I continued my searching efforts, finding ideas like:

• Decorating the underside of your toilet seat with stickers so your child will use the toilet.  Still not my people...
• Building and decorating an “outhouse” for use with your child’s toilet seat. Definitely not my people!
• Using decoupage to decorate the toilet seat for your child. What the hell is decoupage and who has time for this shit?!?

Finally, I typed in “my son used a whole roll of toilet paper help!”  Result?  I came upon this blessed woman who’s tip using Dawn dish soap worked beautifully.

Don’t get me wrong. I have nothing against the parents who are “Not My People.” I just don’t understand them. And sometimes their incessant perfection makes me feel like an inadequate parent.

My husband’s sister is NOT one of My People. She has TWINS the same age as my son. Last summer, while I was lamenting the terrible twos, she replied, “I call them the wonderful twos!” While she was gallantly rescuing her toddlers from a 12 inch fall onto the grass, I turned around to see Geronimo standing on top of their playscape (5 feet off the ground, mind you) grinning and ordering my husband to catch him. While she was cutting hot dog slices into quarters for her kids, my son was walking around with a whole hot dog in each hand, because HE COULD DO IT HIMSELF.

We live in a community I’ll refer to as Stepford. Perfect moms… with perfect kids… and their perfectly decorated toddler outhouses. My house? While I was fixing the toilet problem with the miracle of Dawn dish soap, Geronimo was decorating my husband’s new laptop with a Sharpie. (Google solution #2 of the evening - acetone will remove permanent marker from a laptop WITHOUT damaging the finish.)

So I’m starting this blog as a place for not-perfect-parents of not-perfect-kids to share ideas on how to solve our not-perfect-problems.

Welcome and enjoy!

~Annabelle

Actually, biking up and down the Skyline-Drive hills is even more impressive. A few intrepid athletes were out trying to conquer the hills on two wheels (with no motor). I saw a lovely couple on a tandem bike working their way up a dizzyingly steep half-mile incline. Quite a show of force. Excellent teamwork.

I have a class presentation to give on the virtue of docility. In contemporary English, to be called “docile” is not necessarily a compliment. It can imply that you are easily led by the nose, obedient to a fault. Even without this pejorative connotation, “docile” tends to suggest a lack of proper assertiveness or a weak personality. When we hear ‘docile,’ we think either of a trained animal or a Stepford wife.

In the classical terminology of the great philosophers, however, “docility” is a good quality. In St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae, docile simply means “teachable.” According to St. Thomas, docility is one of the eight parts of the virtue of prudence. The teachable person is ready to learn from someone who knows more. In other words, the docile person takes counsel, listens to good advice.

Docility makes someone prudent by making him moderate in making decisions and taking action. Someone could be ingenious, knowledgeable, and shrewd, but he runs the risk of acting imprudently if he does not take advice, because no one can know everything about everything. Also, someone could be brave, quick, and thoroughly reasonable, but, again, he will act imprudently out of rashness if he is not willing to listen.

The virtue of docility is the great moderator of minds: Teachableness makes smart people smarter; it makes courageous people patient; it makes slow minds knowledgeable; it makes creative geniuses humble; it makes smooth operators wise.

[caption id="attachment_681" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Skyline Drive"][/caption]Doing right requires knowing the truth. We learn more of the truth when we are humble enough to admit what we don’t know, and when we are meek enough to listen even to people we don’t like. The readier we are to learn from others, the better we will be at making good decisions and doing the right thing.

Don’t get me wrong here: Docility is not the only virtue. It is only one of eight parts of prudence, and prudence is one of four cardinal virtues. Everyone needs to be their own person; everyone needs to follow their own lights. It is not good to be led around by the nose, to be passive or submit to bad advice. But it IS good to be teachable. An all-around excellent person listens to good advice, then makes up his own mind.

Check out Part II of this post: Men, Get Thee to the Kitchen!

Photo Credits

next up:  Dok Holocaust Needs rehab for his LOLcat addiction.  you can help by clicking on the picture and voting for it!

I have reflected- in print- on 9/11 for the last two years.

I have reflected about many things in the past: Where I was, what I was doing; who and what that day reminds me of.

On this anniversary, I am thinking of a film.

What, with the elections just around the corner. What, with the media and political circus and political drama, and political "chess" moves that are being palyed in American Politics, all North American Politics, World Politics at the moment. 

Today is a different day for me than past 9/11 anniversaries.

9/11/01 was the catalyst to a lot of the world as we know it now.

Today, I can see how far we have NOT come as a planet; as a conscious race of humans; as people who seem to have been given faery dust and are still asleep. The whole world seems to have become a bizarre kind of Brigadoon.

To quote a friend's response when I questioned the media's motives as of late: "It's all diversion, deflection, and meaningless speculation... The new American media is about opinions, not facts." Is it just me or has the media drastically changed since 9/11? [Or was it like this before?] And I'm not just talking about the obvious Rupert Murdoch and Fox. I'm talking about all of it. MSNBC. CNN. Even the BBC. The list can go on. To me, it's appears that almost every Media outlet is a Stepford wife.

Today, Palin's son is deployed to Iraq. Pardon me: "Eye-Rack." Perhaps it's coincidence but I can't help but notice that it came at a very convenient time. 

Of course I think about what was lost that day. But as I reflect, I think more about what has been lost since. 9/11/01 is a marker. I don't want to take away from the horror; the loss; the pain that everyone- especially the families and 1st responders- has gone through and what this day represents for them.

Today- 9/11/08- I just can't help but think of the film, Wag The Dog. And I can't help but think that we have been- and continue to be- duped.

Shoulda thought about that a long time ago, Dr. Deanenstein and Frau Nancy Blucher.  You're the ones who gave the rabid Clinton Derangement Syndrome suffering "Anybody But Hillary" lunatic fringe free reign while you allowed your creation to traipse around the country like a real boy playing dress-up in the Emperor's see-through suit.  Now you want to complain because the McCain camp has given your monster a Lilith-like bride. Ha, ha, again.

Sarah Palin ripped big chunks from Barack Obama's political flesh, chewed them up, and spit them out, all the while gracefully doing the Dance With Who Brung Ya backwards and in high heels.

Your pathetic little formula was so obvious and easy to copy.  It only worked a little bit in the primaries, but you're too power-lust crazed to realize that once Hillary and Co. realized what you were up to, she cleaned your clock nine ways to Sunday, even with both hands tied behind her back.  By you.  And your Republican mole, Donna Brazile, who along with her crew, kept the Rove playbook working overtime.  You scrambled, thugged and mugged your way across the finish line, barely ahead, dragging your wounded, limping creation behind you and thought you had gotten away clean.  What a schmoo.

Oh, yeah, Dr. Deanestein, your little theory worked. Even better than you hoped.  That was your undoing.  Drunk with the success of the midterm elections in '06, you thought you and your guy were ready for the big, "Puttin' on the Ritz" tour, so you ramped up your plans and rushed off half-cocked, just like you did in your own presidential run.  Good plan, lousy execution, Deanenstein trademark.

Your scheme is so transparent, so easy to copy, are you really surprised that an old warhorse like McCain borrowed the formula, Deanenstein?  His feminized, Stepford-influenced clone is going to reduce your Emperor Pinocchio to a puddle and walk all over him without even taking off her glasses.

And there's nothing you can do about it.

Bwahahaaaa, my ass.

PUMA

Just Say No Deal

Legs crossed, hands folded, titled heads.

or

Two Stepfords and a moose-eating governor.

or

OMG, Cindy McCain has orange legs.

[Posted by Kathleen]

  Juicy Planet has been put on ORANGE ALERT due to the curious socio-medical condition whose origin has been traced to the DNA of females born and raised into the American upper middle, lower upper, and middle flyweight classes. The disease, popularly known as the Inverted Stepford, seems to take hold in female subjects in early adulthood, when being privileged and rich sours a tad due to the double pressures of having to be successful at some high level of some kind of field while simultaneously expected to act as a subservient to all the males in her environment, at least in public, regardless of how much more intelligent, talented, or confident the female may be when compared to the male she is seen stiffly standing next to.

The original Stepford Wife virus was actually developed and perfected by garden variety sexist males who sought to maintain complete control over their wives, to the point of altering their wives ability to remember how lovely flip flops felt beneath their wet feet, let alone what personality they may have had before being infected.

Inverted Stepford differs from the original strain in that these females seem to enjoy living with the virus; looking, standing and speaking as if they believe the rhetoric of their unattractive right wing spouses, understanding the exquisite pleasure of deferred power, when the cameras are turned off and they can abuse the maid, the dog, the flight attendant, behind closed doors. Many of these subjects seem to share a penchant for prescription drugs, so it is advised to clean out your medicine cabinet before invited one over for tea. The risk of contagious infection is low, although these females do tend to cause an awful lot of damage at the political and cultural levels of society, likely as they are to sit on various and sundry corporate and hospital boards and to be married to politicians, ministers, and Republicans. See entries for: Cindy McCain, Victoria Osteen, et al.

CLICK for evidence of Inverted-Stepford-Illness

You would think they where giving that poison away! The line by my count was 9 deep and in the few minutes I was sitting there I counted 5 folks enter. Someone's thirsty!

I guess the hot weather has all the stepford wives really on edge because the lil' ones are finding it too hot to play outside.

Bottoms up!

As a full time blogger (read: unemployed and uninsured, so going out into the real world poses a threat to my health. I could get hurt!), it is my responsibility to creep around the internet at 4 a.m. looking for inspiration.

I stumbled across a video about silly, ornery, old John McCain. Apparently, he called his wife a c-c-c-c-c-cunt. I have trouble even typing it. Did Cindy McCain do something so terrible? Nope. She jokingly told him that he was balding. Um, hello, J? When you're 300 years old, you're bound to bald. Here is what he said to her:

"At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you cunt."

Wowie! So we know how he really feels. John and Cindy 4eva! I don't particularly like Cindy McCain, but I would never call her that. I would call her a Stepford Wife, recipe-stealing, identity-stealing recovering drug addict, home-wrecking other woman, but never a cunt. That is NEVER okay. His excuse? He was tired. Um, fine. But as Wonkette pointed out, he's going to be tired a lot if he becomes president.

The only time I have ever not been offended at all by the word was with James McAvoy and the infamous typewriter scene in Atonement. (Which incidentally, led to the infamous library scene. Rawr!) And even then, as he was typing, my mind kept wondering...Is he really going to type that? Looks like it, but they wouldn't...oh no! OH MY GOD. HE DID! And for the record-James McAvoy, you can call me anything you'd like.

But I digress.

Barack gets called out for calling a reporter "sweetie", which, he admits, is a bad habit. At least it's a casual term of endearment. But nobody calls McCain out for being a complete cotton-headed-ninny-muggins (the worst insult among Santa's elves, duh) to his wife. Why? I think this video does a really good job at explaining it:

What are your thoughts, you cunts? Did I say that? It's late, I must be tired.

[Posted by Kathleen]

Written during the height of the second wave of feminism, Levin has an independent and "liberated" Joanne move to suburban Stepford to escape the hustle, bustle, and crime of the city. The women all appear as actors from detergent ads and when her friend Bobbi turns into one of them - Joanne gets suspicious. It's a bit of a pseudo-feminist portrayal with name dropping of Millet, Friedan, and Steinem, but without a lot of feminist discourse, antics, thought - anything - to back it up.

It's a very short read, only a bit over a hundred pages and if you get the opportunity it's a decent page-turner. But if you find yourself with an afternoon to kill I more highly suggest renting the 1975 classic and getting yourself a bowl of popcorn.

Definitely agree with myself on this one.

Other opinions: books i done read.

Several polygamist communities have been in the news of late: El Dorado, Texas and Bountiful, BC. The Texan community fell afoul of the law and 400 children were removed but recently returned. Bountiful is under police scrutiny; the courts are debating charging them. Over and over again, the media talks about the polygamist marriages where men in their 40s seem to have many wives, some as young as 12 years of age.

It's polygamy that gets mentioned most of all but really there are two other issues here. The first is that of child abuse and rape. The second, harder to prove if all those 14-year-old girls have hit the age of consent and marry a 45-year-old man, is that of coercion, subjugation and good ole fashioned brainwashing.

Let's take a look at equality. If you google pictures of the El Dorado Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints sect, you'll get many shots of women in frumpy Holly Hobby outfits all with the same peter pan collar, button-down demure front, and sleeves neatly buttoned at the wrist. Oh, and with a good ankle length cut. Although blue seems to be a favorite color, there was a woman in pink and one in purple, and even one in business brown. And the hair, ohmigod, the hair, all coiffed in the same sweep, no matter the shape of face or age. Can you say Stepford Wives, moreso than they ever were portrayed in the movie? Though I think there is something scarily in common with these fundamentalist sects and the The Stepford Wives.

But where are the men, you ask? Men? Well, yes, obviously there are fewer of them. After all, every man has several wives. You can probably blame the media for going for the more high profile pictures. After all, any pictures of the men (and there are very few) seem to have them in fairly standard jeans and shirts, even if they are buttoned at wrist and neck. But perhaps there are fewer men because, when the authorities raided the Texas compound, those ole guys went into hiding. And one has to wonder if this particular brand of polygamy is not just another word for pedophilia hiding under the guise of religion.

Bountiful's pictures are not as...bountiful and there are the same pictures of women in outdated dresses (with running shoes, mind you) and yet some of women in modern dress. Winston Blackmore, the BC sect's leader is shown with women in traditional dress and all those women and daughters in modern dress. Always, there are a lot of women, and girls. One has to start to wonder if the law of averages with both genders shows up in Bountiful, or if there are more girls born. After all, they'd be more of a benefit to such a man who needs at least three wives. You don't want any mating wars with other vying males either.

So, why aren't the women collecting several husbands? I'm sure the men could answer this. I'm sure the women could too, because they've probably been schooled since they were young on what they should or shouldn't do and to "keep sweet," as Bountiful's motto goes.

Even though the FLDS sects are part of Mormonism, the larger body of Mormons these days do not follow polygamy, and most of the FLDS groups get around the law by actually only having one married wife and the rest as just secondary wives. And there are enough groups, religious or not that follow polygamy.

I always have a hard time with any group or faith that requires different things from men or women. Whether one gender must wear something or another gender is not allowed to do something, I get suspicious. It usually means there is some inclusion/exclusion based on gender that gets past all sorts of human rights because it is religion. And after all, whichever gender has the restrictions, they're usually told it's god's will, so therefore it's right. And the only thing that sticks in us as much as how family styles us is how we're styled by religion.

There is another side to polygamy, and I'll cover that tomorrow.

http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy65.html

Many articles exist on the above. You just have to google one of the many tags to read up on it.

Water is a precious resource. There is no denying that. Our very existence depends on it, especially fresh drinking water! While it is in abundance in some places, it is scarce in others. Good solid water management is indeed necessary. Unfortunately, as we have had the sorrow of learning, governments cannot be trusted to do what is right for ALL the people. There are far too many special interest groups fighting to keep what they see as their "right" to themselves while making it harder for others to enjoy that same "right".

Common Dreams had a good piece yesterday about Water becoming the new "Oil". Considering how many of us actually PAY for fresh drinking water (I know I buy bottled spring water), it should come as no surprise that eventually, someone would find a way to make water a commodity. Now that a so-called "food crisis" is upon us, you can be sure that a new 'water crisis' will come to light.

Published on Friday, May 30, 2008 by The Christian Science Monitor

Is Water Becoming ‘The New Oil’?
Population, pollution, and climate put the squeeze on potable supplies – and private companies smell a profit. Others ask: Should water be a human right?

by Marc Clayton

Public fountains are dry in Barcelona, Spain, a city so parched there’s a €9,000 ($13,000) fine if you’re caught watering your flowers. A tanker ship docked there this month carrying 5 million gallons of precious fresh water - and officials are scrambling to line up more such shipments to slake public thirst.

Barcelona is not alone. Cyprus will ferry water from Greece this summer. Australian cities are buying water from that nation’s farmers and building desalination plants. Thirsty China plans to divert Himalayan water. And 18 million southern Californians are bracing for their first water-rationing in years.

Water, Dow Chemical Chairman Andrew Liveris told the World Economic Forum in February, “is the oil of this century.” Developed nations have taken cheap, abundant fresh water largely for granted. Now global population growth, pollution, and climate change are shaping a new view of water as “blue gold.”

Water’s hot-commodity status has snared the attention of big equipment suppliers like General Electric as well as big private water companies that buy or manage municipal supplies - notably France-based Suez and Aqua America, the largest US-based private water company.

Global water markets, including drinking water distribution, management, waste treatment, and agriculture are a nearly $500 billion market and growing fast, says a 2007 global investment report.

But governments pushing to privatize costly to maintain public water systems are colliding with a global “water is a human right” movement. Because water is essential for human life, its distribution is best left to more publicly accountable government authorities to distribute at prices the poorest can afford, those water warriors say.

“We’re at a transition point where fundamental decisions need to be made by societies about how this basic human need - water - is going to be provided,” says Christopher Kilian, clean-water program director for the Boston-based Conservation Law Foundation. “The profit motive and basic human need [for water] are just inherently in conflict.”

Will “peak water” displace “peak oil” as the central resource question? Some see such a scenario rising.

“What’s different now is that it’s increasingly obvious that we’re running up against limits to new [fresh water] supplies,” says Peter Gleick, a wat­­­er expert and president of the Pacific In­­­sti­­tute for Studies in Development, En­­vi­­­ron­­ment, and Sec­­ur­­ity, a nonpartisan think tank in Oak­land, Calif. “It’s no long­­er cheap and easy to drill another well or dam another river.”

The idea of “peak water” is an imperfect analogy, he says. Unlike oil, water is not used up but only changes forms. The world still has the same 326 quintillion gallons, NASA estimates.

But some 97 percent of it is salty. The world’s re­maining accessi­ble fresh-water supplies are divided among industry (20 percent), agriculture (70 per­­cent), and domestic use (10 percent), according to the United Nations.

~snip~

“While water is essential to life, and we believe everyone deserves the right of access to water, that doesn’t mean water is free or should be provided free,” says Peter Cook, executive director of the NAWC. “Water should be priced at the cost to provide it - and subsidized for those who can’t afford it.”

But private companies’ promises of efficient, cost-effective water delivery have not always come true. Bolivia ejected giant engineering firm Bechtel in 2000, unhappy over the spiking cost of water for the city of Cochabamba. Last year Bolivia’s president publicly celebrated the departure of French water company Suez, which had held a 30-year contract to supply La Paz.

In her book, “Blue Covenant,” Maude Barlow - one of the leaders of the fledgling “water justice” movement - sees a dark future if private monopolies control access to fresh water. She sees this happening when, instead of curbing pollution and increasing conservation, governments throw up their hands and sell public water companies to the private sector or contract with private desalination companies.

“Water is a public resource and a human right that should be available to all,” she says. “All these companies are doing is recycling dirty water, selling it back to utilities and us at a huge price. But they haven’t been as successful as they want to be. People are concerned about their drinking water and they’ve met resistance.”
Private-water industry officials say those pushing to make water a “human right” are ideologues struggling to preserve inefficient public water authorities that sell water below the cost to produce it and so cheaply it is wasted - doing little to extend service to the poor.

“There are three basic things in life: food, water, and air,” says Paul Marin, who three years ago led a successful door-to-door campaign to keep the town council of Emmaus, Pa., from selling its local water company. “In this country, we have privatized our food. Now there’s a lot of interest in water on Wall Street…. But I can tell you it’s putting the fox in charge of the henhouse to privatize water. It’s a mistake.”

Water and war: Will scarcity lead to conflict?

~snip~

© 2008 The Christian Science Monitor

Read the FULL STORY here.

They say that meat and dairy industries use a lot of water to produce their food products. I'm not sure how accurate that is, but I can tell that this argument is going to be used to push us all into being vegitarians, whether we like it or not.

Are these important issues nonsense? NO! However, IF we sit back and leave the solutions up to those in charge, then we deserve whatever controls they put on us all. And I just know they'll have us all constantly thirsty, and limiting our washing and bathing so we are usually dirty and smelling bad as part of that control. We can't just sit back and blindly accept all these so-called expert reports. We need to be pro-active. Fairness and equitable distribution is a must. Common sense has to also play into this big time.

Do we really need totally salt free water to bathe in and wash our clothes in? I don't think so. While the bulk of the water on the planet may indeed be too salty, I also don't think it needs to be completely desalinated for our cleanliness. We really only need desalinated water for food and drinking consumption.

What we need are real management groups with common sense to ensure that all have fresh drinking water. Unfortunately I don't trust any so-called management groups right now because they all have an agenda, and I'm sure some "special interest group" is backing them in some way. This leaves too much room for mis-managment in order to create a crisis which will of course profit someone somewhere, while hurting millions in the process.

This might also explain our own government's interest in controlling ALL the waters of the U.S., not just the maritime waters, but ALL (which could include your well[s] if they so desired to claim them). I think the government has already proven that it can't find it's way out of a paper bag, so how the hell are we supposed to trust them to keep our water supply safe? We can't, we can only know that they will keep it as safe and clean as THEY want it to be, as long as it doesn't affect them. I mean look at all the chemicals and drugs that are found in our water supplies now. And while they put on a good show of being appalled, you haven't heard a word about solutions since then, have you? As long as they can buy their clean water, they don't give a damn about yours.

`(24) WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES- The term `waters of the United States' means all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or activities affecting these waters, are subject to the legislative power of Congress under the Constitution.'.

I'm all for conservation and good management. What I'm NOT for is any plan that allows any government or agency to control what people are allowed or not allowed. I'm NOT for these control freaks having the ability to hold us all ransom for a few drops of fresh water IF they feel so inclined to give it. And THIS is what it will come down to.

I strongly suggest we all start reading, or re-reading to refresh our memories, George Orwell's 1984 and also Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. I think we all need to be reminded of what 'could be' if we just sit back and buy into every thing some so-called expert claims.

Unless we all want to become some form of "Stepford" person, I suggest we all start waking up and actually using some real common sense here, along with a strong dose of doing the right thing to benefit everyone not just the selected elite.

The robotics specialists could make a feminist's nightmare come true if their invention, "Lisa the Perfect Woman," a robot that they say can cook, clean, shop, give massages and hold a conversation lives up to their promise.

According to the product web site (I can't seem to find the company's main site or anything about the company for that matter even though it's supposed to have been founded two years ago), Fresse said the robot was created as a substitute for a real woman. He explains,

"She has been designed for all men who have not found their soulmate, who would like to have company when they get home in the evening and who would like to have someone who cares for them."

The site says Fresse was inspired by David Levy's book, Love + Sex with Robots: the Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships. He said:

"I had always thought that one day technology would allow us to create a robot that would be able to perfectly imitate human behaviour. With Lisa we succeeded."

Created by Fresse and Yoichi, the robot's Recognition Krax System, technology that apparently allows vocal, tactile and visual recognition in the machine, supposedly enables it to cook a meal based on available ingredients in the fridge. It also lets Lisa play chess and video games (over 390 of them) and even learn to do some sports. She (I suppose we can call inanimate objects that as we do cars), according to the product web site has an IQ of 130 and is able to have sex.

I couldn't find anything on this Recognition Krax System and the product web site doesn't elaborate on how it really works. There is also zilch on the two inventors out there except in relation to the product's launch. I'd venture to guess that this is all some kind of elaborate, unamusing hoax.

Consumers are invited to make pre-orders with customizations available on eye, skin and hair color. All they ask is for your email address. Hmm...we'll see what happens come June 11th.

Check it... er, I mean her out here...

On a matter touching on this very thing do you so easily forget the teachings of the parable: “But what think ye?  A certain man had two sons; and said, Son, to work today in my vineyard.  He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went.  And he came to the second, and said likewise.  And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not.  Whether of them twain did the will of his father?” Matthew 21:28-31.

In past articles I have expressed the belief that one of the problems we face in this world is our inability to tolerate people who do not have the same beliefs as ourselves.  One of the main causes of this sort of strife is religion and the infantile belief that God belongs to and/or condones only the people of whatever religion we belong.  Further many people who are religious believe that science only strives to disprove the existence of God and hence, their belief in God while many people in science believe that evolution disproves the existence of God.  Nothing can be further from the truth than these two points of view.  One of the main reasons for this dichotomy is the inability to explain evolution while maintaining the theological views of whatever religion we belong.  Many religions teach it’s followers that God always was and that without God nothing could have been created.  This sort of thinking tends to lead many people to look at God as some sort of mystical, magical being which has no beginning and no end.  There is nothing more erroneous than this for God evolved into the being it is in the same manner we are evolving into the beings we are and to which we will eventually attain.

In past articles I have stressed that the Holy Bible and in fact, all Holy Books were written by people who were inspired by God but these books were/are not written by God.  Those people interpreted God’s meaning using the predominant theories, hypotheses and knowledge that prevailed during their lifetimes.  This meant that if something was inexplicable to them they ascribed to it the qualities of mysticism and other magical properties and it is this that we see when we read the writings of the prophets.  We then accept their uninformed interpretation of God and imbue God with the same inexplicable mystical and magical powers as the Prophets did in the biblical texts.  However, today we have a better understanding of the things God has done and God continues to reveal itself to us through the language of science which, in turn can allow us to interpret God and God’s word in a manner that gives us a much better understanding of God.

Evolution, technological and biological, is what made God what God is and the blessings he give us is the knowledge (of this science) to become the best beings that we can be.  To sin against God is to misuse the knowledge he provides us in a manner inconsistent with the teachings of love and mercy.  Well, I do not wish to go to deeply into this matter at this time so I shall change the topic to that of Mars.

Many years ago I attended a lecture (I believe it was held at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri) which spoke about the problems we face in the exploration and habitation of the planet Mars.  Space travel has always been something which has interested me as I had/have a great desire to make such travels myself.

One of the problems with Mars is that it does not have enough mass to generate the gravity needed to hold onto an atmosphere for human habitation.  The question is how do we provide it with the mass it needs to hold on to its atmosphere?  If, as is predicted the lower layers of Martian soil contains moisture, the answer may lie in the use of genetically modified micro-organisms.  There are some microbes which can reproduce at such a rate that, left alone with sufficient nutrients they can, in a matter of days, produce colonies with a mass of the Earth.

I do not know what types of nutrients/minerals are in the Martian soil but perhaps we can engineer several forms of microbes that can:

1.     utilize whatever nutrients are present;

2.     will support/supply each other’s needs;

3.    will give off some of the elements/mineral and gases that will help produce an atmosphere conducive to human habitation at some point in the future; and

4.    Do all this while producing enough mass to hold onto that atmosphere.

          I do not know if this is of any real potential to assist in solving some of the problem of the mass on Mars but it may be something to contemplate.  If we are capable of changing the mass of Mars we should also consider how that change will affect such things as its orbit and how any change in its orbit will affect Earth,…  Well, I shall end here and until next time may love and peace be yours always.  Amen.

So is it better that I talk about it here?

I'm not sure that there is such thing as a truly "nice" character. There is always something a little sinister about a character that is only "nice" (watch a Tim Burton movie, or think about the Stepford Wives. Nice=creepy). I don't trust people who are nice in novels/movies; there is some twist or something below the surface. Either there is something wrong with me, or perhaps it is because it is human to be flawed.

The strange thing is that I had been thinking about this issue myself. The stranger thing is that Rachael and I seem to think about the same things at the same time quite frequently. Very strange indeed.

Since I re-read my novel I've been thinking about cutting a couple of characters, A1 and A2 aka the Ana Twins. Why do I need to cut them? They are caricatures for one, but mainly because I wrote them in to feel better about Alice.

Alice popped into my head pretty much as she is now; a people pleaser, a cat person, obsessed with self -help, and overweight. In the novel I describe Alice in terms of food. The first image I had of Alice was of a disaster haircut:

It reminded January of vegemite and crackers...[she would press] them so hard that worms of buttery vegemite would ooze out of the cracker's holes to be licked off with her small pink tongue.

Alice's head looked like vegemite worms, yellow mixed with black and a few that were muddy brown, curls of butter turning greasy in the sun.

Someone had pressed her head too hard.

January is a bitch to Alice; and somewhere along the way I got scared. I got scared because no matter how much I deny it, people are going to assume that January is semi-autobiographical. She lives in the same city (laziness - I didn't have to do any research), she is around the same age...

I got scared because I thought people would think that I thought the same way that January does. So I invented the Ana twins, because if January is mean to them too then it isn't about the weight. It's about the way women treat and judge each other. That is something that I'd like to explore: the roles that women are cast as "the doormat" and "the bitch". But I think I can be a little more subtle in my approach.

It is not a case for making January "nicer" - it is true to her character to push Alice away. Alice is my only "nice" character and for most of the time she is treated badly. I think it might be time for a little steel behind her smile. I'd like her to stand up to January (how would January react to that!) and to be proud of who she is (which again would probably mystify poor old January who is so unsure of who she is that she has changed her identity).

What would happen if suddenly their roles in their relationship are reversed?  Would Alice, given the chance be a bitch to January? Is nice a defining characteristic, or a strategy of play?

What would make January a nice girl?

Each of these women answered the two questions with the exact same words and the same monotone voice. They are robots, programmed to say what the leaders of their sect want them to say. How could I ever believe someone who answers in that monotone, "I have never seen it." That's a non-answer anyway.

If they were innocent of the charge, shouldn't they be indignant. Shouldn't the answer have been more along the line of:  "Our faith does not allow abuse of children. Our men would never do such a thing. I would not allow it."

And, again, I note the photos of the husbands in jeans, tennis shoes and shirts; while the wives wear prairie dresses, all have the same hairdo and talk in the same monotone. Is this the new version of Stepford Wives?

1. Why do you call your husband 'Stepford Husband?

The 1975 movie Stepford Wives was about a quaint town where the men work hard in high tech jobs and the women (in a time when feminism was just reaching its stride) are the perfect wives.  They are all pretty, subservient, funny and excellent hostesses.  All of the time.  Of course, they are robots.  Of course.  My husband is not a Stepford Husband in the sense of wanting a perfect wife.  He loves me the way I am.  All flawed and stuff.  He is a Stepford Husband in that he is like what a woman would wish for in a husband.  He is a nice man.  He is understanding, supportive and rarely cranky.  And he is pretty.  He makes it very hard for me to be cross, unreasonable and moody, but I try anyway. He's not perfect; he's my husband.  Oh, and bonus, because SH are his initials.

2. We eloped.

Very few of our friends had married before we did and the ones who had, enjoyed all the many months of organising and planning.  I would sweat and worry on their behalf.  When we decided to take the plunge, the thought of just getting our weird and wonderful, dysfunctional families together was ulcer making.  I could see no way of us actually enjoying our own wedding and had a wake up call when a recently married colleague said to me: 'what makes you think you should enjoy it - you're the bride.  This is not about you two.'  When they revived me, I had a plan.  We eloped to Vanuatu, and created the most wonderful wedding and memories I could ever have imagined.  I urge all of you to consider it also.  My kids are going to elope.  I'm going with them.

3. We've been married 4 times.

I was one of those 'I'm never gonna get married,' kind of girls.  (I was also never going to have kids and now I have three - so don't believe anything you heard me say before 1993.)  With the elopement planned, we had to let our friends in on it.  They were disappointed.  Coincidentally, we were invited to a party organised for the weekend before we were to leave.  A costume party.  'You should dress as a bride!' suggested a girlfriend.  'Pffffff no way, I'm not married yet!' I may or may not have said.  What a party.  Best party ever.  And in the middle of it, they married us in a very proper ceremony that I will always consider serious and binding.  I was given away by a Cow and married by a Court Page in blue tights.  Batgirl was my witness.  And a Genie made our beautiful cake.  That was wedding number 1, our elopement was number 2. We renewed our vows at the Carillion, me with a neckbrace waiting in the car and Stepford Husband high on migraine medication (it was stress related, lucky we didn't go the full fiasco, eh?) a few days after returning for the benefit of our parents - number 3, and a few years ago we returned to Vanuatu and renewed our vows again with our three kids there as witnesses.  Only in the middle of the ceremony, they asked if they could go and join in the volleyball game further down the beach.  But it was lovely.  Number 4.  And we'll do it again given half a chance.

Questions?  Confessions?

This inner-city world is strange to me; VERY strange! In fact, I believe Jim Morrison of The Doors speaks best for me when he states “People are strange, when you’re a stranger/ Faces look ugly when you’re alone.” I am alone. I am strange. I have encountered MANY uneven streets (metaphorically speaking) since working at this school than I have in any other and I am no novice teacher. I am beginning to think I work in a circus “Fun” House…distorted mirror images included!

I am incredulous in regards to the things that are ALLOWED to continue at this “school.” The students are not expected to adhere to ANY types of rules or standards because those rules/standards are NEVER enforced! I have never worked anywhere like this (mind you this is my FOURTH high school of employment and my 7^th year of teaching)…I am no novice. The students regard our fearless leader as the biggest joke since “W” (sorry Republicans) and I agree! Oh sure…he enforces rules and asserts his authori-TAH, but only when it’s safe for him…only when it’s a teacher. And when he does that, it’s passive-aggressive, yellow-bellied, and underhanded.

My fearless leader’s main concerns are as follows (and not in any particular order):

• Did you close your classroom window?
• Did you make it to work by EXACTLY 8AM?
• Are you attending your one-hour-and-fifteen-minute-long common planning meetings twice a month? (He never reads the minutes, addresses our concerns from those meetings, or attempts to resolve administrative issues)
• Are you showing ANYTHING that closely resembles a video on a FRIDAY? (even if it’s educational…and our classes meet every OTHER day, so students are ALWAYS confused. If you are teaching Romeo and Juliet…students may ONLY watch on a Mon. or Wed. because showing it on FRIDAY is a sacrilege)
• Are you physically PRESENT? (EVERYONE should come to work and REMAIN at work even if you are throwing up all over yourself, have a migraine, or can not breathe due to Asthma)
• What ever it is that you are doing…does it LOOK good? (who cares what’s ACTUALLY going on)

My fearless leader is NOT concerned with the following (and not in any particular order):

• Fights in the hallway ( he walks past those). In fact, a student once said to me, “Hey, you know how Mr.*** is always wearin’ them sneakers? It makes you think he going to be the FIRST one on the scene of a fight…sprintin’ right, but that n***a is the LAST one there!”
• Discipline issues in the classroom – I have watched him shut the door on other teachers who have brought the student to his door! He says that he is on lunch…or too busy.
• Standing in the hallway during class changes to monitor student behavior and (more importantly) to foster a relationship with students aside from that of a “disciplinarian.”
• The fact that I share ONE set of twenty books with two other teachers who teach the same subject (and NO…we are not sharing a classroom, too)!
• Students who are congregated in the hallways past the ringing of the bell – he walks past that without a word (I have personally witnessed that).
• Enforcing the very rules he has so vehemently put into place! Guess what…you named it! He walks past those juvenile wrong doers without so much as a word!

I think it is obvious that I will NOT be returning to that school next year…in fact, the experience, as a whole, has caused me to truly question the institution and concept of public school “education.” I am conflicted. I mean…what am I REALLY doing? I don’t want to deal with anymore obnoxious discipline issues all by myself, poor administration, inadequate resources, ungrateful students, or shitty NCLB…really it’s No Teacher Left Behind (but that’s another blog).

I would like to think that the goal of education is to create free-thinkers (not to micro-manage), however the longer I remain in the profession, I notice the opposite happening. I see the creation of a corporation of drones. I see Stepford Wives. I see students attacking other students for being “different,” while I experience the school administration begin to view me as a plague because I will not wholeheartedly buy into the latest trend of educational bullshit drone-dom they are force feeding down the throats of the faculty. I feel like a leper because all I want to do is to teach kids HOW to think!

]]> http://buzzblogg.wordpress.com/?p=54 Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:27:25 +0000 oejohnsen http://buzzblogg.no.wordpress.com/2008/03/13/i-wanna-say-one-thing-to-the-american-peopleclinton/ I forbindelse med den amerikanske valgkampen 2008, ble jeg plutselig påminnet om en gammel hendelse fra amerikansk politikk. Skandalen med president Bill Clinton og Monica Lewinsky må ha vært ekstremt vanskelig for Hillary å takle. Enten er hun vanvittig tøff og tilgivende av natur, ellerså er hun bare en Stepford-wife. Man vet aldri helt med amerikanerne.

Om Hillary lyver, så har hun i så fall lært av den beste. Bare se på klippet.

Theme: Stepford Wives

the first post event of our fyp, indeed, i'm gonna miss everyone and my poly life...

(Stepford Wives meet Mambo part 1.)

(Stepford Wives meet Mambo part 2.)

(Stepford Wives meet Mambo part 3.)

i love you girls! we rawk. =)

look out next week.