By on

In the last week, I have see two advertisements where the model is touching his junk. I am not sure why this particular pose has gained such popularity but I’ve begun to see it more frequently. Now I enjoy see a good looking man as much as the next guy, well, maybe not the next guy but as much as the next person who might find scantily clad young men attractive, and I don’t mean to sound like a prude but I know I will but is this really the best pose to sell underwear? It makes me think that the underwear must be uncomfortable or binding because they need to rearrange their junk. I mean that is usually the reason I would be feeling my junk. Not exactly, the idea that the advertiser wants the potential customer to have. Or has holding your junk taken on a new meaning that I am unaware of? Honestly, these two gents can get away with it but I am pretty sure I would be arrested if I attempted this. Finally I love the word junk when it is used to describe male genitalia.

By on

I don’t like to change technology, upgrade or do anything to make my application new and improved. It annoys me mostly. I only need a rudimentary version of any application which means that any upgrade I get is something I don’t care about and it will somehow interfere with what I do like. Because I don’t like messing with new technology, if I must change, give it a few days and, if I can figure out the few things I want to do, I adopt the upgrade, otherwise, I just give up on it and never use the application again. I know I shouldn’t give up but I would rather read an old paperback novel or play with a deck of cards or write or do any non-technological activity than spend hours trying to figure out to manage this upgrade.

So I was worried when my Kindle died. I tried desperately to revive her but her battery simply wouldn’t recharge anymore. I finally surrendered to the inevitable and let her go to the great technology afterlife in the bottom drawer of my desk. The Kindle dying on that particular day was dire as I hadn’t finished my book for book club and the meeting was imminent. Bob saved the day. He has a lot of old technology laying around the house and he happened to have an old Kindle I could use. Wait by old, I meant it was old for him, it was, unfortunately, newer than my old Kindle. I was delighted to learn that without much effort I could still do the two things I demanded of Kindle which was read my book and read internet news.

Life was good until later that same day, I tried to play Spider. For those of you who don’t know, Spider is a computer game that is version of Solitaire. If you don’t know Solitaire, I don’t know what to say. I can’t explain it easily but I am sure you can Google it and get a much better description of the game than I can ever give. Sorry. Any way, back to Spider, Spider is my meditation, my morning prayer, my evening prayer, my centering device. I play it twice each day. Once when I get up in the morning and once again before I go to sleep at night. Spider was important to me.

So, of course, this is where my new Kindle began to falter. Wait, not falter, it failed. It was, in fact, God damn annoying. Every time I logged in I got an advertisement, and all right, I understand, I am getting Spider for free, I will gladly glance at your ad as I am clicking the X and getting out of the unwanted ad and to Spider. My old Kindle displayed an before I was able to play so this was nothing I couldn’t handle. Or so I thought. This new version cleverly hid the X to get you out of the screen. I swear this is true because I have seen it about a thousand times now and the X always eludes me. I search and search and the only symbol I can find is an arrow pointing to the left. I click on it and it takes me to the internet where a new game appears on my screen. A game I don’t want to play.

There is one particular game that I don’t know why anyone would play which my explain the assiduous need for the company to advertise for it. The game has young woman being kicked out of her house by her no good boyfriend. He is usually kissing on his new girlfriend in front of her. She burst into tears and leaves without a place to go until she finds shelter in a derelict house. The object of the game is to make the house livable for her. The game gives you a few choices to repairs you might make and you need to choose the right one to continue playing. For example you might have to choose between new windows or coal for a fire. Sometimes she has a small child which only adds to the fun if you make the wrong choice as the child begins to cry and shake from the cold. Some masochist must have thought this would be a great game to play but I am think it is dreadful.

Any way, I obviously would rather play Spider than the fix up the house game but again there is no X to get out of the game. The only button I can find is one the loads the application on to my Kindle. I have loaded new games on to my Kindle numerous times. I finally figured out that I can just exit the game through the settings and log in again to Spider which sometimes work and sometimes takes me through the whole process again. On rare occasions it takes me through the whole fucking process a third or fourth time before I get to Spider. But at what price I ask. My peace has been trifled with, my day has been ruined and my night time relaxation has turned to aggravation.

I am sorry to take this out on you, dear Readers, but it needed to be said. Perhaps you can write to your Congressperson on this important matter.

By on

I have no moral qualms about eating animals. The earth is a brutal place where animals killing other animals is a fundamental part of the food chain. I don’t see why humans should be any different than other animals. But I do have trouble with the mistreatment of these animals. They are, after all, feeding us which is a tremendous sacrifice on their part and vital to our existence. I think it is the least we can do is give animals a good life while they are still alive.

So, I read with great horror about the fire that killed 18,000 cows in one barn. How is that possible? I realize that this wasn’t your standard barn but if it was as big as a football field, could 18,000 cows live in it comfortably? Cows are big animals. 18,000 of them roaming, shitting, pissing and eating in a football field sized barn doesn’t seem big enough for that many animals. As far as the fire, or for that matter any disaster that might occur at the barn, how can you get 18,000 panic stricken cows out of a barn safely. What about disease? Isn’t putting 18,000 animals in the same barn risky if some disease should spread through the herd. The very notion that these animals are humanely and safely housed is ludicrous. This wasn’t even the worst barn disaster involving farm animals. Between 100,000 and 400,000 chickens died in another fire. Even if you lowball it at 100,000, that’s a lot of chickens in one barn. Can’t we do better than this?

I know the opposing argument is industrial farming is what has made cheap meat prices possible. If we housed animals better, we would need to spend more money which would bring up the price of food. Yes. Of course. We can’t be humane because it would cost too much money which has become a standard response to any problem we aren’t interested in fixing. It is just too damn expensive. We just have to learn to live with the homeless, insufficient public transportation, high rents, and paying people low wages. As an answer, I find too much money is a pretty lame response anymore because, of course, there is money, indeed plenty of money, there is however no will to make these things happen. Who wants to pay $5.00 for a hamburger?

Animals don’t have effective advocates mostly because a most of them are pressing vegetarianism as the answer. This radical change in the way Americans eat just isn’t going to happen. Beef, pork, and poultry are mainstays in the American diet. They can’t easily be removed from the American diet without resistance from people who like this diet. They want to eat meat. I don’t blame them. I want to eat meat.

What could change is how we view industrial livestock production. Which will be difficult and frustrating and will take years to have an effect but I think would have a more lasting impact on the American people. The first step is we need to care about the lives of animals which is easier said than done. Every time I learn anything about what happens to animals my reaction is usually the same — I don’t want to know what happens to my food. Their treatment almost always sounds cruel and inhumane. I would much rather an animal lived in the wild and was hunted for food than for an animal to live through industrial farming. Unfortunately that isn’t the way it happens and, to be fair, I understand why so much of our meat is produced this way. It is easier, cheaper and efficient for us that it might be painful for the animal is beside the point. We need this food.

But we can care about the animal and try to make their lives better. In order for it to happen we would have to actively learn what happens to animals and what actions would be possible to improve their lives. This would also mean we would have to change a lot of people’s attitudes towards animals. They aren’t just dumb animals that can be mistreated simply because they are dumb animals. They don’t care how they live as long as you feed them. As someone who has met cows and pigs , I don’t believe that for one minute. They are living creatures who deserve more from life than being stuck in barns and pens laying in their own shit and piss, never seeing the light of day for years on end. Because we have the capacity to think and to improve how we do things, we can care about their living conditions and make those changes when possible.

By on 2 Comments

I occasionally look for new music in Google with some key phrase like “Best Songs.” A list of songs will appear which I then listen to and buy. I thought I saw the song “Marie” by the Gleeman on one of these lists. Since I decided to write about “Marie” I tried to duplicate the search but I am somehow am unable to find it on any lists, so now I can’t really explain how I encountered Marie but I believe it was on somebody’s list of best songs.

The reason that I’m so interested in finding out how I found “Marie” is that it is not a song I would usually listen to. There are a lot of elements I don’t particularly like. The sentiment of being able to do anything you want is something I distrust and think is sometimes used destructively (see this post for more of my thoughts). The lyrics are a bit too saccharine for my taste. The singer’s voice is almost too overpoweringly good. I prefer, particularly in male singers, a more roughed voice, say like Tom Waits, then the Gleeman’s beautiful and perfect vocals.

Yet I find myself, after several listens, liking “Marie” so much that I keep repeating the song several times a day. The Gleeman sings with such vigor and excitement that I found myself enjoying it despite my reservations. I believe it will be one of the songs I will listen to so many times that I will become sick of it and stop listening to it for a long time and then rediscover it years down the road and fall in love with it all over again.All I can say is, right now, it made me feel really good for just a moment and, in the end, I think that is all you can really ask from a song. I know this is a terrible explanation because I can’t tell you why I like it, but I do like it and think that maybe some of you might find yourself in the same boat.

By on

I believe that Christians are so hypersensitive about gay/trans grooming is they do so much grooming of their own that they can’t believe other groups aren’t doing the same. Christian grooming is so pervasive that any attempt to reign in Christianity is seen as hostility towards Christianity. When they are asked to stop their proselytizing, particularly in public spaces, they see this as hostility as opposed to equal treatment of religion. There are now substantial numbers of pagans, Jews, Muslims and Hindus in the mix. With this type of diversity, it is best, in the interest of fairness, to eliminate religion from the public sphere. It is after all the Constitution that binds Americans together and not a specific religion.

The problem, then, is that Christians see this diminution in access to public spaces is somehow hostility to Christianity. But how? Are Christians forbidden from practicing their religion anywhere in the United States? Do they get thrown in prison for going to church services? Are they discriminated against if they apply for jobs? Are they put in large arenas and fed to lions? I am pretty certain that the hostility, in no way, matches these more hostile examples of the treatment of Christians. They just don’t happen in the United States.

A recent Supreme Court case found that it is legal for a football coach (in other words a public school teacher) to lead his team in prayer after the game. The majority opinion was that a little prayer is neutral. It give some comfort to the Christians in the audience and does no harm to the non-believers. All right then if a prayer is neutral, which runs counter to Christian thinking by the way, why worry about it if it isn’t included in a public space. Why argue about it at all then? Nothing is stopping the Christian players from getting together and praying and leaving the non-Christians out of it. But the non-believers aren’t forced to participate? It is up to the individual whether they participate. Well, yes, but when the person in charge of your team is praying, there might be an impetus to participate in the prayer in order to stay in his good graces.

Would the Court feel the same if they coach decided to exercise his first amendment rights to free speech if he decided to talk about Trans Rights. Indeed, we know that many states have curtailed teachers from engaging in this particular form of free speech. So talking about Trans people is grooming and wrong while praying is free speech and positive for Christians and neutral for everyone else. This begs the question who is the prayer for — the Christian children or the pagan children. If for the Christian children, it is hardly necessary. These children should be praying at home it their parents are so devout and, if they aren’t praying at home, why should I think it is so important to make these children pray after the football game? This leaves the pagan children who may not know anything about Christianity and who’s parents don’t want them to know anything about Christianity. Why do they need to see prayer? Because it is good? Because Christians are good? Because Christians don’t encourage transgender children to act on their feelings?

I can hear Christians getting exasperated with my arguments. No one is forcing the non-believers to prayer. The non-believers can keep respectfully silent while the Christians pray. Wait. Why? If you are expressing your first amendment rights to prayer on public property why do I have to respect you for that? If you are praying in your church, sure I have to respect you? But if you are praying on public lands, I owe you nothing. I can scream as loud as I want, interfere with your prayers in any way I see fit because you are actively grooming children to be Christians. You believe it is neutral and harmless, others may not believe the same thing. Why should the non-believers stand idly by while you foist your beliefs on others? What’s the harm in a little prayer? Well, then what is the harm in a little Satanic chant?

If you want to pray, have at it. Pray all you want but if you do it audibly in a public space, know that you are irritating me and thus are harming me. You can’t claim a Christian prayer is both neutral to non-believers and good for believers. Your aim is to influence non-believing children and that, by your own definition, is grooming and wrong. So stop it.

By on

Now that I am retired and safely out of the work environment, I have been thinking of ideas that can make the work day better for those still toiling away. I was trying to think of a way to get greater employee participation while, also, inspiring employees to both improve their performance and strive to maintain this level throughout the year.

The program is called Grab, Hold and Nudge. The company identifies its five best employees each month. Require all employees to attend a motivation event to be held in a wrestling/boxing ring. Then, from the ceiling, the company drops 1,000 $1 bills. The employees can keep as much as they can Grab and Hold while being free to Nudge the others in the ring to shake loose any of the bills they are holding. At the end of five minutes the employees can keep all the bills in their hand. Any unsecured money would be put into the pot for the following month.

There are several benefits to a program such as this:

  1. It encourages everyone to participate because every one could use some extra crash and let’s face it even an extra $20 is worth a little rumble in the ring. Full Employee Participation.
  2. Since this would be a monthly event, there would be plenty of time in a year to improve your performance and get that place in the ring. 12 Opportunities Each Year
  3. It is a measly $12,000 for all that potential motivation. Surely this could be made up by paring down the annual Summer Picnic or the Winter Party. Maybe skip the free alcohol or the starters menu. Cost Friendly
  4. The employees not in the ring would be inspired by all the cash and fun they will see in the ring. Think about all those cheering employees encouraging their friends to grab any unsecured cash while also seeing a tangible benefit what could happen to a good employee. The company could almost charge admission as it would be so exciting to watch. Inspiring
  5. But try not to charge as the competitive nature of Grab, Hold and Nudge teaches important behavioral lessons. First it would inspire employees to get in that ring and if that means working just a little bit harder, gosh darn it, I am going to do it. More importantly it shows the advantage of an aggressive and mercenary behavior in a work environment. Let me tell you, nobody will forget seeing the scramble for cash and the necessary skills you need to pocket all that money. It is difficult to be cut throat until you see the advantages of being cut throat and let me tell you five minutes watching people fighting for cash is worth more than a day of people skills training. Training and Development.
  6. Most of all it would bring a little fun for the audience and a little blood pumping exercise for the contestants. Your employees will be talking about each event and looking forward to the next month’s entertainment. Fun

Two cautionary notes. Grab, Hold and Nudge does not necessarily transfer to countries more dependent on coin currency than paper currency. For example, dropping one thousand pound coins from the ceiling in the UK could create a situation akin to the first twenty minutes of Saving Private Ryan. Nobody wants a blood bath so you might test this out first because coins can easily become bullets depending upon the height you drop them from. Just find a few stray cats and dogs, put them in the ring and see how to diminish any possible carnage from the coins.

There also is a slight chance that overly enthusiastic audiences members might rush the perimeter for any cash that might slip off the ring. I have found putting a moat surrounding the ring as an easy deterrent. If your company has a lot of minimum wage employees, you might think about adding some barbed wire to the moat as most people won’t risks the cuts and bruises acquired from such an impediment. Otherwise enjoy all of the fun this new inspiring program will bring to your workplace.

Good luck and let me know your thoughts on this innovative new program.

By on

During the 2009 banking crisis, I had a conversation with a prosperous real estate man. He wasn’t the least bit fazed by all the individuals losing their homes because they could no longer afford the monthly mortgage payments. He said it was a good lesson for these people who will now make better decisions regarding their future home purchases. When I pointed out that banks should learn this same difficult lesson so they too will learn their lesson about risky behavior. He was quiet for a moment as he absorbed my point.

Once he got his footing, he argued that this was different. The collapse of banks could lead to a much bigger collapse of the whole economic system, devastating everyone. The country can’t takes such a terrible risk because we don’t know where an economic collapse would take us. Of course, he is right. However, he also adamant that the ordinary person still needed to learn the lessons of the free market even if the too big to fail companies are spared this lesson. He understood the unfairness of it all, understood that it wasn’t quite the perfect capitalist system he talked about. But we, and I include myself in this, choose to live with this imperfect version of Capitalism because nobody wants an economic catastrophe that might occur if we let the rich go under.

This disconnect from theory and practice for the rich while maintaining the importance of market principles for the poor is a distinctly American position. Almost every other Western Economy offers a greater social safety net for its ordinary citizens while regulating companies too big to fail and taxing the rich who benefit from this protection of their businesses. Americans, on the other hand, protect the rich while letting the poor fall prey to the mercies of the market. So the game is rigged and everybody knows it but can’t admit it because socialism is bad. This misunderstanding of the government safety net is so out of whack with actual reality that I have met people who believe Medicare isn’t socialized medicine when it actually epitomizes how socialized medicine should work. But I can choose my own doctors with Medicare, it isn’t socialized medicine if I can choose my own doctors. I beat my head against the wall.

Instead we continue to push the facade that the market rules, the market decides and nothing is personal. If a person makes good decisions, they prosper. If a person make bad decisions, the person grows poor. Except this isn’t exactly how the system works. The people with a lot of money can make bad decisions and absolutely nothing happens to them because if they do go down the drain they can take the rest of us with them. Too big to fail is not market capitalism. Yet, we cling to this schizophrenic version of a market economy.

Once we see things differently, maybe, we could get the rich to take more responsibility for their protected enterprises. Greater regulation of business and higher taxes seems like a fair trade for this protection and, if you are thinking soberly about the continuation of capitalism, it is the only way to bring an element of fairness back into our version of a market system. It might even save capitalism from its very worst instincts.

Yet, as Robert Reich pointed out, these paragons of pure capitalism, are complaining about any effort to rein them in. They helpfully remind us that regulation and higher taxes are not how a free market works best. Right. Thanks. But if you are talking about how capitalism is supposed to work then, in a free market failing businesses are allowed to fail, aren’t they? Failing businesses would stop handing out bonus checks to their upper management if they knew the government wasn’t going to bail them out because they would need the money to save the business. So when this begins to happen, I will happy to listen to talk about how free markets are supposed to work. Until then you need to explain what concessions you are willing to make for the too big to fail guarantee that the taxpayers are giving your companies and it better be good too.

By on

I received $700 tax refund from California last year. Uncle Sam never got a chance to tax it so they wanted a chance this year. I needed a 1099 tax form from the state of California about this money in order to file my federal taxes. This is a tax form that California distributes by the millions each year. They have a record of it, they have the form prepared, they probably already sent it to me, I just can’t locate it. Sounds like a simple transaction. Well, you would be wrong. It took me a day and half of increasingly frustrating communication with the California Franchise Tax board who, I might add, did very little to assist me.

I first went to their web site. All Customer Service queries these days must start on line. If you don’t start on line, you will be reminded constantly to do so. Their recording will tell you that it is easier and faster. Although this hasn’t always been my experience this seemed like an easy enough request that an on line solution seemed perfectly reasonable. All I wanted was a tax document that millions of Californians receive every year. The document is already created and waiting for me. Of course, the website was a confusing array of options and explanations. After about half hour of reading, I was able to learn that I could have instant access to my tax documents if I created a personal profile for the site.

All right then, I tried to create a user ID and password. Except that somewhere in the distant past I must have already created a user ID because the website messaged me that my email address already had a user ID and password. Great. I check my list of user IDs and passwords which, before you tell me, I realize is not a secure way to deal with passwords. But damnit, I’ve tried to synchronize my User ID’s and passwords across all web sites I used. Honestly. Please believe me but they became out of sync almost instantaneously because some sites require frequent changes in the passwords, or won’t allow you to use the same password, all for very real security reasons although I am sure a seasoned hacker can get into my accounts faster than I can so what is the point. Any way I was in a bind because I didn’t remember my password or ID for the California Franchise Tax Board.

What’s a person to do? Well, I went to the link called “Forgot your used ID or Password.” The California Franchise Tax Board outsourced their security questions to a credit check company. These are not questions like your mother’s maiden name. They are questions like did you live at the following street address in 1979. I muddled through the first two questions. I was kind of proud that I could remember my university days address. The last question, however, stumped me. It gave a list of last names and asked me to put a check mark by all the names I have used to get credit. Since most of the names were not Fitzpatrick, I thought this would be simple. I was wrong. On the list was a version of Fitzpatrick but badly misspelled something like Ifitzaptrck. I have had my name misspelled before on a credit card but never recalled it being that badly misspelled so I didn’t check it and, because of that, I then failed the security check. They would need me to send me the my user ID and password through the mail. Why this is safer, eludes me, but I couldn’t ask anyone to explain.

Increasingly frustrated, I noticed that there was an on line chat. I always try the chat before calling because modern customer service departments discourage phone conversations at all costs. They want you to use web sites and on line tools. They have invested a lot of money into technology that prevents you from actually talking to someone and damnit they are going to make sure you use it. I started my chat with an explanation of my very simple need — a tax document verifying I received money from California. The customer service agent who responded to my chat gave me a phone number I should call and that department would help me with my request. I was delighted to hear. They want me to call them. I will talk to a person who will realize that this is a simple request, the person will push a few buttons and I will get my document. Again, I was wrong.

The phone tree announcement was the most complicated phone tree I have ever encountered with minutes of explanation and options and warnings to listen carefully because their options have changed recently. I focused completely on my options. I heard what I thought was my option, I pressed the button which sent me into another phone tree with even more options. I picked one of them and I went to another phone tree, so I kept pressing options until, and I have no rational explanation for what happened so don’t ask me, I found myself back at the introductory announcement giving me the same long explanation and the same numerous buttons to press. I tried pressing different buttons to see if this would connect me with an actual person. It didn’t. No matter what I did, the phone tree sent me back to the introductory message. So I started screaming agent, customer service, operator and any other word I could think of that might cause a human being to answer my query. I waited and waited, my screams turned into whimpers and eventually a recorded message came on telling me I hadn’t made a valid choice, thanking me for my call and disconnecting me. I tried two other times — always ending with them disconnecting me.

So, I decided to try the chat line to see if they can help me either a better phone number or just send me the damn forms. My chat agent told me that I needed to call the phone number I had just called to receive the document. I explained that nobody is answering. She said try first thing in the morning as there won’t be as much competition for customer service agents. I said answering isn’t the problem, the phone tree never gives me an agent to speak with. It always disconnects me. She insisted I had to call back. I asked if she could give my number to someone who could call me back. She said I had to call directly as they had to verify I could request the form besides she was only supposed to answer simple questions. All I wanted was one measly document that I know they send to millions of Californians every year. What could be more simple than that. Apparently she disagreed because she disconnected my chat.

I decided to give up and try calling in the morning. For some reason, again I have no rational explanation of why, I press a bunch of buttons successfully and instead of going back to first announcement, it takes me to a living breathing human being. After a bunch of questions about what she would see on my tax form — middle initial, my address, etc. — she relents and decides to send me the tax document I wanted but I would have to wait for U.S. Mail to deliver it. I ask how long I would have to wait. She said 14 days. This is cutting it close for the day taxes are due (OK, so yeah that one is my fault. I own it). I asked if she could send a PDF copy to me immediately instead. She pauses. I don’t think she knows what a PDF document is. Instead of allowing me to explain, she tells me I have to wait for the document in the mail, thanks me, and then disconnects.

This is terrible customer service:

  1. It is makes the customer do all of the work.
  2. If a person is calling, they have probably tried the website and the chat line, they need to talk to someone. Give them an easy option that allows them to talk to someone.
  3. If you are telling people a better time to call is in the morning, you are acknowledging you don’t have enough employees and that you deliver terrible customer service. Why do I have to call in the morning to get an agent to talk with me? It doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in your service.
  4. Making them run through a phone tree that gives long explanation of how to use the system says your phone tree is too complicated for the average person to plow through. It is confusing and frustrating.
  5. Saying that your website, chat line, and phone service are quick and easy doesn’t make it so. The customer makes that decision not you. Stop messaging that the customer might have better luck with web site or on line chat. It is irritating. The only person who is getting quick and easy service in this scenario is the Customer Service Department.
  6. If a person says they are having trouble with your system, help the customer. The system isn’t going to work for everyone. Don’t force a frustrated person to continue to use a system that clearly isn’t working for them. Yes, the customer may be a technophobe but then they are still a customer and they still need help. Making them even more frustrated is helping your reputation as a business and certainly isn’t providing the customer with any service.

So there.

.

By on

A principal at a private school in Florida was fired because she allowed students to see Michelangelo’s David. Ironically, this school emphasized a classic education. To which I ask, what could be more classic than Michelangelo’s David? Michelangelo is one of the greatest artists, if not the greatest artist, of the Italian Renaissance. The statue is based in a Biblical story. People come from all over the world and stand in long lines just to see this statue. The problem, as far as I can tell, is David stands naked before the world and some children shouldn’t see naked people.

To be fair, the principal has some fault here. There was some kind of problem with notifying the parents that their children would be seeing the naked David. The parents failed to get the communication. This was handled poorly and, certainly if the communication had been better, any parent who found David’s nudity disagreeable could have opted out. But the reaction to the mistake is disproportionate to the damage done.

If the disagreement was that David’s brazen nudity was too much for young eyes, I could agree with the parents who didn’t want their children to see the image. Unfortunately, it was more than that. One parent used the word pornographic to describe David. David as pornography suggests that David’s value is of a prurient nature only. So this small minority of people, against the judgement of almost all of Western society, are redefining Renaissance Art as pornography.

So, like clockwork, another controversy engulfed, unsurprisingly, another Florida school. A parent objected to the showing of a film called Ruby Bridges which is about a six year old Black girl integrating the New Orleans public school system. The school pulled the film because, well, Florida. The complaining parent was concerned that 2nd graders might learn about racism and actually start hating Black people. Yeah. Right. On the other hand, the movie is a tad bit embarrassing to White children as it show White people as bigots who threaten a six year old. Not exactly the image of great grandmother you want to hand down. Ironically, almost all of these stories are rich with irony, protecting White children from the past is vital. We can’t have white children questioning the actions of their forefathers. Yet, little Ruby Bridges had to walk through a crowd of hostile White people screaming racists chants. Hmm, which is a more traumatic experience.

This is why I get nervous about the all powerful parent and curriculum. Parents have a right and should have some say in what their children learn but there has to be a limit to their guidance. This is particularly important when the parents represent a small minority within the community and what they want is out of step with the rest of civilized world. We can quibble about whether it is age appropriate but David is a masterpiece and Ruby Bridges was subjected to vicious racism when going to school. Few will debate these points so both have historical importance. When is it appropriate for the youth of America to learn more about them?

Then there is the grooming going on here. These parents want to control what their children learn about the world. In the process, other people’s children are just collateral damage in their struggle. They are, in fact, trying to groom all children into their narrow view of America and Western Culture. This means no nude art and a no problems America. They will nitpick every disagreeable comma until they drain history and art of what little life is left in these courses. They believe that if they maintain this control over what a child learns that child will adopt their world view and all will be right afterwards.

Perhaps but it also fails to address the possibility of what happens when the child eventually encounter different ideas. Creating the illusion of a perfect world and, then, being unable to provide one, doesn’t prepare a child for the world they live in. It doesn’t help the child sort out good information from bad information. It, in fact, hobbles the child, and future adult, with the notion of a black and white world. America is good. Nudity is bad. Education, for these groomers, is not about thinking but about the recitation of canned responses. They will give you the answers that you want. Don’t you worry your pretty little head about it. They will protect children from anything that might make them squeamish or excited or rebellious. We won’t have to worry about these children thinking outside the box because they will be so tightly jammed into a nice little box they will have trouble breathing much less thinking.

By on

This mother’s letter to Slate amused me because she thought her son wasn’t having enough fun at college. He wasn’t drinking, getting high or screwing around enough for her. Furthermore, she suspects he is still a virgin. Do you hear me — a virgin. He is studying, for Christ’s Sake, why would he be doing that at college when he could be chugging beer, hitting on bongs and fucking strangers?

She asks the Slate Advice Columnist whether she should intervene. What exactly is she going to do? You are going to that keg party, Mister, you are going to get drunk and you are going to laid or else I stop paying for your tuition and I don’t mean maybe. It’s sweet, in a way, that she wants him to have fun but she is taking this hip mom routine way too far.

Here is a thought maybe he is having all that fun but he is just better at hiding it because he knows his snoopy Mom wants to know absolutely everything about his life.