louis", there was no reference to this incident. I'm surprised no one has blogged about the incident. I can only hope that there is an open honest discussion of what has happened and how it will be followed up by law enforcement. The best outcome from a horrible situation is that we are all forced to think and perhaps create our own opinions that can be educated and dynamic.

The stupidest gender inequity visual. . .ever.

These are so ridiculous, I could scream. So, girls don't need school and it's utterly out of the question that a boy would be interested in attending a theater performance.

These are rugs available at Lowe's, ostensibly for children to play with.

Um, do you wanna hear something funny?

I figure I should note some funny events even though everyone I talk to has heard about them a million times. I could always hit my head and forget about my auspicious background : )=

My car broke down months ago. It was a '91 Geo Prizm, so I was not shocked when, right after dropping a couple hundred bucks to fix the ignition, both the exhaust and radiator become completely defunct. I was carless and seeking employment. I worked at a barely above minimum wage job within walking distance of my house. Finally, after numerous circular (read: agonizingly frustrating) conversations with my pop, he sent me money to buy some new wheels.

I searched CraigsList and decided to check out a 1986 Crown Victoria for $500. Got a ride to check it out and settled on the massive tank-of-a-vehicle. My reasoning was that V8 engines run forever and I don't do mass quantities of driving anyway, so what the hell if it's gets less than hybrid efficiency. First of all, we had the longest stretch of slick, icy, freezing weather which caused my new baby to drift terrifyingly about lanes of traffic. Secondly, I was stupid and decided to wait a week to get the car checked out. The first sign of trouble was an incident with overheating. Since I was at the store, I bought antifreeze (and oil, just in case I was low) and topped off the radiator.

Then, a couple of days later, in the midst of helping a friend put together a benefit, it happened. I was 'running' through the Jack-in-the-Box drive through to pick up food for a hungry queen. The cash registers were down. Can you feel the tension mounting? I sat in the drive through and the car started to smoke. Having driven my share of POS cars, I fidgetingly cursed and wiggled in my seat with no way to get out of the line. I was just blocks from my destination, so I hoped to limp there and deal with 'Princessconnie' later. As I rolled down the drive through lane and into traffic, she died. She died in the intersection. Thankfully I was facing uphill, so I dropped the gearshift into neutral and rolled to the curb.

I gave 6-8 feet of berth to fire hydrant on the corner and made sure I wasn't blocking a bus stop. I then hoofed 4 or 5 blocks in my party dress and heels. I didn't even check under my hood, because you never check under the hood of a recently overheated car. Well, the event went off without a hitch. As for the car, she no longer resided on the corner when I went to get her in the morning. I called the police and found that I was guilty of leaving a burning car on the side of the road. What kind of ass leaves a burning car on the side of the road? A few hyperventilating, sobbing, hours later we picked up the car and had it towed to a lot where I pocketed $75 from my $500 investment.

I then had to contend with the 4, that right, FOUR tickets left on my windshield. Two were for improper registration. No problem, I'd only owned the car for a week. As for the other two tickets. One was for parking less than 15 feet from a hydrant and the other was for abandoning my vehicle. So, if you ever plan on your car catching FIRE in the city of St. Louis, you need to remain in the vehicle and distance yourself as far as possible from any FIRE hydrants. Oh, well, I bought a bike (then became incapacitated in my right knee and a month later in my left foot). But those are stories for another time.

The funniest article

I think 'the' is the funniest article. What isn't made funnier by referring to it as a specific instance or item when that's completely unnecessary.

For example, in reference to a particular location. Say the bar is called, "Novaks." There's no particular call for saying 'the' Novaks, but it's a lot funnier: What are you doing tonight? Oh, we're going to the Novaks even though the crowd is so rude.

Specifying 'the' just brings out any particularly strong feelings you may have about a person, place, or thing without having to voice them definitively.

Try out the 'the' and see how it can work for you!

Single mothers, a sign of the apocolypse?

I was reading an article in that ever favorite column of mine, Broadsheet, reviewing/reaming an article on what I've decided may be a least favorite site, Slate.com. The Slate article, . . .And Baby Makes Two, is an obscene indictment of single mothers who choose not to marry the 'baby daddy.' I wanted to post my own response to the article for those of you who may not read the Broadsheet yet.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vile, foul, and disgusting.

I can't believe that Emily Yoffe could write, let alone believe, the pablum that was published about single motherhood. First of all, since much of the country has escaped the era of pregnancy being more shameful than murder, the ideas this article espouses are terribly outdated. Secondly, in the United States, birth control is openly available, if not free to those who would request it.
To suggest the one responsibility a woman has is to choose only to have sex with a man who would make a good father is ludicrous. Her choices begin with contraception, followed by choice of mate and choice of sexual activity. Then, should she possibly be pregnant, many states still respect her ability to choose early contraception. And barring all other circumstances, she still has the right to decide whether to have a child at all. And these are only the choices of the woman involved. Are we truly so sexist as to reduce all men to walking sperm donors, unaware of the consequences of their actions?
Aside from the ridiculousnous Yoffe spews about pregnancy, she clearly has no perspective on the current sexual climate at all. Becoming pregnant is by no means the worst outcome from unprotected or accidentally unprotected sex. Aside from the obvious bomb of HIV/AIDS, I would argue that herpes lasts as long, or longer than the responsibilities of having a child.
And finally, For Ms. Yoffee to rant and rave about young women's lack of personal responsibility presents a sexist and bigoted perspective on sexual politics. I feel that it is akin to saying that one should not have sex with someone who is not responsible enough to care for us if we become infected with HIV/AIDS by having sex with them. Clearly, we all make positive and negative choices regarding our bodies, but safer sex is the first step on the way to limiting unplanned pregnancies. Blaming a woman who doesn't want to run out and plan a shotgun wedding gets us nowhere except for firmly in the saddle of our high horse.

So, about the sex part. . .

I was reading this piece on monogamy from the Salon.com's Broadsheet column (a personal favorite), and had some thoughts.

People continuously argue about whether humans are 'meant' to be monogamous. I am a biologist and I do believe that we are animals and basally driven to preserve our own genetic heritage and to relate intimately with others of our own kind. That being said, I also believe that unlike most animals out there, we have highly developed, discrete communication skills. We have spoken language and written language. We have a plethora of conduits for both: face-to-face, phone, snail mail, e-mail, and even (heaven forbid) texting. If you feel the urge to spread that genetic diversity around, you can pretty easily share that information with whatever partner to which you are partnered.

So, I don't think the problem is that we're all constantly at odds with millions of years of evolution/natural selection. I think the problem is, that once we've decided (oh, yeah, there's that free will thing too) to merge, we allow shame, guilt, selfishness, and/or awkwardness to keep us from simply fessing up. Perhaps if we could all hold ourselves to the higher of our animal traits, that is communication, as opposed to our lower, being the urge to satisfy our sex drives, relationships could flourish and grow or be ended in a fashion slightly less devastating than feeling like you've been drowned in a vat of boiling nacho cheese.

Regardless of the reasons for cheating, be they genetic or personal, it's going to happen, period. Maybe we should all stop bitching and moaning about how people respond to cheating (such as Ms. Spitzer) and concern ourselves simply with treating each other better under circumstances where infidelity has occurred. The cheater has a basic human responsibility to take ownership of the behavior. The cheatee owes it to him/herself to absorb the situation, learn, and proceed in the manner that leaves the fewest psychic scars whether it be staying in the relationship, or moving on. As for the rest of us, we mostly need to mind our own business and be there to listen to what the parties involved have to say since no amount of our judging, preaching, coddling, or shunning can change the actions which have occurred.

Private Languages

So here's to being punched in the adam's apple and spanked by my daddy.

How can I possibly resist the charms of men who wear dresses?

The Last Five Years

I've been trying to figure out how to best express my feelings about the upcoming five year anniversary of the war in Iraq. I feel anger, sorrow, sympathy, horror, and untold other emotions. But, when I received a message from Rev. John Thomas, The United Church of Christ, my head felt clear. He included a prayer written by Rev. Yousif al Saka, an elder in the Presbyterian Church in Baghdad. The prayer encompasses all of my sincerest desires, not only for the Iraqi people, but truly for all of creation.

I was not raised in a tradition of reading composed prayers. We would shoot from the hip and speak as we felt led. But as I grow in my faith, I realize that prayers are just like all other words. Sometimes we choose them far better after thoughtful meditation. And, just like other words, the words of a prayer have strength which can be enforced by repetition (recall the teacher who said over and over again: this WILL be on the test.) I want to save the words of this prayer and make them available for anyone wishing to both express sorrow and yearn for hope in this world where we may feel out of control.

Here is Reverend Yousif al Saka's prayer:

We beseech You, we humble ourselves for the name of our Savior Jesus Christ,
to send your Holy Spirit to shade the land of Iraq,
so that peace may
prevail in its dwellings, and the acts of violence, kidnapping and persecution
may cease;
so that the displaced may return to their homes, the churches may
reopen their gates without fear from shells and explosion;
so that smiles
may be seen again on the faces of children that have been stolen from them here
in this difficult time;
so that the elderly may lean back on their chairs in
comfort and tranquility saying farewell to their children when leaving for
school or work without anxiety or fear;
so that mothers think only of happy,
prosperous, and peaceful futures for their daughters and sons.

O Lord, have pity on us, we Iraqis. Let the light of
your face shine on us, bless us, strengthen our belief, and bestow patience upon
us.