Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Is...

He's... He's...

You know what? Fuck it! That bigot isn't even worth my time, nor is anyone who is so ignorant and intolerant as to call his level of bullshit bigotry "religious freedom" deserving of support.


  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

I am the Biracial Whisperer (or Maybe I have Biracialdar?)

I was watching 'Suits' this morning and actually paying close attention for a change. There was a close up of Rachel (played by Meghan Markle) taking the LSATs. I saw her freckles and hair and immediately and excitedly blurted (out loud, sadly), "OMG! She's biracial!" For some reason, I always had assumed she was Hispanic, even though "Zane" (her character's last name) isn't a particularly Latino name. But there wasn't any mistaking the HD closeup. I Googled "Meghan Markle biracial," and BOOM, there it was. Just like my kids, her mom is black, and her father is white of Irish descent. 




Meghan Markle and her mother (from her Instagram)


Mariah Carey... Jennifer Beals... Rashida Jones... Soledad O'Brien...  Vin Diesel... Wentworth Miller... and now Rachel Markle. Even before seeing some "OMG! She looks white, but SURPRISE!!" article, I could tell they were biracial. Look, I know I am not the only one. There are probably a lot of you reading this going, "Duh! I knew too!" But, just like when a celebrity comes out as gay or lesbian, there's something oddly wonderful and fantastic to me about finding the closeted (whether it is simply because the issue has never been raised or addressed because here's no necessity to it or because a record company or TV producer intentionally wanted to leave the impression that the performer is white) biracial people.

I also get people who don't understand my excitement about these discoveries. But for those people, when someone asks you if or implies that you are the nanny of your own child, you'll get it.






  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Review and GIVEAWAY!! Win a copy of Sandra Boyton's "Frog Trouble"

Disclaimer: I did not and will not receive any financial compensation for this post. I received a copy of the Frog Trouble CD for review purposes. All opinions expressed in the review are solely the opinions of the Pop Culture Family and shall in no way be imputed to the Warner Music Group, Sandra Boyton, or Big Honcho Media.




REVIEW

As I have mentioned before, my house is filled with Sandra Boynton fans. So you can imagine how over-the-moon giddy I was when I was asked to review her latest CD. Now, everyone in my house likes country music. Pop Culture Dad, despite being born on the East Coast and raised in the Midwest, is probably the biggest country music fan in our house; and I, despite being born and raised in Texas and owning horses and a cattle ranch (seriously, I do), am a much smaller country music fan. My dad raised me on mostly Willie Nelson, Dolly Parton, Reba McEntire, and Kenny Rogers-type country, with some Crystal Gayle thrown in here and there (the classic stuff). In high school, I frequently played Pam Tillis, Trisha Yearwood, or John Michael Montgomery in rotation with Boys II Men, Madonna, and Dr. Dre. But as I got older, my tastes in country music got more pop-py. Sure, I still like the songs I used to, but if I'm going to pick new country music to listen to, I'm more likely to rev up Shedaisy, Faith Hill, Tim McGraw, Sugarland, or Dixie Chicks than… I dunno, pick someone who's won a CMA recently. You can keep your Tobey Keith, thank you.

So I approached this CD with some reservations. I love Sandra Boynton, but would I like this CD? The answer is apparently, for the most part, yes. Pop Culture Dad had no such reservations. When the CD arrived, he looked at the list of artists and said, "I'm going to love this song… and that one… and that one." He was right in most cases. [The Pop Culture Kids have pure minds, free of biases, and went into this whole gig with no pre-formed opinions whatsoever].

Overall, it's a great CD. It's very kid-friendly, and definitely doesn't give a parent pause like some of the songs on Radio Disney sometimes can. This is not a CD for people who don't like country music, however. If you consider Taylor Swift real country and are expecting that kind of sound, this is not the CD for you. Some of these tracks (most of them) have a real, old country kind of feel, banjos and all. There are some crossover hits, like Darius Rucker's "Beautiful Baby" or Ben Folds' "Broken Piano," but overall, there is no doubt that Frog Trouble is country.

The Good: My entire family agrees that "Heartache Song" is the best track on this CD. It's a fun, bluesy track that starts with Kacey Musgraves belting, "They made me cleanup my room..." before launching into other apparent woes of being a kid. Not gonna lie, the Grease geek in me kind of thought of Stockard Channing singing "Look at Me I'm Sandra Dee" in parts (this is a good thing, people). Another favorite of mine (though Pop Culture Dad may disagree) is "Beautiful Baby." Darius Rucker has this uncanny ability to sing songs that make you look at your children and breakdown into happy tears.

The Not-So-Good: The first song Pop Culture Dad prematurely declared he would love turned out to be the Pop Culture Family's least favorite. Look, no disrespect to Alison Krauss (one of Pop Culture Dad's favorite singers), but "End of a Summer Storm" was a wee but depressing. I mean, her voice sounded just fine (I guess), but the song was overall kind of a bummer. Pop Culture Dad thought it just didn't have a place on a kids' album. Also, I liked "Copycat," but I don't want to, because I still don't forgive Brad Paisley for that intentionally racist "Accidental Racist," so despite liking the song, I'm giving it a very stubborn thumbs-down.  



In general, I think any family who likes country music or just fun kids' music, regardless of genre, will like Frog Trouble. Now, thanks to Warner Music Group, one lucky reader will get a chance to own it for free!


THE GIVEAWAY

Before we get into the details from the concert sponsor, Warner Music Group, let me do some additional disclaimers [sorry, I'm a lawyer. That's what we do].

° The giveaway ends at midnight Monday, October 14, 2013, prevailing Central Time. Any entries received after 11:59.59 CT on October 13, 2013 will not be entered in the giveaway.
° The prizes will actually be furnished by Warner Music Group. I'm the facilitator. Once the winner is chosen, Warner is the one sending the prize. If the Post is slow, don't yell at me, please.
° The prize can only be shipped to a US address.
° While the CD does not in any way contain adult content, this giveaway is limited to people 18 and older
° All the information below is from Warner Music Group. When you hit the line, that's when my opinion ends and theirs begins.
° There are four ways to enter: 

1. The first is mandatory—leave a comment. I'm disabling comment verification just for this giveaway. Your comment can be about anything. Don't use it as an excuse to get all crazy and internet-trollie. I am still a member of the Mom Pledge, and anyone who uses this free period to go bananas with hate-speech or bullying will not only be ineligible from the contest, but will be banned from the site.
2. Like The Pop Culture Mom Facebook page. This option is worth two entries. If you already like the page, leave a separate comment to make sure your "like" is counted.
3. Follow me on Twitter
4. Retweet about the contest. One Tweet per day only, please.
° The giveaway is being managed by Rafflecopter, so to make sure your entry counts, go here:  a Rafflecopter giveaway


That's it! That's all you have to do! And now... A word from our sponsor:






FROG TROUBLE

Audio CD by Sandra Boynton
In Stores Now

Hang on to yer hat, Cowboy! Experience Sandra Boynton’s Frog Trouble with your little one!

One (1) winner receives:

·         Kid-safe headphones
·         copy of Frog Trouble CD


Giveaway open to U.S. addresses only.
Prizing & samples courtesy of Warner Music Group.

About the CD

Grammy nominated and bestselling children’s author, songwriter and music producer, Sandra Boynton, presents her first Country album, Frog Trouble. The album features 12 original songs by Boynton, arranged and mixed with Michael Ford.

Boynton produced the tracks mostly in Nashville, with renowned session musicians and an All-Star roster. Each artist was hand-picked by Boynton for this retro sounding album, including Dwight Yoakam, Fountains of Wayne, Mark Lanegan, Kacey Musgraves, Ryan Adams, Ben Folds, Brad Paisley, Alison Krauss, Josh Turner, Darius Rucker, Linda Eder, and Falls Mountain Cowboys.

With composer Michael Ford, Boynton has written and produced five albums, three of which have been certified Gold. She also received a GRAMMY nomination for the Boynton/Ford album Philadelphia Chickens. Frog Trouble has tracks ranging from Country to Bluegrass to Rockabilly to Honkytonk to Blues. It’s truly an album for everyone or, as the cover says, "For ages one to older than dirt."

FROG TROUBLE Track Listing

1.         I’ve Got a Dog – Dwight Yoakam
2.         Trucks – Fountains of Wayne
3.         Frog Trouble – Mark Lanegan
4.         Heartache Song – Kacey Musgraves
5.         When Pigs Fly – Ryan Adams
6.         Broken Piano – Ben Folds
7.         Copycat – Brad Paisley
8.         End of a Summer Storm – Alison Krauss
9.         Alligator Stroll – Josh Turner
10.       Beautiful Baby – Darius Rucker
11.       Deepest Blue – Linda Eder
12.       More Frog Trouble – Falls Mountain Cowboys (a fictitious group)

Frog Trouble Online
Visit the official website
Like Sandra Boynton on Facebook                   
Watch clips on YouTube                  
Follow @SandyBoynton on Twitter #FrogTrouble

Available at the following retailers

Amazon
Barnes & Noble
iTunes

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

9 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Parenthood: "She's So White!"

While I was party planning this afternoon, I started watching last night's episode of 'Parenthood'. Barely five minutes in, I fell over laughing when Crosby held up his newly-born daughter and exclaimed with shock, "She's so white!" And 10 minutes in, I nearly died again when Grandpa Braverman said, "She's even lighter than she was in the hospital!" and then expressed his confusion at the term light-skinned. Ah... All of this is so familiar to parents of biracial children.

Pop Culture Dad and I had the same reaction when Little Diva was born. I mean, we knew she would likely be born much more pale than she would eventually end up. Many black children (particularly with lighter-skinned parents) and most biracial kids are. My doula with Little Diva has biracial grandchildren, and she tried to prep us for the possibility before we went into the delivery room. This wasn't an earth shattering revelation. I was a pale child, and I've been around plenty of black and biracial newborns. I don't know any black person who would be particularly shocked by the revelation that some black and biracial babies will be darn-near white at birth.

What Pop Culture Dad and I were not prepared for, however, was that our then-blue eyed (now green), pale child, would pretty much stay pale—very pale—for years. My multi-ethnic mother comes from a long line of "high yella" women. My dad's mother was also very beige. But I'm brown. And my mother-in-law is a pretty deep tan. My husband isn't even that pale himself. Somehow, though, for the first three-and-a-half years of her life, our baby girl was lighter than her father.

This was a real problem for me when Little Diva was a baby. Despite the fact that she looks just like my toddler pictures, when it was just the two of us, people often asked me if she was my child or just assumed I was the nanny. I was so glad when she learned to talk and started calling me "Mommy" in public, so the people who were staring and trying to figure things out would look away. I also bought her several shirts that said things like "She's my mommy, not the nanny!" or which hadn't picture of a vanilla/chocolate ice cream cone baring the slogan "Swirled!" Even now that Little Diva has (finally) got a little bit of a tan, her skin color is often a topic of conversation among people. Annoying...

All of this "nanny" and "OMG, she looks white" [she does not] stuff is perhaps why immediately after giving birth to Super Girl, I exclaimed, "Oh, thank goodness! She has some color!" No one wants to be called the nanny.

I'll be interested to see as the season plays out, if Jasmine will experience any of the "Uh... Is that... um... your baby,... or, uh... are you the, um....?" nonsense that so many black mothers of biracial (or just light-skinned) babies deal with. If there are any black writers (or white writers with biracial families) on staff, I imagine it's coming.




  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Why Green Eggs and Ham, Mr. Cruz?

Last night, Ted Cruz, the junior senator from my state (and general stain on humanity), decided to filibuster into the wee hours of the night on his crusade against ensuring proper healthcare coverage for million Americans. During his all-night-long rage against quality of life, he read Green Eggs and Ham. Why that book instead of any other Dr. Seuss tale? Well, ignoring the irony of reading a book about someone who stubbornly insists he hates something he's never tried only to find out in the end he likes it to protest something Sen. Cruz has declared he hates, even though it is yet untested, I have some theories about why the other Seuss books were a no-go:



1. Mr. Brown Can Moo, but that mooing was the result of a pre-existing medical condition. Formerly, Mr. Brown could not qualify for insurance based on that condition; but now, thanks to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), he can no longer be turned down by insurance companies because of any pre-existing conditions, even mooing.

2. The Cat and the Hat's friends, Dick and Sally, are now college students in their 20s. Their mothers did not mind at all if the did opt to stay on their families' plans as dependent children. Thanks to the ACA, Dick and Sally can stay on that plan as long as they are dependents, up to age 26.

3. Oh The Places You'll Go, like to the doctor when you're mildly sick, instead of the minor emergency room; because now that you have insurance, you'll have real co-pays instead of attempting to duck hospital bills that come later.

4. Horton Hears a Who, but now that the ACA requires strengthened standards for community mental health centers, there's a good chance he can find a qualified doctor to help him work through the schizophrenic episodes.

5. You're Only Old Once!, and under the ACA, there will now be a temporary reinsurance program for employers (reimbursing them for 80% of claims between $15,000 and $90,000) providing health insurance coverage to retirees over the age of 55 who are not yet eligible for Medicare.

6. If I Ran the Circus, it would have to provide me healthcare insurance or pay a nominal penalty so long as I remained full-time and it had 50 or more employees.

7. I Can Lick 30 Tigers Today!, but I'm pretty sure I would need immediate medical attention afterward. Now I can afford it!

8. I am not Going to Get up Today! Well, I wasn't. But then my employer, a small business, received a grant under the ACA for establishing a wellness program, and now I realize the benefits of getting up and moving.

9. The Butter Battle (Book) was resolved when I read the nutritional content on my menu at Cracker Barrel. The ACA requires chain restaurants and food sold from vending machines to disclose the nutritional content of each item. Whelp! I dodged a bullet there!

10. The Lorax developed a powerful cancer-fighting drug from those glorious trees, and he received a 12-year patent on exclusive use before the FDA will be able to make a generic version of the biologic drug (which hopefully will not further deplete the tree resources!).
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

I Judge Parenting Styles Like I Judge Comma Syntax

Today one of the pages I follow posted an article from the Huffington Post entitled "10 Uncomfortable Confessions From an Imperfect Mom." One of the confessions, which the page featured, was, "I know that every time I feel defensive or judgmental about someone else's parenting choices, it's because I am less than confident about my own." Commenters were asked to agree or disagree. While there were other confessions that resonated with me almost to an eerie level of discomfort, this one did not. 

Let me be clear: I know I'm not a perfect mom. I'm far from it, in fact. If parenting could be judged by a report card, I'm sure my children would give me varying marks ranging from A++ to F, and those grades in each category would change in any given day. My mother would probably give me different scores, as would a Pop Culture Dad and the rest of society. Heck, I would give myself a broad range of scores. But (and as I responded to the post) I went into this gig knowing that perfection was a ridiculous standard, and I would never fall into those traps setup by the Mommy Wars where I would be forced to feel defensive about being less than perfect or even just different. So I accept my imperfections, but also know that I truly am doing the best I can do—whatever "best" looks like in that moment—within my comfort level. If someone thinks I'm doing it wrong, s/he is certainly entitled to that opinion, just as I am entitled not to give a flying f*ck what someone else thinks.

That's not to say I don't judge other parents. I do (boy, do I!). We all do. Judging others is natural. Anyone who says they've never judged another person is a liar. Even if you don't mean to, often you do. And, while I've certainly seen some harsh judgments come from obvious places of insecurity, that isn't always the case. Judgment can also come from a place of feeling in your bones that your way is better. No, just because you have that feeling doesn't make you right. Unfortunately, your opinion can never be right. Even when your opinion is fact-based, the facts upon which you base your opinion can be right, but that doesn't mean the ultimate conclusion you derive from those facts is correct. Yes, there are some universal truths out there about which we all may have opinions; but most of us are dealing with shades of gray, penumbras of life in which no universal truths are challenged.

More to the point, though, just because you judge someone doesn't mean you have to vocalize it. That's what I think we all really mean when we say people shouldn't be so judgmental. Yeah, sure, we are all going to be a little judgy; but there's a huge difference between (i) keeping that judgment to yourself or a conversation among like-minded individuals and (ii) bombarding the person or group you are judging with your "facts" (opinions) about how crappy their parenting is. Generally, unless someone asks you for your opinion; they're in "your house," so to speak... (blog, Facebook page, Twitter feed, journal, etc.—anywhere you should be reasonably expected to voice your opinion about your feelings); you are in the midst of an open debate/dialogue/discussion; a person is operating on truly wrong intel; or someone is doing something that any reasonable [the standard for "reasonable" here not being "totally agrees with me"] person would agree constitutes a "universal bad," no one really gives a rat's patootie that you think they're the Worst Parent in the World for [fill in the blank with polar-opposite-of-yours parenting style about which you're really judgmental]. And that's fine that you're confident about you parent. I'm confident about the way I parent, too. But we're both wrong... and right... and neither of the above.

It's the same way I feel at work when someone gives me a draft that doesn't use Oxford commas. At the end of the day, neither one of us is right; we just have different preferences. My judging a writer for giving me a memo devoid of serial commas doesn't mean I'm insecure about my use of them. And even though I have many grammar and legal writing books that say [paraphrasing], "In America, unless you are a periodical, we use the Oxford comma, dammit!!!" doesn't make me right. It's okay to silently roll your eyes and mutter "man, they've got this all WRONG." When I'm controlling the document (just like when I'm running my household), it's perfectly okay for me to change every single one of the comma clauses to suit my preference. It is not okay, however, to throw the document at the other person and tell him/her how stupid s/he is for not doing it your way [and, yes, that has happened to me too... I was a big firm lawyer for 12 years, after all]. 
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Five Reasons Why I Have No Problem With Ben Affleck as Batman

When it was announced over the weekend that Ben Affleck would play Batman, people immediately lost their damn minds. All of the sudden, it was like they had been personally betrayed or something. I don't get the outrage. What's wrong with Ben Affleck?

Okay, sure, he's made some missteps in his career (like Gigli). But he's also done some fantastic movies (Argo, The Town, Pearl Harbor, Chasing Amy... Just to name a few). He has two Oscars. I mean, okay, neither one of them is for acting; but he still has two Oscars. 

Matt Damon Defends Ben Affleck as Batman – But Won't Be Robin
Ben Affleck and Matt Damon
MARION CURTIS/STARTRAKS
So what is the issue? Because he started out as mainly a comedy actor rather than an action hero, do people think that he is not allowed to make the transition to Batman? If so, let me remind you of a few things:

1. Matt Damon, Ben Affleck's BFF, had the same acting roots, yet no one has had any problem with Matt as Jason Bourne. Sure, he's been more selective in his roles, but he's had a couple of movie duds, too. Not to mention, Ben still has one more Oscar than he does, so...
2. The first big screen Batman in modern-ish times was Michael Keeton. Let the sink in: Michael Keeton. As in Mr. Mom, Multiplicity, and Beetlejuice Michael Keeton. And he was phenomenal. No shade to Christian Bale (or Adam West) or anything, but he is still my favorite Batman of all time.
3. Batman has been played by so many men in movies. Even if you're used to Christian Bale, you had to expect his reign to end at some point. It's like James Bond or Doctor Who—many men will portray, you won't like them all equally, but you should at least watch the performance before declaring it awful and unworthy of the title. And, lezbereal for a minute here: Is it even remotely possible that Ben Affleck could be a worse Batman than Val Kilmer??? Doubtful.
4. This isn't a Dark Knight movie, so there's no need for someone dark. It's Batman vs. Superman for cripes' sake!
5. Ben Affleck is sexy. Damn sexy. And he's going to look fabulous in that Batsuit.
How ya like them apples?
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Yet Another Moral Outrage


I had some other things planned for today's post... some lighter, fluffier, hopefully little-bit-funny things... then I found out about Judge G. Todd Baugh in Montana, and all those plans went out the window.
 
On Monday, Judge Baugh sentenced a pedophile... a then-49-year old teacher who two years ago raped his 14-year old student... who from the pressures brought on her by both the "relationship" and the trial killed herself in January of this year... to a month. I guess, to be more accurate, I should say that he sentenced this stain on humanity to 15 years, but then decided to give him time served for the one day the d-bag actually spent in jail and reduced the entirety of the sentence to 31 days. I'm not making this up.
 
What could have possibly made the judge believe that 31 days is a sufficient punishment for a teacher betraying the trust of a young girl in his care, grooming her to be a sexual partner, violating her, and then dragging this thing out until she could no longer take the emotional pressure [the sentencing was prolonged while this jerkwad underwent a three-year treatment program... which it turns out he wasn't really attending, and during that time he was supposed to be in treatment, he continued to—in violation of the terms of the program—have contact with minors and entered into a sexual relationship, resulting in him eventually getting kicked out of the program]? Well, because the child was much "older than her chronological age" and was "as much in control of the situation" as her 49-year old rapist-teacher with respect to the relationship. 'Scuse me??? She was a child. And this child was in this man's care. He was supposed to be someone she could trust. And he violated her. She was not in control. She was 14. I don't care how sexually experienced she was or was not or how much makeup she wore, he was still the adult here, he was still in a position of power, and he knew he shouldn't be touching a 14-year old girl. Period.
 
The "judge" was also persuaded by the rapist's pleas for leniency, because he was going to be "branded as a sex offender" for the rest of his life and has had his life ruined by the "scarlet letter of the Internet." No, buddy, your life was ruined because you raped a child. You had a choice to make here which would have prevented you from being "branded as a sex offender" and having your life ruined—that choice was to not rape a child. But you did, and under normal circumstances, with a normal judge, you should have been required to pay the consequences.
 
All of this slut-shaming of the victim while feeling sorry for the perpetrator eerily reminded me of CNN's coverage of the Steubenville rapists, wherein Candy Crowley, Poppy Harlow, and others harped on and on about how the guilty verdict and maximum fine would affect the poor rapists and showed not one minute of concern for the girl the "two young men" had raped. Poppy was practically on the verge of tears talking about how it was "incredibly difficult" to watch "as these two young men—who had such promising futures, star football players and very good students—literally watched as they believed their life [sic] fell apart." Seriously. She said that. And it went on and on. Contributor Paul Callan weighed in on what such a verdict meant for these 16-year olds who were crying in court and how they would be punished for the rest of their lives: "There's always that moment of just... Lives are destroyed. But in terms of what happens now, the most severe thing with these young men is being labeled as registered sex offenders. That label is now placed on them by Ohio law. That will haunt them for the rest of their lives."
 
Yes. That happened. That was said. Are you outraged? If you aren't, you should be.
 
These boys (like this teacher) will be "haunted" by the "label" of sex offender for their entire lives, because they made a conscious decision to become sex offenders. Sure, when each of these three men decided to pursue the act of raping a teenage girl, it never occurred to them that a consequence might some day be that they would be registered sex offenders... but it should have. Honestly, I would hope that the act of having sexual intercourse with someone too drunk, too unconscious, or too young to legally, knowingly, or rationally give consent should be enough of a deterrent to this kind of behavior; but for those fools who are somehow not motivated by morality and a conscience like the rest of us, I would hope that the legal system doing its job would be enough of a deterrent. For those who persist, then I'm happy we have the legal system there as a backup. At least it worked in the case of the Steubenville Rapists [I hope]. But this teacher? Where's his motivation to stop?
 
"Judge" Baugh said he believed the Teacher-Rapist wasn't a likely repeat offender. He had no basis for this really. I mean, the man couldn't even successfully comply with a three-year treatment program after being caught raping one of his students! So now we're just supposed to trust that he—after being given the lightest of slaps on the wrist—is supposed to prevent himself from diddling with young girls in the future? Not likely. And, I'm sure if someone was motivated to poke around a bit more, they would find that he's poked around with a lot more students than this one.
 
If you're curious of Judge Baugh has had anything to say since the backlash for his sentencing started, you're in luck. Turns out he totally had something to say on Tuesday:
 
I think that people have in mind that this was some violent, forcible, horrible rape ... It was horrible enough as it is just given her age, but it wasn't this forcible beat-up rape.
 
Oh.... I get it! Not one of those "legitimate rapes"? Well, I guess we can't be upset then, can we? Cuz, ya know, it's not like those rapes where you don't get beaten up at knifepoint actually count, right? Enjoy your re-election efforts this year, Braugh. Should be an interesting political season in Billings.
 
As for the rest of society, those possibly capable of learning, when are we going to learn to stop feeling sorry for the perpetrators and stop blaming the victims? When someone gets carjacked, you never hear, "Well, what did you expect driving around in a nice car like that on the open road where anyone could see you? You're just asking to get it taken from you at gunpoint." When a company is hit by embezzlement, no one argues, "C'mon now! It just had all that money sitting in its bank accounts! What did the company expect an employee would do??" But there are certain types of situations—those usually involving the already powerless (like rape, sexual orientation-based hate crimes, or racial/gender discrimination) where it's perfectly normal to hear the victim getting blamed rather than holding the perpetrators accountable for their actions, even by people who are themselves similarly situated as the victims. We have seen it in Poppy Harlow and Candy Crowley sympathizing with the rapists over the rape victim. We saw it when Don Lemon blamed blacks for racial discrimination perpetrated against them. We hear it when a transgendered person or a gay person who is thought of by (those with issues) as "too flamboyant" is killed or beaten.
 
Perhaps its because we've let the powerful dictate the treatment of the powerless for so long that the powerless have started to believe the propaganda? I'm not sure. But I do know it's time we put an end to this. Victimization is rarely (if ever) the victim's fault.

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Miley Cyrus and the Question of Priorities

Miley, Miley, Miley... WTF, girl? Honestly, there isn't much I can say about her train wreck of a performance at the VMAs Sunday night than has already been said in many many places and by many people (including myself).
 So this is only partly about Miley. I want to talk about... priorities.

This afternoon, one of the pages I follow [and often share] posted this:
(W) Today's News quiz for the American public:
The phrase "MORAL OBSCENITY" is trending because:a) US Secretary of State John Kerry used it in the official statement referring to chemical weapons use against civilians in Syriab) Hundreds of mainstream media references to Miley Cyrusperforming at MTV awards yesterday.
Is the Web a mirror in which we see a real reflection of our society? If so, it ain't a pretty face 
It was a good point, but I believe it was pointless. For one thing, instead of getting the serious discussion I think the post was intended to have, a huge chunk of the comments (at least, as far as I bothered to scroll through--there were a lot) were about Miley's performance. I believe that was the exact opposite of what this page intended to do. But, more than that, this page (one I normally love, mind you) and some of the commenters on this page's status whose contributions to this post I read (the ones that weren't about Miley) about how "stupid," "dumbed down," or "desensitized" people who talked about the pop tart instead of John Kerry are, need to get a grip.


You know, it's perfectly possible and even acceptable to care about mindless, mundane things like Miley Cyrus making a complete fool of herself, Robin Thicke, and the rest of us while also caring about actually important world events. Just because you don't talk about Syria... or Egypt... or the NSA... or Trayvon Martin... or the 50th Anniversary of the "I Have a Dream Speech" on your Facebook wall doesn't mean you aren't informed and don't care. And, maybe, you know, underneath all of those grains of emptiness of millions of Facebook users and bloggers going on and on about Miley Cyrus and that poor excuse for "twerking" is a serious and legitimate concern that demands attention--like one woman who commented on this status pointing out that it's not a very "Liberal" (part of the page's name) attitude to have absolutely zero concern for the very feminist issue of why women feel they need to exploit themselves in order to be relevant?
Dafuq?? I'm pretty sure Paula Patton was ready to snatch those pine cones off her head...
For myself, though, I was just enjoying mindless fun--which I'm entitled to have. I read the news often. I'm generally up on current events. I am certainly no stranger to analyzing and ranting (both on this blog and on my personal Facebook wall) about world news and national or local political issues. However, for all of my talk today about the VMAs and all my talk for the last few months about women's issues, racism, voting rights, and other issues du jour, I have not posted one thing about Syria or Egypt. Why?

Well, for me (and only for me), when it comes to my political rantings and ravings I prefer to post about things that outrage me that I feel I (or my Facebook friends) can have some control over. Can the people I know change the way they approach and view others (subconsciously often) regarding race or gender? Absolutely. Can I remind my Facebook friends and family members (especially my younger family members who may still live in a bubble where they are 100% unaware of any news that doesn't fall into the entertainment category) of how important it is to vote? Of course. Can I do a thing about a government using chemical weapons on its citizens? Probably not. I can sign all the MoveOn.org petitions in the world, but there's nothing about my behavior, my actions, or even my moral outrage that could possibly do a darn thing. And really, that's part of my internal litmus test for my Facebook page and this blog. Some of the factors I use are: (1) is it funny or cute?; (2) do I actually have any personal or professional knowledge about this subject that allows me to talk about this without sounding like a complete idiot?; (3) does it directly affect me?; (4) can we do anything about this?; (5) is it worth my breath? Those aren't everything I internally process in approximately 10 seconds before I post something, but it's a pretty good summary of where most things break down. But that's just me.

My friends all have different tests. I have some friends who have one or two topics that get their goat, and they will latch on to any and every topic related to those issues. I have other friends who (as I often do) have a large variety of topics from which to draw their internet material. And I have other friends who feel like they would rather leave the negative issues in one place and use Facebook and blogging for the silly, funny, happy, and mundane. It's our variety that makes the world go 'round. Sure, I have friends who may have been busy posting about vacations or sharing funny pictures of polar bears when I was ranting and raving about the Texas Legislature's war on women, but that doesn't mean that they had absolutely no idea what was going on. It didn't mean they didn't care. And it also didn't mean that their cute polar bear pictures were somehow a waste of time or 100% unimportant (after all, funny and cute things improve your quality of life).

When I posted a very heartfelt "Some of you have been far too silent, so please delete me if you don't care about these couple of issues that are part of the essence of me and some of the most important things I believe" plea to all of my friends on my personal Facebook page, I got responses from a lot of people saying something to the effect of, "Please don't take my silence as an indication that I don't care. I do care. I just don't use Facebook for that." And, quite honestly, I have a lot of friends who admitted in one way or another that they really didn't care about certain issues, either because something else in their lives took priority or because they completely disagreed with my view of things. Whichever of these camps some of the answers fell in, it was good litmus test for me--to what extent was I willing to be okay with remaining in the online of company of people who didn't feel certain topics worthy of discussion or who fundamentally disagreed with me about things that I found so important that I was physically ill at points over the topic? The answer actually was, "Well... it depends on the person and why s/he doesn't want to discuss that kind of topic here/whether I can respect his or her point of disagreement." But it was also a good reminder: Silence on a topic doesn't mean someone isn't paying attention.

A friend of mine always has this statement about people's struggles: It isn't a contest, and someone suffering more doesn't mean that my struggles don't exist. Similarly, just because a person focuses on something mundane and mindless doesn't mean that s/he is mundane or mindless. It doesn't mean that the important, interesting, and topical thing isn't important to him/her. But it also isn't a contest. Why can't you be outraged by Syria and Miley Cyrus "twerking" (hardly) at the same time? Are we not allowed to multi-task anymore? Doesn't the fact that I belong to a page where discussion of heavy political and global issues is the norm while ranting about Real Housewives mean that I am multi-tasking?



So my answer to the page that I briefly considered un-liking today before shrugging off this one hiccup in our otherwise stable relationship (wherein I repost 15 gazillion articles from it a day) is this:
No, the web is not a mirror in which to see a reflection on our society. It is what it is. Everyone chooses what they want to share and to what they want to contribute, and sometimes that isn't going to be the heaviest and most serious issue of the day; but it is quite presumptuous to think that just because the things that the majority choose to discuss ad nauseum aren't the things you consider important means our society is headed for a downfall. After all, isn't the fact that a country is using chemical weapons on its people while an over-indulged former Disney girl performs the ultimate cry for attention on the same weekend partial evidence that we've kinda already fallen?
I dunno... This is pretty damn morally outrageous, too....

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

What is the Breakup Bitterness Window?

Just a little warning: Last night's VMAs provided me with such good raw material that I might end up riding this train all the way to the end of my "31 Write Now" challenge. That being said, let's get to our first subject: Taylor Swift.
 
Oh, Taylor!
 
Taylor Swift looked so beautiful last night at last night's VMAs. When Pop Culture Dad and I saw her being interviewed on the red carpet, at first we didn't even know who she was. Miss Swift has certainly grown up nicely. Or so we thought...
 
Barely 10 minutes into the show, One Direction took the stage for the first time. Insert Taylor's first recorded f-bomb of the night. One of many, it seemed. Throughout the night, you could see gorgeous, grown up-looking Taylor whispering to her bestie, Selena Gomez, some version of "f*** you," "f*** off," or "shut the f*** up" EVERY TIME One Direction (and ex-Harry Styles) took the stage. Pop Culture Dad mentioned it after the first time: "Didn't that look like Taylor Swift just said, 'F*** you"? Why is she saying that? Is it to Selena Gomez?? Why?". That's when I had to explain the One Direction connection to him. Pop Culture Dad was as instantly confused as anyone with any sense of rationality should be, "I mean, did they date a long time? How many guys has she dated since then? Did they just break up or something?" Exxxxxxxxxactly. And, if the F-bombs weren't enough, when Taylor accepted her award for the video for "I Knew You Were Trouble," she decided to give a virtual f-you to the man who inspired the song who "knew who" he is [which is pretty odd, since according to many sources, the song could easily be about one of three guys, even though the most likely and most famously suspected source is the fabulous Mr. Gyllenhaal... see more on this below].


 
Along with Miley's awful "twerking" <snort> incident (more on that tomorrow), Taylor Swift's rage was a hot topic of conversation this morning. Nicole on the Morning Mashup asked, "How long exactly should you still be bitter? A couple of months, maybe?" My answer to Nicole (via Twitter) was, "You're right about Taylor Swift's window. You should never be bitter longer than the relationship lasted!!! She has issues." That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
 
Taylor Swift and Harry Styles started dating in late-November/early-December 2012. They broke up in early January 2013. Are you doing the math here? That's approximately less than two months (depending on how early their courtship really began). Sure, they'd been on a couple of dates in the year prior to that, which apparently didn't go anywhere and had no lasting affect on Taylor (as evidenced by the lack of songs about Harry Stiles), but for all intents and purposes, their "relationship" was that two-month period. And, more math here, that was more than seven months ago. Let me break this down: Taylor Swift has been bitter about her breakup with Harry Styles more than three times as long as the relationship lasted. That ain't right.
 
Not only that, but Taylor has dated since then. I mean, not that I guess that means anything.
 
Honestly, I don't know why I'm surprised she's still raging after only a couple of months with some guy. In Taylorland, the majority of hunnies don't seem to last very long as it is—but most seem to be around just long enough to get a song (or three) out of her. Billboard.com has put together a list of some of Taylor's loves (rumored and confirmed) and the songs it suspects are attributable to these very short relationships [others have been supplemented from a Taylor Swift ex-love Wiki]:
 
  • Brandon Borello (? to ?) is the man behind "Tim McGraw." This one was a sweet memoir of a past relationship, because young Taylor had not yet learned the bitter way of the worlds. Also, dear Brandon was only going to college, not dumping her because she was cray cray, so why do more than "something to remember her by"?
  • Unamed-"Redneck"-Who-Wouldn't-Let-Her-Drive-His-Pickup-Truck (? to ?) is the inspiration behind "Picture to Burn." Let the bitterness begin!
  • Sam Armstrong (? to ?) was the guy to whom she "dedicates" "Should've Said No," and Taylor made it so clear that every time an S, A, or M appears in that order in the CD booklet, it was capitalized to spell out his name. Uh-oh, girl... We're getting a little crazy now.
  • Joe Jonas (July 2008 - October 2008) inspired "Last Kiss" and "Forever and Always" (later she made nice with "Holy Ground"... guess she got over him? Well... Until she wrote "Better than Revenge" about his ex-girlfriend, Camila Belle. Damn girl! Put the claws back in.
  • Lucas Till (March 2009 - April 2009) managed to escape the song curse. I guess one undramatic month doesn't provide enough song material?
  • Taylor Lautner (August 2009 - December 2009) — "Back to December," an apology for dumping him (guess there's a better treatment when the breakup is her idea?)
  • John Mayer (December 2009 - February 2010) is the guy for which "Dear John" ("Don't you think I was too young to be messed with." Uh... isn't that your call, too, honey?) was written. There's also some speculation that "I Knew You Were Trouble" (see also Jake Gyllenhaal and Harry Styles) may be about him
  • Cory Monteith (suspected April 2010 to May 2010) is thought to be the guy behind "Mine" (even though he was, if the unconfirmed rumors were true, not even hers for very long)
  • Jake Gyllenhaal (October 2010 to January 2011) apparently provided an entire album for Taylor in their very brief time together: "The Last Time," "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together," "State of Grace," "All Too Well," "Girl at Home," "The Moment I Knew," and "I Knew You Were Trouble" (in fact, the VMA she received for "Trouble" last night was dedicated to him)
  • Conor Kennedy (July 2012 - October 2012) "Begin Again"
  • Harry Styles (November/December 2012 - January 2013) - none as of yet, though there has also been speculation that "I Knew You Were Trouble" is about him.
 
None of these relationships even lasted a year. I mean, the girl is 23 now. Isn't the time for high school obsession and infatuations to be over? Just because she dates teenagers doesn't mean she needs to still act like one. Or, as one wise person pointed out, maybe her next song should be called, "Maybe I'm the Problem?"
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

This Week I'm Loving... Cartwheel by Target


"Ma'am, that'll be 269--," the cashier started to tell me. "Wait! We're not done yet!" I interrupted, and I handed her my phone. The register verified that I had saved $10.41. Then I swiped my debit card, and my total bill went down to around $240. Not bad for two seconds work. What's my magic trick? Cartwheel and a Target debit card.

Cartwheel is a new app by Target. The basic concept is social couponing. You login to Cartwheel with your Facebook account, and you are instantly connected with everyone on your friend list who has downloaded the Cartwheel app. You see what they're saving, they see what you're saving, and you can choose to save on the same deals. You earn badges based on your savings and your friends' savings, and those "badges" result in more open slots for you to select coupons.

Unlike the Target Mobile coupons that get text messaged to you every week, these coupons are totally customizable. You can go through the extensive list of coupons and select what you what. My strategy is to go to Target with an empty Cartwheel and search for the items I'm purchasing. If my selection comes down to a choice between brands, I usually select whatever has a coupon. Since I shop first and save later, my savings usually end up larger than they do when I simply clip any and all coupons, because I'm truly only finding savings for things I want to buy (much like when I use Ebates), not changing my shopping habits by using coupons to subconsciously influence me to buy something for which I wasn't actually in the market. Also, unlike the Target Mobile coupons, once you use the Cartwheel coupons, they do not go away until either you physically remove them or the expiration date. Also, you can use the coupons multiple times for the same instance of an item. The Cartwheel coupons can be used in conjunction with sales and other coupons and the 5% discount you get for using a Target Visa or debit card.

Here's an example of some of the things that went into the $10.41 I saved today:


I bought four packs of the Up and Up crayons that were on sale for $0.25


We needed more potty rewards, so I searched for an M&Ms coupon--and found one. Turned out Twin Mom had already redeemed one:



I searched for Shout cleaner and found a coupon for the spray. Lovely surprise, turns out the Cartwheel coupon extended to the boxes of Shout Color Catches I purchased also. Huzzah!


Cartwheel has seriously changed my life. I'm already a Target over-shopper, and I'm prone to forgetting my coupons. Even though I'm still weekly spending a fortune at Target, the fact that I can shop for all of the kiddie birthdays we attend and find (every week so far!) coupons for the present, the card, and the gift wrap and bag, makes me giddy with joy! I have to buy these things anyway, might as well save!
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Two Things Y'all Apparently Didn't Know About Wentworth Miller


As you have probably heard, yesterday Wentworth Miller told the St. Petersburg International Film Festival [I'm paraphrasing here]: "Thanks but no thanks for your invitation to appear at your festival, but as long as your country is oppressing gay people like me, you can go f*** yourselves." And people, gay and straight alike, lost their damn minds.

Post by GLAAD.

I was (and still am) perplexed. I mean, didn't everyone know he's gay by now? I thought that closet door had long been open and shut behind him. He didn't have some huge coming out cover story on People or anything, but most people don't. He's never tried to lie about his sexual orientation and never had a beard. Heck, I remember having this discussion with some women in my former mommy group four years ago. And that discussion revealed another thing those women apparently didn't know about Wentworth Miller (and I found a lot of people were as in the dark as they were).

So here are two facts that I have known about Wentworth Miller since his Prison Break days (even though I never watched that show; I only admired his beautiful face and body), and which I have wrongly assumed everyone knew:

1. Wentworth Miller is gay. 

Here's a picture with his boyfriend (actor Luke MacFarlane) from 2007 described back then in an article as him coming out. 


2. Wentworth Miller is black (well, half-black).1
An old yearbook picture of WM with hair

El Hottie with his uncle and father

Bam! Minds blown. 


Well, unless you were paying attention the past few years, in which case, this is all duuuuuuuuh!


FN 1. Also, FYI, other black/half-black celebrities that no one seems to know (incognegro?) are: Jennifer Beals, Vin Diesel, Rashida Jones, Soledad O'Brien, Slash, Mariah Carey, Pete Wentz, Cash Warren, Carol Channing...
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

People Will Apparently Believe Anything (Odd Baby Names)

I was listening to a replay of an earlier episode of Lance Bass's Dirty Pop the other day, and Lance and his co-hosts were talking about the Tennessee judge who changed a child's name from "Messiah" to "Martin." This topic lead into a discussion of weird baby names people have heard, and several people called in with some whoppers. And when I mean whoppers, I mean these were outright lies.

What is it about you teachers and nurses (the biggest offenders) that you apparently think your job isn't interest enough on its own that you have to make up names of students? I'm not saying teachers and nurses don't have interesting jobs. In fact, most of the teachers and nurses I know have much better war stories (assuming any of them are true) than pretty much any other profession I've met. But either you people are so greedy that you want to have a lock on "In addition to all the crazy stories I can tell you about my day, let me tell you this name I heard!" or you for some reason think that the rest of the world finds your job so boring that you're just making up stuff. Either that, or you're pathological liars. I dunno. But nearly everyone of these obviously fake "baby names" that are easily debunked by anyone who wants to spend 10 seconds on Google come from a nurse, a teacher, or a person who heard the name from a nurse or teacher. Heck, even my own mother used to make up these, "There's a child at my school named [insert name that's never appeared in the U.S. birth records ever]. Her mom is so uneducated she didn't know what it meant!"

So what were the baby names (and how they were pronounced) reported by teachers, nurses, and friends of teachers/nurses to the Dirty Pop crew? Shithead (shah-threed), La-a (lah-dash-ah), twins named Lemonjello and Orangejello (lu-mon-jah-lo and oh-ron-jah-lo), Placenta (play-ceen-tah), and Meconium (mek-oh-nam). Seriously?! Not only have everybody and their grandmothers heard these urban legend child names before, but Snopes has debunked Every. Single. One. Of. Them. The only name missing from this "common urban legend" list was Female (fem-uh-lee; rhymes with "Emily").

There were a couple of reported names that were probably real, like Dick Wiener (Richard Wiener is easy to believe. Not to mention, there was once a mayor in Indiana named Harry Baals, and the "First Lady" of my home state of Texas was named Ima Hogg). And there was at least one name that I completely called bullshit on, which turns out is actually real... because people suck [that name, in case you were wondering is Abcde (ab-sa-duh), which, while apparently a real name, is claimed to belong to someone actually known to the reporter more often than the vital records would support. That's just lazy, people! (and stupid)].

Overwhelmingly, though, these names were clearly and lazily made up. Just the fact that Snopes has two articles on them, and I've heard no less than a dozen comedy routines using a number of these names is proof positive that people need to find new material. If you're going to make things up, at least be original! Though, really, I would prefer people just didn't make these things up. There are enough people in the world with unbelievably horrible names because of their parents' stupidity, that you really shouldn't even need to make up names. Not to mention, as the Snopes writer points out, many of these names have their origins in racism. Even if these urban legends aren't thought of as racist in today's times, they are, at best, classist. Personally, I don't find it particularly amusing to make fun of people because they are poor and have low education.

Now, a note about Messiah:
Look, it's no secret that I loathe kr8v names. But that judge was way over the line. In addition to the complete overstepping of her bounds [the only issue before her was the baby's last name, not his first], her reasoning for the name change really bothers me. "There's only one Messiah" smacks the legal system stepping its bounds into religion. Since the government shall establish no religion, and there's only one religion that believes there has been the one Messiah, it sure looks like that judge was establishing a religion in violation of the First Amendment. I don't foresee this withstanding appeal. I'm not a fan of naming a kid Messiah, but that wasn't this judge's call to make.

(Heidi Wigdahl / Associated Press)
Sorry, little guy. Whatever your name is, you sure are cute.

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

1 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.

Forget the Gold Phone

First thought just rampant speculation and silly rumor, it is apparently now all but officially confirmed that a gold (but not a tacky gold, mind you, "more of a champagne color") phone will be the new edition to the iPhone line when Apple makes its announcement next month. And I could truly care less. 

Okay, I get that the gold color is more for the Chinese market than the American, so "gold iPhone" isn't really for us. And I get that every other year, Apple doesn't make any major improvements to its phone line, it simply adds an "S" to the model number [for "Seriously no different"?], changes a couple of things around, and expects (justifiably, it seems) for millions of iPhone owners to ditch their phones and camp out overnight waiting to be the first to get the new ones. I will not be one of those people. 

I love my iOS devices. I carry both my iPhone and iPad everywhere. I now even take all of my meeting notes on my iPad. But I've never bought into the fangirl-like crazy that surrounds the iDevices. I used to be a technogeek who wanted everything first. Then I grew up. Now it's about utility and common sense. 

I skipped the iPhone 5. Other than a better camera, there wasn't much available on that version that I didn't get on my iPhone 4 with a simple iOS upgrade. Yes, there is the new port, but that was more of a con than a pro. Had Apple changed to a universal plug like every freaking other phone maker on the planet, that would have been a draw. But noooooo, always one to be different, Apple simply changed to its own tiny, non-interchangeable port, which would make every plug, dock, stand, and radio I own obsolete. No thank you. 

So now there's a new phone. And you can get it in gold. Whoopdefreakingdo. 

There's a possibility that the 5s may have fingerprint technology to keep your files safe. Unlike the gold, this feature is purely conjecture based on Apple's purchase of the security firm AuthenTec back in 2012.

One confirmed feature is that the new phone will be equipped with iOS 7; but, like every iOS release since the beginning of iPhone time, the operating system will also be available on every earlier model (with some feature limitations on the older models).

So... Basically... Gold. That's what you're getting with the latest iPhone that's different from its last incarnation. 

You wanna impress me, Apple? Add a USB port, allow Flash websites to play, let me customize fonts in e-mail, make Siri more useful, or stop deleting my contacts randomly. 

Of course, I'll have to wait until the official September 10 announcement to completely pass judgment; but since CNet and other tech bloggers have rarely steered me wrong before, I'm not generally expecting much different. 

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis
  • MySpace
  • LinkedIn
  • Live
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Sphinn
  • Propeller
  • Slashdot
  • Netvibes

0 comments:

Post a Comment

In keeping with our vow to the Mom Pledge, all comments will be moderated for tone. Any comments made outside the spirit of that Pledge or any comments made to invoke a reaction outside the scope of that Pledge will not be posted.