Sexual abuse or “boys at play”

By Mark Bernstein

There’s been a lot of attention in the news about sexual abuse. The most recent scandal involves some sports coaches at a large American University culminating in the firing of a legendary and iconic football coach for being complicit in the cover-up of a younger coach’s indecent activities. This most base of human indiscretions seems to be rampant in the worlds of religion and sports – men of the cloth and coaches being the major perpetrators. Much of the abuse we hear about seems to be man on boy. For many victims, the sexual abuse has had an initially occult but eventually profound effect on their lives, which is completely understandable, undoubtedly due to their betrayal by highly trusted adults which makes it difficult for them to trust again. What may be much more common is everyday sexual abuse which never makes it into the newspapers, TV shows, or law or mediation courts, or even into conversation.

Like what happened to me. I am now 61 and it would have been when I was about 10. It happened over several summers at my family’s summer cottage. There was an older boy BC, I guess 5 years my senior, whose family had the cottage next to ours. One of the families had put up a large old-fashioned white canvas box tent between the two cottages for the boys to use as a play-house or fort. BC was fun to be with and we did a lot of fun stuff like walking in the woods, going fishing, making forts, swearing, shooting arrows with bows, smoking cigarettes, drinking stolen alcohol, spying on our sisters, boy stuff. I guess I felt honoured to have an older boy spend time with me. And I was such an insecure little kid I would have done anything anyone older than me told me to do.

So I did. He did not physically force me but he must have asked and saying “no” would not have even popped into my immature little brain. So, at his instruction I used to regularly go into the tent, undress him, get on my knees and put his erect penis into my mouth and with his verbal guidance and probably some help from his right hand, (as I’m sure I was not very good at it) bring him to orgasm. During the act he always regaled me with tales of the last girl he had felt up. After 50 years I still remember the name of his favourite girl (her initials were CH). I don’t remember if I swallowed or got any on my face. I do not recall if I felt any sexual arousal. Maybe it was just another simple and not unpleasant chore like putting out the garbage or mowing the lawn.

I do not feel remotely scarred by what happened. I do not recall feeling badly, or frightened, or violated at the time it happened. It did not feel particularly unnatural. Maybe I thought it was some kind of game boys play. And when I reflect on it now (which I seldom do) I don’t have any negative feelings. My heterosexual development was within normal limits regarding my sexual appetite and performance, or any other metric I can think of. And while I completely embrace homosexuality (including being a strong supporter of gay marriage) I feel no homosexual desires and do not recall ever having had such urges. Similarly, I do not find the idea of being with a man repulsive. In fact the opportunity of giving pleasure to one’s fellow homo sapiens of any gender is a very wonderful thing to do and may trump other factors.

So I guess the questions for me are: Why did this not have a greater (or any) impact on me? Am I a latent homosexual? Was the bond of trust between me and BC just not powerful enough to produce consequences when it was broken? Or has it had an impact and I’m just not aware of it? Maybe I would have been a better husband, a better father, a better brain surgeon had these things not happened. I’ll never know and I’m not going to lose a minute’s sleep over it. And I almost never think about it. I’m not even sure why I wrote this piece except maybe to convey to others like me: “You’re not weird if childhood sexual abuse did not screw up your life”. I guess that’s why.

 

Mark Bernstein is a neurosurgeon at the Toronto Western Hospital and Professor of Surgery at the University of Toronto. He and his wife Lee (a native Los Angelina) have three daughters and two pet Labradors. He has written extensively in the medical literature for over 25 years and for the last few years has been trying his hand at non-medical writing. He is the world’s second worst saxophone player.

Why Sport and Religion are bad for society

By Nasir Hashir.

I live in a small town in California. I was born here and my parents have been here since the 1960’s. Because my older brother was a hot rod enthusiast, my childhood sports heroes were low-budget independent drag racers, and not football, baseball or basketball players.

So from an early age, when my school friends did the shouting, cheering, high-fiveing sport-fan things, I smiled and nodded and remained quiet and calm. I enjoyed being on the outside of it.

When made to play games with balls and teams at school, I did not object, but I would get into mild trouble when I would fail to notice a passing ball that I was supposed to catch, chase or run with, because I was looking at a weed in the grass, or a car parked nearby, or the female teachers that I had crushes on.

And so I adopted a life devoid of sport. I even turned my attention away from car racing by the time I reached 12.

And that’s when I first noticed that the more people like sport, the more violent, angry, competitive and generally unpleasant they become. Whereas, the less people like sport, the more reasonable, intelligent, objective and charitable they become.

There are of course many exceptions, many sports players or fans who are very nice indeed, but I can can sum it up thus:

Sport causes violence.

 

My parents were non-religious, and from an early age I saw the common sense in that. I simply cannot understand why anyone anywhere would for one second believe that the God myth is true. Since I am lucky enough to be an American, and I don’t live in Iran or Afghanistan or in certain areas of Dallas, I can freely and openly declare my non-belief and only get beaten up by religious people once every few years.

And from this outside, objective, point of view, I can observe the religious and clearly see that they are more likely to hate people who are different from them. Some Moslems hate Christians and Jews, some Hindus hate Moslems, some Protestants hate Catholics, etc. etc. and throughout the modern history era, this attitude has been taken to the ultimate level, war and murder.

There are of course many exceptions, many people of religion who are among the nicest people in the world, but I can sum it up thus:

Religion causes killing.

 

So there you have it, sport causes violence and religion causes killing. You may sit there and read this and say, but I like baseball and bowling and I never hit anyone. Or you may say, I go to church and I oppose all war. But as I said, there are exceptions and if you are a nice person and still like sport and religion, you are using your power of reason to go against the flow to a certain extent.

There are exceptions on both sides. Some people may not like sport or religion and yet still be killers. There are exceptions to any rule and trend. But I stand behind my observations and say again, sport and religion are bad for society.

Nasir Hashir is a baker in a small town in California, but does not eat cakes himself.

 

National Crazy Breakfast

By Jeffrey the Barak

In the tale, The Emperor’s New Clothes by Hans Christian Anderson, first published in 1837, the hero of the story is the little boy who screams “He’s naked”. In his innocence and honesty, he sees the truth.

This little boy is sorely needed today. Today we have organizations convincing people of untruths. Terrorists kill because they believe at that moment that it is the right path. And intelligence and reason are constantly suppressed by the world’s religions. Millions believe in the imaginary, and are seemingly quite oblivious of the beauty of truth, reason and intelligence.

And even our great President, arguably the most intelligent we’ve had, right about most things, has endorsed the organization named The Fellowship Foundation, also known as “The Family,” who’s goal it seems is to ignore separation of “Church and State”. When religion and politics kill or oppress millions every day, why do we invite a “National Prayer Breakfast” to occur in Washington and show such disregard for the letter and spirit of our First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?

Praying should have no place in our government. Religion and God do not belong there. In fact that’s the law of our nation. When omnipotent imaginary characters are invoked (God, son of God, the Devil, Angels etc.,) and these organizations of hate, intolerance and discrimination are given credibility and respect by our leaders, then the dream of fairness for all recedes ever further into the future. Minorities will be victimized, and the tricksters and megalomaniacs of the religion business will continue to amass wealth and power over the weak and gullible.

Today, the modern American fundamentalist Christians are as scary and dangerous as the radical Islamists that our armed forces are sacrificing themselves to protect us from. They may not attack in a deadly fashion with explosives, but they apply pressure en masse and bully the more reasonable people who share residence in their strongholds. If you imagine it is safe for a mixed-race couple or a same-sex couple to go, for example, into a Southern restaurant and hold hands, then you don’t realize how dangerous the American Christians are. The good people of the South are being taught intolerance, dressed up in a cloak called “Family Values”. And of course the most obvious victims are the Americans who were born gay, but it does not end with them.

By legitimizing American religion in the American government we are sowing the seeds for an internal culture war, and reinforcing narrow-mindedness and hatred. Those who do not comply with the predominant philosophy will be the victims.

Human beings, ordinary men and women, are using the God myth to control people for their evil ends, and they have succeeded, because belief in God is legitimized and made to seem correct and normal. If you dare to interrupt a prayer at the start of a sporting event, you are being “disrespectful”, but why is the inclusion of a prayer, when religious affiliation is not required of a person attending, not also disrespectful? After all, we non-believers have the law and the Constitution on our side, don’t we?

Personally I feel disappointment when I see my President endorsing an organization such as The Family. But I put my feeling aside and continue to support him as the least unreasonable man in Washington. Perhaps the outcry should not be directed at the President himself, but we need that innocent and honest little boy from The Emperor’s New Clothes to jump up and shout out the truth, and stop the crazy train before anyone else gets victimized.

Jeffrey the Barak is a non-believer, and is proud to live in a free country, with a reasonable constitution.

Wash, don’t wipe, your butt.

By Sparklee A Hole.

If you can read this, you are a human, and you poop. A subject that may delight a few, and disgust many more. but opinions don’t count, because we all have to go and poop. It is what happens afterwards that is rarely discussed. People from different cultures have different ideas about what you should do next. An American or a Brit, who has only ever seen a toilet roll next to a toilet, may travel abroad and find one of the five following devices at his or her disposal.

  • A porcelain bidet
  • A bucket or barrel of water with a scooper
  • A shower spray connected to the toilet tank water supply with a T-adaptor
  • An electronic toilet seat that dispenses sprays or jets of warm water and may also air-dry the area
  • A pipe that shoots water upwards.

There may be more systems than these five, but these are the common alternatives to simply using dry tissue paper to clean up.

Conversely, someone from the Arab world, or the Philippines, or parts of Asia, might visit The USA and be appalled to find out that Americans believe they can clean their anal area following defecation with nothing more than dry tissue paper. And they would be right, because it really does take more than tissue to be clean following the business.

Clearly, washing is more efficient than tissue-wiping when it comes to removing the after effects of going, especially if a lather from detergent is introduced, so what do these mysterious foreigners do in the bathroom?

The Bidet.

Often seen beside a toilet, the bidet has featured in travel jokes for decades. It is basically a little bathtub that one squats over to wash the area. These usually have hot and cold running water and can squirt, rinse and spray. Anyone who has used a bidet is probably emerging from the bathroom clean.

The electronic bidet toilet seat.

The Japanese have pioneered this field. To have one of these, your toilet needs to have electricity as well as water. These devices, controlled with the push of a button are designed to wash and then dry the area, without the user leaving the seat. Some are simple and some are full of hi-tech features.

The Tabo

Called the tabo in the Philippines but known by other names in South Asia, this system is basically a jug of water, filled in a bucket or barrel or from the tap. The user raises up slightly from the toilet seat and pours water towards the small of the back where the space between the butt cheeks is. The water naturally flows down and over the skin and washes the area.  In practice, although rarely talked about, the user usually puts soap on his or her fingers and washes the butt, just like everyone does in the shower and then rinses with the tabo. Of course this means touching the unclean substance in question (poo) but the hand is using soap and water so with practice it ends up clean when all is over. In the Philippines, bathrooms are wet, meaning there is usually a floor drain and a faucet on the wall, which is used to fill the vessel. The tabo is difficult for lifelong wipers to accept, but it does remove all traces of waste and associated bacteria, so should not be criticized. Anyone with a sink within arm’s reach of the toilet, and a plastic jug or jar, can try the tabo right now, with nothing to install. In rural areas, the tabo is also used for outdoor, full body bathing.

The bidet shower spray.

The Arabs call it a shattaf, (sounds like shit off, which is basically what it does), but this is nothing more than a handheld water shower that connects to the water inlet valve for the toilet via a T-connection. Room temperature water is sprayed on the anus after the business is done. As with the tabo, hand washing the area with soap is an unmentioned option. These sprays are often called diaper sprays or nappy sprayers, because they can also be used to wash off most of the baby poo from your baby’s diaper before tossing it in the bleach pail. The baby poo just goes right down the loo. The downside to using a handheld shower spray in a colder climate is, in winter, the tap water can be extremely cold. In some places these are called the muslim bidet and other names, because the muslim world is apparently quite particular about keeping clean down there. But if your bathroom is in Thailand or Saudi Arabia, to name a couple of places, you’ll probably have a sprayer adjacent to the toilet, and the water will not be a cold shock.

The sprayer pipe.

In Egypt you are likely to see a curved brass pipe at the back of the toilet bowl. This is water spraying at it’s most basic. Just turn on the tap and a jet of water shoots towards the butt for hands-free washing, or manually assisted soaping, as discussed under the tabo.

So here is the taboo subject of cleaning the ass being discussed in a magazine. Some will find the whole subject unthinkable and live their whole lives failing to properly remove poo and bacteria with their little pieces of tissue paper, and others will never use tissue paper instead of washing. While it may be obvious which idea is more effective,  preconceptions about what is civilized may keep most westerners in the dirt until they are buried in the dirt. But whatever you do following a poo, follow by washing your hands with soapy lather, and you’ll stay safe.

Sparklee A Hole is always ready for inspection and never has to hide his underwear deep in the laundry basket.

What a Coincidence

When an event and a moment collide.

By Sig Shonholtz

For most of us, the phrase “what a coincidence” is simply a phrase like any cliché. I was still in high school when I started thinking about it more seriously. It was the result of an unusual event. I was driving home from school and noticed a sign for a real-estate company, called Red Carpet Realtors. I admit I was a little bored so I started thinking about what might be good to go with Red Carpet. A few minutes later, I was stopped at a signal waiting to turn left, I noticed a little piece of paper fluttering in the wind by my open window, it seemed like it was begging to come in. A moment later a car drove by and it was swept upwards, it floated down and again tried to enter my open window, by now I was transfixed on it, again a car drove by and the little piece of paper was once more swept away. This time though it fluttered like a whirling dervish, came through my window, and settled on my lap. What could be so important I wondered, I turned it over and to my amazement it said “Red Carpet Auto Parks”. I looked around, looked up, got goose bumps, and wondered what the meaning was?

I soon found myself studying the phenomenon of coincidence. In the early 1970′s, spiritual interpretations of everything, were common, so I looked for some deep meaning in the event. I spoke to some friends, older than myself, and they said it was meaningful.

Some say there are no coincidences. I was that way for many years. But like the shifting of the earth on its axis, over time, I began to wonder, what if there is no meaning, and things happen for no reason. Over time I took this perspective, which is that there are only coincidences. Since there are billions of people and billions of moments every day, inevitably some things will happen that are extraordinary. We call these events coincidences. What is a coincidence? A coincidence is when a moment and an event collide.

We tend to think that all coincidences are the same, they are not. After several years of observing very unusual events in my own life I decided to break the idea of coincidence down into some basic groups.

There are two basic types of coincidences, those we manifest and those that occur. The example above is a manifested coincidence. But many coincidences are just occurences. For example, once while on business in New York I met a woman in the morning and chatted with her. In the late afternoon, I took a cab all the way across town, I was going to meet Andy Warhol. I exited my cab and bumped into the same woman on a corner, 8 hours later. I told her that it was our destiny to meet and invited her to join me and meet Andy. She looked at me with surprise and said “no thank you”, she must have thought I was stalking her but I was surprised at her lack of curiosity.

Oddly at the same time I was thinking about the different types of coincidences, I mentioned it to Jennifer, a friend of mine, and discovered that she had also been thinking about different types of coincidences. I found that was an amazing coincidence in itself. One special instance left her looking up the word lemming in the dictionary. It seemed she had missed this word her entire life. However the next day she came upon the same word after having just learned it. Of course we could say that learning that word made it more available to her. We decided to call all coincidences relating to learning and knowledge a Lemming coincidence.

There are thirteen types of coincidences.

  1. Most coincidences are “basic” like bumping into a friend unexpectedly or some are “simple” like thinking about someone then seeing them by accident.
  2. There are coincidences of nature are called “miracles”.
  3. There are coincidences of learning, language and knowledge called “Lemmings”.
  4. There are coincidences we call “synchronicity” which are related to events of music or actions but not about people.
  5. Most coincidences are about people, places and events, they are called “Manya’s”.
  6. There are “complex” coincidences, which come about even though the odds are astronomical.
  7. There are “compound” coincidences, which are in effect a coincidence inside of a coincidence.
  8. There are those coincidences, which are not ours, but we are part of them
  9. The most common coincidence is the “undiscovered” one. Imagine you are wondering about someone and in fact they may actually be in the aisle next to you at the market but you did not notice them.
  10. The most important type of coincidence is the one we call “serendipity”. This is the most important because it is reserved for the area that determines our destiny; who we fall in love with and how we choose our careers.
  11. Luck is the moment of coincidence, but what makes the moment “lucky” is what we do with the opportunity.
  12. Prayers being answered, wishes coming true and manifestations realized are all forms of coincidence depending on how the world occurs to us.
  13. 9/11 is a complex coincidence because thousands of people failed to notice things that could have stopped the bombers at any juncture but failed to notice unusual things around them.

One of my more unusual coincidences happened in the late 1970′s. I was running out the door, late for an auction taking place at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel in Beverly Hills. As I ran out the door I picked up the Los Angeles Times and glanced at the front page. The Dalai lama was visiting Los Angeles . I wondered, “What would it be like to meet the Dalai lama”? I jumped into my car and sped away.

I arrived late for the auction and ran up the stairs four steps at a time. When I reached the top I was nearly airborne and realized that there was an imposing looking man in my way. As a matter of fact, he was standing with two robed men on either side of him. And what is going on? Why do they have white gowns and why are they going for their swords? Oh my gosh, it’s the Dalai lama and those are his body guards. OH NO, they think I am an assassin. The Dalia lama had a very concerned look on his face. He probably thought I was sent by the Chinese to do him in. I grabbed the railing as hard as I could and came tumbling down to an abrupt stop at the midway landing. The two guards and the Dalai Lama himself ran down to see if I was OK and they all picked me up. We all had a big laugh and I mumbled “sorry Mr. Lama, I am late for an auction”. It took me a moment to realize that I had actually just met the Dalai lama, just 30 minutes after I asked the question, “What would it be like to meet the Dalai lama?”

I quietly walked into the auction room, but was surprised to learn that the auction had happened the day before.

Another unusual coincidence happened over an insect. One lazy day in Venice Beach California I was sitting outside my neighborhood coffee house. Along came a large aggressive flying Scarab Beetle. It was beautiful, iridescent green and about a half-inch long. It was so aggressive that people were diving underneath their tables. It decided to land on my table and I put a glass over it. I slid a piece of paper over the top and picked it up. It was ferocious. It looked at me through the glass and buzzed its head off. The glass was pulsating. I could almost feel its anger at being caught. Now, you probably do not know this (unless you read my story about bees) but I like to collect bugs. However, I will only collect them when they have died. But this beautiful Scarab Beetle was so exquisite that I wanted it. In the end though I decided to release it. It flew out of the glass, looked right at me with a rage and a glare and flew away.

I lived across the street in a condo complex on the second floor, down an opened hallway, and down a walkway. When I got home that evening I was surprised (more shocked) to find that in the middle of my door mat dead as could be was a beautiful iridescent Scarab Beetle, laying face down. To be sure I was a little surprised, was it the same Scarab Beetle? They are very rare in my town, but it did not really matter. It was a gift and I still have it. It is the centerpiece of by small insect collection.

My last coincidence is perhaps the strangest one, even though all the examples I have shared are unique. It started rather like the Red Carpet story. I was driving to work one day while listening to Dennis Prager, a conservative moralist, on the radio. He would pose a moral dilemma in our society and ask callers to call and voice their opinions. Every now and again he would actually change his position on the radio if someone made a more powerful argument.

Occasionally he would ask his assistant Manya to take down a caller’s number so he could follow up with them later on. I became curious about Manya, I wondered what she looked like and how old she was, and if she was funny? Of course, just like the Red Carpet story it was a silly exercise because I was certain I was never going to meet her.

That evening I left work and went home to my condominium; we were having a homeowners meeting that evening, and it was  a ruckus  event. We were arguing about the termites that had nested in the walls. (See the bee story). I was sitting next to a woman who I had seen for a few years in the building, we always said hello, but had never really spoken. After a while I asked her what she did, she said she worked for a radio station. Then I asked her which one, KABC she said, then I asked whom she worked for, Dennis Prager was her answer. Finally I asked her name, Manya she said. Here she was right next to me, the woman that I had spent my entire morning day-dreaming about. I told her that I had just been thinking about her but I do not think she really understood what I meant. Anyway, that is why I  call events about people Manyas’.

There are nearly 20 million people in the Los Angeles area. She could have lived anywhere. What were the chances that she lived in my building? It occurred to me afterward that I could have sat next to her but never learned her name that would have been the undiscovered coincidence.

The one coincidence that we are all familiar with is Serendipity. Typically, we do not think of them as coincidence but they really are. I consider that they are reserved for two categories in our lives; romance and career. A Serendipitous event sets us on our course for our careers, something happens and we go down a road, it might be a good road or it might be a bad road, but a road it is. Similarly, a serendipitous event introduces us to somebody and we fall in love and have a family, or do not depending on the situation. It determines our destiny.

I have chosen to share only a few of my coincidences, but to be honest, I have many others that are at least as unique as the ones above.

There are things we learn, there are things we are taught and there are things we discover. The things we discover are always sweeter.

I have discovered that when we invest ourselves in an idea or a concept, things occur to us. Discovery is discovering. The longer we think about something, the deeper we go with an idea the more we understand, and the more possibilities we have. What I have learned about coincidence is that by continuously investing myself in curiosity and inquiry the more unusual the things are that will happen to me.

For many years after the red carpet experience I took a very spiritual position to my coincidences. At some time I began to wonder, what if there is no meaning to them? So I started to consider them simply as events that occured because I was day dreaming all the time about things and had a vivid imagination. My pendulum is now swinging in the other direction and I am once again taking a more spiritual view of them. I am beginning to understand that there are mysteries in the universe that we cannot comprehend.

What is the meaning of a coincidence? It is the meaning we give it. For me the meaning of a coincidence is that it has become part of life. I call it my hobby. We are all S.E.E’s, which means self-entertaining entities, so let’s indulge ourselves in thoughts and ideas. The nice thing about it is that I never know when something extraordinary will happen.

Just Pay Separate S+H

By Jeffrey the Barak

How to make twenty-four dollars sound like ten.

It seems like a bargain, only ten bucks, and then they’ll throw in a second one for free, “just pay separate shipping and handling”. But that’s the catch. Shipping and handling may be $6.99. So let’s add it up.

First item: $10

Second item: $ free

Shipping and Handling 1: $6.99

Shipping and Handling 2: $6.99

Grand total: $23.98

Well that seems fair enough, or does it? Lets say this example is a pair of sunglasses, and I’m not picking on 3D Vision here, and I have no reason to assume they are not excellent $10 sunglasses, but I use them here to illustrate the example. You may not need two pairs, but to say no to a free pair is difficult. So you pay $13.98 for shipping and handling. Is this UPS Second Day Air? No of course not, it is regular mail, and the handling is unspecified, and it may be while before they arrive. Perhaps the postage only costs the seller a dollar or two, well that’s how they make their money, and you could have bought the glasses locally for $10 anyway.

So it may be fair to assume that any time you hear “just pay separate shipping and handling” it is your cue to not buy anything.

The Nice Manifesto

By Jeffrey the Barak

In the story, “The Emperor’s New Clothes”, adults are persuaded to accept a false reality, which is eventually shattered by one little boy, who voices  a true observation that instantly makes the adults realize they were following a false path.

I too have my little boy, the eternally young Lamb Borghini, who although tiny and innocent, has a great skill  for pointing out the obvious when I am being silly, or when I am wrong. His often repeated mottos include “world peace”, “civil liberties” and “stop global warming”.

His words of course come straight from my wife, a person of great wisdom, and someone who is simply unable to chose to not do the right thing, or not be nice.

But regardless of the true source, Lamb’s philosophy is simple, true and correct, and it can be applied to very much more complicated behavior in world politics. In world politics, leaders are all too often driven by greed, Sadism, spite, hatred, ignorance, fear, aggression and other ugly aspects of human behavior, and the result is, in a word, unfairness.

It is unfair to exploit a person or entity for the gain of another, and it is certainly unfair to hurt or kill others. I mean this is just plain logical common sense. It cannot be justified by observing non-human animals in the competition to survive. Because we humans can conceptualize good and bad, we are then responsible to choose to be good.

Being bad can be mildly harmful, as in the case of the school bully, or very harmful as in the case of the national leader who practices genocide, or anything in-between.

So when looking at the behavior that gives us the most trouble today, I wonder why Lamb’s simple philosophy cannot be applied.

Why would someone use, for example, a religion, to come up with a plan to misinform gullible children and adults about the true reality, and end up making them think that conducting a suicide bombing, can be good, as opposed to bad?

In Africa, generations of normal kids are transformed into fighters who go on rampages, dismembering, raping and murdering other people just like them. Why does any one of them think that this could be anything other than completely wrong?  Who is responsible for making this their reality?

It’s too easy to blame religion for everything, although on a broad scale it is hard to find a common violent or dishonest act that is not tied into a certain brand of a particular religion or political movement. But religion is one of the easiest ways to make normal people into evil ones. You see, in order to have religion, you have to have faith, which is essentially a suspension of disbelief. If you can be taught to believe that the approximately three centuries old idea of a magic man who made everything is real, you can apparently also be taught to believe that you should run out and murder all redheads called Joe, because your structure of belief has strayed too far from the path of logic and reality.

And so even leaders of very small groups of people, for example the infamous Charles Manson, can lead hereto normal people into evil acts and cause terrible outcomes.

And yet even people who understand that religion is just a new idea that started a micro-billionth of a moment back in the history of time, can still be murderers, if they do not follow the path of good, which is independent of any movement such as religion etc.

If Lamb’s principals were followed by everyone, there would not be war, murder, gangster violence, racial hatred, repression of female people, or any of the other ugliness that we see around us.

Even if we focus, not on murder and war, but on social and economic issues of everyday government, we see blatantly dishonest people getting their way. A good party with all good intentions cannot make progress in government because an opposition party blocks all their ideas in order to try to get themselves back into power, and this is driven by greed. And this is at government level.

The same philosophy extends down to the mundane. It extends to households, relationships and to a sole individual’s own choices that barely affect anyone else.

If everyone knew Lamb, or if everyone could learn ethics from the purely good kids in the kindergartens, all our evil would pass into history. We would all be….  nice.

The secret link between dog anger and people who eat potatoes


By Annie Manzano

In 1987, Willard Froloy was found dead and partly devoured in his Philadelphia apartment. His three pet dogs had been feeding on his corpse for two weeks. Investigation showed that the cause of death was choking and it seems that large-cut French-fried potatoes were the substance of the blockage.

The dogs had eaten the potatoes, but peelings suggested that the victim had prepared at least ten of them.

Well known tennis player Bea Tyson, was bitten on the throat by her pet Lab, a sweet dog who had shown no aggression or abnormal behavior for the five years she had lived with Bea. Tyson said later that the sight of a bag of potatoes had sparked something primal in Rainy’s demeanor and the attack occurred in the blink of an eye.

When house burglars Lorn and Cleavis Hutson seduced a family chow with a fresh beef shank and filled their bags with the valuables belonging to the Arlen family in Dallas, all went well until Lorn picked up a potato from the kitchen counter. In a flash, the chow had sunken it’s teeth into brother Cleavis’ face and punctured his eyeball.

These incidents all occurred in 2008 and in all there were close to twenty reports of previously peaceful pooches suddenly snapping violently at the mere sight of the humble potato. But according to FBI agent Brandon Line, as suddenly as it all started, it stopped, with zero cases in 2009. The file was closed in 2010.

So what caused this outbreak of potato sparked dog attacks? Agent Line believes it is possibly a four year cycle, because there were some cases reported in 2004 also. Nothing can be proven, but come 2012, it may be prudent to take care around dogs when using potatoes.

Annie Manzano is the secretary of the Filipino-American Potato Society of San Jose, California.

Holding the Tablet

By Jeffrey the Barak

The most polarizing computing device ever sold is spreading across the United States.

Long-time professional hardware reviewers have all published their opinions for and against  the wisdom of buying one, now, later or never. Some say it’s a giant iPod Touch, (as if that were a bad thing), others say it’s the most important breakthrough in personal computing for the masses.

The importance of this device is great, or small, depending on your personal point of view. A tablet computer is not new, the interface of the iPad is not completely new, and the concept of the device is not new, but it is here, it is enjoyable to use, and it is very useful.

Looking beyond this device, it is clear that in general there is a huge demand for a device that has the following qualities:

  • Affordable
  • Connected
  • Easy to use
  • Useful
  • Enjoyable

Forgetting current issues such as Flash versus HTML, Apple versus Google (I love them both), Google Docs versus Microsoft Office, computer operating systems versus mobile device operating systems etc.,  The demand of the consumers will win out, as it always does, and the inventors and manufacturers will fill the niches.

One of the more promising roads to computers for all is the Google Chrome operating system, designed to fulfill the needs of the average person, offered at zero cost, and designed to run on low cost “Netbooks”. Plenty of money will be spent on high-speed Internet access, the Netbooks and their accessories, and on goods and services advertised on Google, to make it all worthwhile for Google to give us this system at no cost.

Clearly, the usual standard traditional option will remain for anyone with the money to get a full computer, PC, Mac, whatever, and run heavier applications to make music, movies etc., and to manage business. But once millions of adults and kids begin to use Netbooks, with Google Chrome or another OS, or iPads, the technical world will change as much as it did when everyone got a mobile telephone.

The Apple iPad is a hurdle and a challenge to Google’s plan for global domination via Chrome, because the iPad has such a beautiful design ethic as compared to any Netbook that exists today. Sure we may prefer to type on a keyboard and have the illusion of multitasking, but who really prefers plastic and fuzzy graphics to the chrome and special magic glass touch screen that is on the iPad? People may choose less functionality and go with iPad simply because of it’s beauty.

I think that Netbooks would have become much more widespread if they did not run Windows. Even the simplified version of Windows 7 that ships with most Netbooks today is pretty horrible and slow and well down a dark road of bad design. In this pre-Chrome era, the only alternative to Windows is a flavor package of Linux, but regular folks who are not computer enthusiasts tend to have no end of little problems with Linux, because it’s never really completely finished and tested. For success, a normal idiot needs to be able to get anything done, and that’s why the iPad is so brilliant.

Personally, to do any considerable amount of work, in comfort, I need a desk, and a large monitor with sharp graphics. I am very comfortable with my 27” iMac, but less so with my 13” Macbook.

For many years I was a Palm computing enthusiast, even before they became telephones. I upgraded and flipped my way though Palm (or Handspring) devices right up to the TX, then my eyesight became inadequate to really enjoy the size. Had my wife not bought me an iPhone, I might still be eschewing small devices, but with a good pair of glasses I can enjoy the excellent design of the iconic iPhone.

Today’s iPad has all the appeal of those Palm Pilots, plus the appeal of a paper based personal organizer, plus the power of an Apple computer plus more that we never dreamed of ten years ago.

Of course, a connection is required, but we can count on that becoming normal everywhere in the future. The point is, no matter what pros and cons the iPad and the Netbooks give us, it’s inevitable that millions of people around the world will have something that is greater than a smartphone, and not as great as a laptop. You can bet on it.

Every student in every school will have some device, just as they all have calculators today. Nothing will stop it.

Going back in time fifteen years to before the Palm era, our paper based systems were as heavy as, and much thicker than iPads. But they would not give us movies, games and other forms of entertainment. The entertainment factor is very important and many an iPad buyer will never do an ounce of real work on his or her iPad, but the entertainment is a distraction from the real importance of the format. Anything that makes computing an extension of our fingertips is world changing tool.

Like it or hate it, this is the iPad era, and soon it will also be the Chrome era. And as the Internet and Wi-Fi spread, more people in the world will be joining our world.

Jeffrey the Barak is not carrying a penguin

The bear eludes me

By Xygore the Word Cop

Allude – mention, or refer indirectly to

Elude - Avoid or escape

You can bear with me, but there is not a bear with me.

You cannot bare with me unless we are nudists.

And yes it’s a sardine. So what?

Xygore the Word Cop is an absolute bastard and he lives near Primm NV USA.

A Humane Goldfish Bowl

By Jeffrey the Barak

You can spend five-thousand dollars setting up and stocking a huge tropical reef aquarium, and the bastards won’t even look at you. But put a one dollar goldfish in a five dollar bowl, and that little fish will await your return twenty times a day, eager to play follow the finger and he or she will gaze at you and love you like a puppy dog.
Ethics.
If you ever play the game, or perform the exercise of, Word Association, then the the most common response to “Goldfish”, is “Bowl”.
The typical picture of a goldfish, in photographs, cartoons and on film, is a picture of a goldfish in a bowl. But if you let people know that you have a goldfish in a bowl, they will consider you cruel, and they will tell you that a goldfish needs to live in a long tank with an elaborate filter system, and then move to a pond when it matures.
There is probably one pond around per million goldfish. Most live, and die, in aquariums or in bowls.
So the question arises, how can a goldfish be humanely kept in a bowl? Is it automatically cruel, reprehensible and impossible, or is the noble rescue of a commercially bred goldfish from the pet store, and the keeping of such an animal in a bowl justifiable.
It’s all about the water.
Actually, it is humane to keep a goldfish in a bowl, as long as the water is good, and as long as the fish can be relocated to a pond or large habitat when it becomes mature, as in too big the live in the bowl. It is not automatically cruel to keep one in a bowl.
But a goldfish aquarium has features that are missing from a simple empty glass bowl full of water. There are many elements that remove or convert toxic chemicals from the water, and also elements that support living bacteria that help keep the water healthy for your fish.
These elements include gravel, biological media, cotton filters, carbon filters, air stones, bubble wands and more. Each has a duty as part of a system to remove harmful wastes from the water and to keep it clean, oxygenated and nourishing to the skin and gills of the fish. Even if you have a nice large aquarium with elaborate filters, gravel and air systems, it is quite easy to mismanage the systems and end up with cloudy, uncomfortable water that will make the fish sick or even cause them to die.
So then, if an aquarium system costing hundreds of dollars can be that bad, how could a bowl be better? The answer is simple, the bottom line is the state of the water. The fish only depends on the quality of the water and it does not matter if this perfect water is introduced as-is or if it relies on a system to make it so. In fact it is less cruel for a goldfish to be in a bowl of perfect water than it is to be in a less-than-perfect larger aquarium.
The way to have water in a fish bowl that is as good as or even better than the water in an aquarium system is to have a second vessel. Water can be obtained by buying bottled water, which is often called mountain spring water, or it can come from a tap water filter, as long as it is not the reverse-osmosis kind. It cannot be distilled water, de-ionized water, or water containing municipal chlorine or other chemicals designed to protect human consumers from food poisoning.
But this is easy. If you have drinking water at home for the human occupants, it can usually sit in a bucket for a day and become safe for a goldfish to live in. But to be extra sure, you can add a drop or two of aquarium water conditioner and a granule or two of aquarium salt before it sits, so that by the time your fish is living in it the next day, it will be nourishing and comfortable.
So one simple way to have a goldfish living in perfect water is to have two bowls. Each day the fish can be moved to the other bowl, while the first bowl can be emptied, wiped clean and refilled with water that will be ready for the fish to live in the next day. As long as your home never gets freezing cold inside and you do not feed the fish more than it can eat in a minute, or more than two to six times a week, the fish should remain in healthy condition and be quite content with it’s environment.
Better yet, to have a similar system that does not involve removing the animal with a net, and potentially causing stress from the move, you could empty most of the water, leaving the goldfish in the remaining water, and then introduce the clean water from the second vessel. Using this method, you can even have a small, lightweight rectangular tank, such as an affordable plastic “Lee’s Kritter Keeper” and a cheap plastic bucket as the second vessel. If you have a water filter on your kitchen faucet (not reverse-osmosis) then you can refill the bucket from that and use it the next day. For this system you don’t even need a net. Just one bowl/lightweight tank, and a second bucket.
As long as the goldfish has not reached a size where the bowl is too small for it to swim freely in one direction for a couple of seconds, and you are able to offer it some visual stimulation from outside the bowl a few times a day, then you will have a happy healthy fish in clean water at all times. Just be ready to bid farewell to your beloved friend when it’s time for it to move to a big pond for the rest of it’s, hopefully long, life. If there is no sign of such a pond within a hundred miles of your house, then most aquarium stores will be willing to take in a donated healthy-looking large goldfish in exchange for another one-dollar feeder to rescue from a certain date with death. Hopefully they’ll sell it to someone with a big pond or aquarium.
So we have to remember a few things to justify a goldfish bowl. Goldfish are not natural. They were bred by man to become attractive golden fish and were originally hardy river carp, scavengers that could survive in ponds, streams and rivers, eating anything and everything, and since they don’t have a stomach, but rather just a long intestine, they would excrete the waste quickly and make the water dirty. An expensive and complicated aquarium system intended to condition the water may fail to do so for many reasons, and it is very easy, or even highly likely, to have a goldfish in such an aquarium, suffering distress from a less than optimal water quality. A bowl can contain clean, healthy, comfortable water if you have the two bowl system, or a bowl and bucket system. The water in this bowl can be, at all times, better than the water in most people’s aquaria. And lastly, even if your goldfish dies after a few months, as they may do through no fault of the owner, it can be a few months of a good life that it would not have had as food for an aquarium carnivore.
Aside from the well-being of the fish, the advantages of a goldfish bowl over an aquarium are many. They don’t cost much, they don’t weigh as much as your sister riding a bike, they don’t require electricity or reinforced furniture, and you can move them from room to room in order to spend more time interacting with your pet.
While it is always nice to see healthy goldfish in a clean, healthy large aquarium, it is also not so good to see them suffering in a cloudy, dirty tank and exhibiting spots, sores and nervous behavior.  Your happy healthy bowl fish will be better off than most goldfish alive today.
What does the fish need in it’s bowl?
Goldfish are bred from carp, which are scavengers. This is why goldfish can be seen constantly sucking pieces of gravel into their mouths and spitting it out. You may assume they are playing or trying to keep busy or wishing they had something to eat, or extracting some nutrients from the bacteria on the gravel, but they just can’t help this natural behavior. In an aquarium system the gravel can be a medium for the growth and support of healthy bacteria, but it is also a hiding place for fish waste that breaks down and introduces harmful elements into the water. So if you can stand the inevitable sight of a few strands of fish poop in your bowl, don’t bother with the gravel, because let’s remember, it’s all about the water quality, not the objects.
And speaking of objects, goldfish are more intelligent than most people assume and they love to follow your finger and look at you and play with you, but they have no need for decorations or toys. In fact such objects can cause injury because part of the natural behavior of a fish is to be occasionally startled and move several inches at a remarkably high speed. Better if there is no castle or treasure chest to collide with.
The minimalism of a clear empty bowl and a healthy fish in clean water is ideal. If you want to landscape the habitat, then set up a large aquarium system.
So if you would like a little golden friend to interact with while you sit at your desk all day, don’t be put off by people telling you a goldfish bowl is a cruel habitat. Remember it’s all about the water, and if the water is always good and there is enough of it to permit a little swimming, your fish will be content.

bowlsYou can spend five-thousand dollars setting up and stocking a huge tropical reef aquarium, and the bastards won’t even look at you. But put a one dollar goldfish in a five dollar bowl, and that little fish will await your return twenty times a day, eager to play follow the finger and he or she will gaze at you and love you like a puppy dog.

Ethics.

If you ever play the game, or perform the exercise of, Word Association, then the the most common response to “Goldfish”, is “Bowl”.

The typical picture of a goldfish, in photographs, cartoons and on film, is a picture of a goldfish in a bowl. But if you let people know that you have a goldfish in a bowl, they will consider you cruel, and they will tell you that a goldfish needs to live in a long tank with an elaborate filter system, and then move to a pond when it matures.

The majority of goldfishes live out their lives without ever becoming mature pond dwellers. Most live, and die, in aquariums or in bowls.

So the question arises, how can a goldfish be humanely kept in a bowl? Is it automatically cruel, reprehensible and impossible, or is the noble rescue of a commercially bred goldfish from the pet store, and the keeping of such an animal in a bowl justifiable.

It’s all about the water.

Actually, it is humane to keep a goldfish in a bowl, as long as the water is good, and as long as the fish can be relocated to a pond or large habitat when it becomes mature, as in too big the live in the bowl. It is not automatically cruel to keep one in a bowl.

But a goldfish aquarium has features that are missing from a simple empty glass bowl full of water. There are many elements that remove or convert toxic chemicals from the water, and also elements that support living bacteria that help keep the water healthy for your fish.

These elements include gravel, biological media, cotton filters, carbon filters, air stones, bubble wands and more. Each has a duty as part of a system to remove harmful wastes from the water and to keep it clean, oxygenated and nourishing to the skin and gills of the fish. Even if you have a nice large aquarium with elaborate filters, gravel and air systems, it is quite easy to mismanage the systems and end up with cloudy, uncomfortable water that will make the fish sick or even cause them to die.

So then, if an aquarium system costing hundreds of dollars can be that bad, how could a bowl be better? The answer is simple, the bottom line is the state of the water. The fish only depends on the quality of the water and it does not matter if this perfect water is introduced as-is or if it relies on a system to make it so. In fact it is less cruel for a goldfish to be in a bowl of perfect water than it is to be in a less-than-perfect larger aquarium.

The way to have water in a fish bowl that is as good as or even better than the water in an aquarium system is to have a second vessel. Water can be obtained by buying bottled water, which is often called mountain spring water, or it can come from a tap water filter, as long as it is not the reverse-osmosis kind. It cannot be distilled water, de-ionized water, or water containing municipal chlorine or other chemicals designed to protect human consumers from food poisoning.

But this is easy. If you have drinking water at home for the human occupants, it can usually sit in a bucket for a day and become safe for a goldfish to live in. But to be extra sure, you can add a drop or two of aquarium water conditioner and a granule or two of aquarium salt before it sits, so that by the time your fish is living in it the next day, it will be nourishing and comfortable.

So one simple way to have a goldfish living in perfect water is to have two bowls. Each day the fish can be moved to the other bowl, while the first bowl can be emptied, wiped clean and refilled with water that will be ready for the fish to live in the next day. As long as your home never gets freezing cold inside and you do not feed the fish more than it can eat in a minute, or more than two to six times a week, the fish should remain in healthy condition and be quite content with it’s environment.

Better yet, to have a similar system that does not involve removing the animal with a net, and potentially causing stress from the move, you could empty most of the water, leaving the goldfish in the remaining water, and then introduce the clean water from the second vessel. Using this method, you can even have a small, lightweight rectangular tank, such as an affordable plastic “Lee’s Kritter Keeper” and a cheap plastic bucket as the second vessel. If you have a water filter on your kitchen faucet (not reverse-osmosis) then you can refill the bucket from that and use it the next day. For this system you don’t even need a net. Just one bowl/lightweight tank, and a second bucket.

As long as the goldfish has not reached a size where the bowl is too small for it to swim freely in one direction for a couple of seconds, and you are able to offer it some visual stimulation from outside the bowl a few times a day, then you will have a happy healthy fish in clean water at all times. Just be ready to bid farewell to your beloved friend when it’s time for it to move to a big pond for the rest of it’s, hopefully long, life. If there is no sign of such a pond within a hundred miles of your house, then most aquarium stores will be willing to take in a donated healthy-looking large goldfish in exchange for another one-dollar feeder to rescue from a certain date with death. Hopefully they’ll sell it to someone with a big pond or aquarium.

So we have to remember a few things to justify a goldfish bowl. Goldfish are not natural. They were bred by man to become attractive golden fish and were originally hardy river carp, scavengers that could survive in ponds, streams and rivers, eating anything and everything, and since they don’t have a stomach, but rather just a long intestine, they would excrete the waste quickly and make the water dirty. An expensive and complicated aquarium system intended to condition the water may fail to do so for many reasons, and it is very easy, or even highly likely, to have a goldfish in such an aquarium, suffering distress from a less than optimal water quality. A bowl can contain clean, healthy, comfortable water if you have the two bowl system, or a bowl and bucket system. The water in this bowl can be, at all times, better than the water in most people’s aquaria. And lastly, even if your goldfish dies after a few months, as they may do through no fault of the owner, it can be a few months of a good life that it would not have had as food for an aquarium carnivore.

Aside from the well-being of the fish, the advantages of a goldfish bowl over an aquarium are many. They don’t cost much, they don’t weigh as much as your sister riding a bike, they don’t require electricity or reinforced furniture, and you can move them from room to room in order to spend more time interacting with your pet.

While it is always nice to see healthy goldfish in a clean, healthy large aquarium, it is also not so good to see them suffering in a cloudy, dirty tank and exhibiting spots, sores and nervous behavior.  Your happy healthy bowl fish will be better off than most goldfish alive today.

What does the fish need in it’s bowl?

Goldfish are bred from carp, which are scavengers. This is why goldfish can be seen constantly sucking pieces of gravel into their mouths and spitting it out. You may assume they are playing or trying to keep busy or wishing they had something to eat, or extracting some nutrients from the bacteria on the gravel, but they just can’t help this natural behavior. In an aquarium system the gravel can be a medium for the growth and support of healthy bacteria, but it is also a hiding place for fish waste that breaks down and introduces harmful elements into the water. So if you can stand the inevitable sight of a few strands of fish poop in your bowl, don’t bother with the gravel, because let’s remember, it’s all about the water quality, not the objects.

And speaking of objects, goldfish are more intelligent than most people assume and they love to follow your finger and look at you and play with you, but they have no need for decorations or toys. In fact such objects can cause injury because part of the natural behavior of a fish is to be occasionally startled and move several inches at a remarkably high speed. Better if there is no castle or treasure chest to collide with.

The minimalism of a clear empty bowl and a healthy fish in clean water is ideal. If you want to landscape the habitat, then set up a large aquarium system.

So if you would like a little golden friend to interact with while you sit at your desk all day, don’t be put off by people telling you a goldfish bowl is a cruel habitat. Remember it’s all about the water, and if the water is always good and there is enough of it to permit a little swimming, your fish will be content.

End of the Uh-Oh’s

I wonder if we will call this coming year twenty-ten or the more cumbersome two thousand and ten. I think we should have called 2001 twenty-o-one, just like they did in nineteen-o-one and eighteen-o-one. Personally I will from this day make that change, and no longer refer to twenty-o-four, as two-thousand and four.
And what do we call the decade? Is it to be the double-oh’s, the twenty-hundreds, or the uh-oh’s. Well not the twenty-hundreds as that would mean the century, just as the nineteen hundreds refers to a whole century.
It will be The Media that set the course, as they did in 2000 when they started saying two-thousand and one, when they should really have said twenty-o-one. And why did this happen? Probably because no-one ever said twenty hundred. There is no such number as twenty hundred, so we all said two-thousand, which is good. The mistake was a year later when we missed the opportunity to spend the future saying twenty-o-one, twenty-o-two etc.

By Jeffrey the Barak,

(written towards the end of 2009.)

2010I wonder if we will call this coming year twenty-ten or the more cumbersome two thousand and ten. I think we should have called 2001 twenty-o-one, just like they did in nineteen-o-one and eighteen-o-one. Personally I will from this day make that change, and no longer refer to twenty-o-four, as two-thousand and four.

And what do we call the decade? Is it to be the double-oh’s, the twenty-hundreds, or the uh-oh’s. Well not the twenty-hundreds as that would mean the century, just as the nineteen hundreds refers to a whole century.

It will be The Media that set the course, as they did in 2000 when they started saying two-thousand and one, when they should really have said twenty-o-one. And why did this happen? Probably because no-one ever said twenty hundred. There is no such number as twenty hundred, so we all said two-thousand, which is good. The mistake was a year later when we missed the opportunity to spend the future saying twenty-o-one, twenty-o-two etc.

By next month, we will know.

In Search of Space

In Search of Space: Individual Claims of Public Space and Property in the University Library
H.E. Whitney
November 15, 2009
So I begin this short essay from the standpoint of a lowly staff assistant at a university library. The perks of the job are few but when I am free, I do manage to scour the internet for minutiae such as the latest football standings, the most recent Paul Krugman article, the newest row concerning Glen Beck’s antics, insect studies, or innovations in waste disposal. Occasionally I will peruse alternative media such as the Boston Phoenix or Alternet or high brow cultural magazines and journals such as The Atlantic Monthly, New Yorker, or the Journal of Postmodern Culture. Outside of these moments I lend study room keys to students, remove paper jams from the library printers, troubleshoot computer software problems, or help students research their papers. It is a thankless job, but since I am a graduate student, the librarians who hired me now have comfortable respites from these otherwise rote aspects of working in a college library. I’ve spent much of my life in the library so I probably know more about where things are than they do.
One of the most intriguing aspects of a college library environment is the quest for space. I don’t have to worry about finding a desk or table to perform my duties because one is already set aside for me to assist patrons. But the patron must find a table or chair to study or a workstation from which to scroll through Facebook pages or YouTube videos. (I think it is hilarious that there are signs on the workstations saying “These Computers Are Reserved fo Academic Research Only” when half of the monitors I see show the Facebook websites on any given day.) Yet what intrigues me about working in the library is the quest for space and the array of conventions used by students to establish personal territory.
Butted table-tops.<picture1.jpg> The circular or rectangular table-tops in my work area are about 3 ½ feet in diameter. Normally when I arrive to work, I will see two or three tables butted together but only one occupant. The occupant is sometimes waiting for two or three fellow students. Gender tends to play a role in this phenomenon, as women tend to study with other women while men tend to be solitary when they study. But since the tables are 3 ½feet in diameter, three “ordinary” sized people should be able to comfortably share a single table. (I know, I know: we are all fat Americans, right?) Yet two or three people using two tables is overkill. Which leads to. . .
Reserving chairs and tables simply by leaving personal effects on them. This occurrence is widespread. Visualize the following scenario. There is one table with three chairs. There is one student sitting in one of the three chairs.  Yet he or she has placed his or her laptop in one chair and a knapsack or book bag in the other. So three chairs at this table are presumably “occupied”, although there is only one human being using the table. For prospective library patrons looking for a study area, this particular table has been exclusively cordoned off by this one patron. <picture2.jpg>  In this picture, the woman’s purse also appears to be “studying”. While there is an empty chair across from the woman for another person to sit and share the table, she has made it clear that her bag will not defer its chair to a prospective human occupant. This isn’t bad in itself but when there are several other people at tables doing the same thing, demand for tables and chairs goes through the roof.
This scenario is laughable insofar as it expresses the vanity of claiming a public object for one’s self or for one’s property. The mind of the college student who perpetrates this act is sadly misinformed by our system of commodity and exchange, which seeks to place a value on everything, including abstractions such as “space”.  For the table hogger, he or she feels leaving belongings on the table constitutes the purchase of that table for his or her exclusive use. The problem is compounded when the occupant leaves the table for extended period of time, yet leaves his or her belongings at the table.
During peak periods when library traffic is high, a table that is being “used”, but with no human occupant, presents problems: for one, it inconveniences other patrons who need tables to attend to their studies. It is also a waste of resources from the library’s point of view: fewer individuals can use tables when a single individual has laid exclusive claim to them and fails to maximize the use of them from the community’s perspective. <picture3.jpg> In this picture the table (foreground) is “occupied” by a single individual: there is a single book bag on the table-top with a book and notepaper. In an attempt to preserve “ownership” of this table, the patron has left his or her stuff at the table. I see this very often, but I’ve also seen people leave valuables such as I-pods, cell phones, laptops, and purses unattended for hours!
Nothing is more instinctive to the capitalist mind but to declare a thing “mine”: even when that thing is shared by all. Tables and chairs in libraries are publicly shared objects. Perhaps the lesson to be learned here is that we perhaps need to get library patrons in general to understand knowledge as a communal endeavor instead of as an object to be individually possessed at all costs. Libraries exist to serve the needs of all knowledge seekers, so it should make sense that we can share library furniture as well as books, right?

By H.E. Whitney

In Search of Space: Individual Claims of Public Space and Property in the University Library.
November 15, 2009

So I begin this short essay from the standpoint of a lowly staff assistant at a university library. The perks of the job are few but when I am free, I do manage to scour the internet for minutiae such as the latest football standings, the most recent Paul Krugman article, the newest row concerning Glen Beck’s antics, insect studies, or innovations in waste disposal. Occasionally I will peruse alternative media such as the Boston Phoenix or Alternet or high brow cultural magazines and journals such as The Atlantic Monthly, New Yorker, or the Journal of Postmodern Culture. Outside of these moments I lend study room keys to students, remove paper jams from the library printers, troubleshoot computer software problems, or help students research their papers. It is a thankless job, but since I am a graduate student, the librarians who hired me now have comfortable respites from these otherwise rote aspects of working in a college library. I’ve spent much of my life in the library so I probably know more about where things are than they do.

picture1

One of the most intriguing aspects of a college library environment is the quest for space. I don’t have to worry about finding a desk or table to perform my duties because one is already set aside for me to assist patrons. But the patron must find a table or chair to study or a workstation from which to scroll through Facebook pages or YouTube videos. (I think it is hilarious that there are signs on the workstations saying “These Computers Are Reserved fo Academic Research Only” when half of the monitors I see show the Facebook websites on any given day.) Yet what intrigues me about working in the library is the quest for space and the array of conventions used by students to establish personal territory.

Butted table-tops. (See first picture.) The circular or rectangular table-tops in my work area are about 3 ½ feet in diameter. Normally when I arrive to work, I will see two or three tables butted together but only one occupant. The occupant is sometimes waiting for two or three fellow students. Gender tends to play a role in this phenomenon, as women tend to study with other women while men tend to be solitary when they study. But since the tables are 3 ½feet in diameter, three “ordinary” sized people should be able to comfortably share a single table. (I know, I know: we are all fat Americans, right?) Yet two or three people using two tables is overkill. Which leads to. . .

picture2Reserving chairs and tables simply by leaving personal effects on them. This occurrence is widespread. Visualize the following scenario. There is one table with three chairs. There is one student sitting in one of the three chairs.  Yet he or she has placed his or her laptop in one chair and a knapsack or book bag in the other. So three chairs at this table are presumably “occupied”, although there is only one human being using the table. For prospective library patrons looking for a study area, this particular table has been exclusively cordoned off by this one patron. (See second picture.)  In this picture, the woman’s purse also appears to be “studying”. While there is an empty chair across from the woman for another person to sit and share the table, she has made it clear that her bag will not defer its chair to a prospective human occupant. This isn’t bad in itself but when there are several other people at tables doing the same thing, demand for tables and chairs goes through the roof.

This scenario is laughable insofar as it expresses the vanity of claiming a public object for one’s self or for one’s property. The mind of the college student who perpetrates this act is sadly misinformed by our system of commodity and exchange, which seeks to place a value on everything, including abstractions such as “space”.  For the table hogger, he or she feels leaving belongings on the table constitutes the purchase of that table for his or her exclusive use. The problem is compounded when the occupant leaves the table for extended period of time, yet leaves his or her belongings at the table.

picture3During peak periods when library traffic is high, a table that is being “used”, but with no human occupant, presents problems: for one, it inconveniences other patrons who need tables to attend to their studies. It is also a waste of resources from the library’s point of view: fewer individuals can use tables when a single individual has laid exclusive claim to them and fails to maximize the use of them from the community’s perspective. (See third picture.) In this picture the table (foreground) is “occupied” by a single individual: there is a single book bag on the table-top with a book and notepaper. In an attempt to preserve “ownership” of this table, the patron has left his or her stuff at the table. I see this very often, but I’ve also seen people leave valuables such as iPods, cell phones, laptops, and purses unattended for hours!

Nothing is more instinctive to the capitalist mind but to declare a thing “mine”: even when that thing is shared by all. Tables and chairs in libraries are publicly shared objects. Perhaps the lesson to be learned here is that we perhaps need to get library patrons in general to understand knowledge as a communal endeavor instead of as an object to be individually possessed at all costs. Libraries exist to serve the needs of all knowledge seekers, so it should make sense that we can share library furniture as well as books, right?

H.E. Whitney, Jr. is a PhD student in history at Florida State University. H.E’s fields of study are the history of science, intellectual history, and technology and culture. H.E. is originally from Suffolk, Virginia but has called California, Ohio, North Carolina, Massachusetts, and Florida home at some point. H.E. has taught philosophy and graphic design/multimedia studies at the college level and enjoy creating digital art when not pontificating on scientific, cultural, or historical matters.

The Good Quiz

The Good Quiz: How good are you?

Answer the following questions with absolute honesty and tally your number of yes answers and no answers to see how good you are.

Question MarkDo you think that female humans are in any way inferior to male humans? Yes or No
Do you think that people who do not share your identical and exact religious views are inferior to you? Yes or No
Do you think that people of a certain ethnicity are in any way inferior to you and your own exact blend of ethnic backgrounds? Yes or No
Do you think that people who do not believe in God are in any way inferior to you or less good than you? Yes or No
Do you think that people who are attracted to their own gender are imperfect? Yes or No
Do you think that homosexual people are a potential dangerous threat to the safety and well-being of children? Yes or No
Do you think that female humans should be treated differently to male humans with regards to rights and freedoms?  Yes or No
Do you think that physically less able people are less important or of less value than the able? Yes or No
Do you think that “mentally unwell” people are less important than the “normal”? Yes or No
Do you think that people who have different moral standards with regards to sex and promiscuity are not as good as yourself? Yes or No
Do you think that gay people are not naturally so inclined? Yes or No
Do you think that governments and religions should prevent two people of the same gender from marrying each other? Yes or No
Do you think it is alright to put someone to death or imprison them for adultery or flirting? Yes or No
Do you think that the poor and/or homeless should be completely responsible for their current circumstances? Yes or No
Do you think that elderly people are less important or valuable than the young? Yes or No

    Answers:

    • If you answered with 15 NO answers, you are good.
    • If you answered with 14 or less NO answers, you are not good, and you should seriously consider being less horrible.

    Note, some contentious  issues, such as abortion, and euthanasia etc., have been deliberately omitted from the quiz, because everyone seems to think one camp is right and the other wrong, and few people ever change their mind. Among the truly objective, there may never be a general yes or no answer on such issues, but the truly objective are a rare minority.

    A need to consider perspective.

    By Sig Shonholtz

    perspective4

    I have been trying to bridge a gap of understanding, which seems to define many relationships. For lack of a better phrase (I welcome any better phrase) I am calling it a philosophical anomaly.

    I will explain it best in an experience I had with an old girlfriend. I was driving the car and she was my passenger. I was driving in a sort of jerky fashion and she said to “can you drive a little nicer”, which I did.. A week later she was driving and I had to make the same request of her, “can you drive a little nicer, please (hers was a demand, mine a request)?” But instead of changing her driving she argued that I made the request because she had said it to me the week before. I argued (pointed out) that last week I was the driver and this week I am a passenger and my perspective was completely different.

    This got me wondering about how many possible perspectives a person could have during any 24 hour period. These perspectives are not points of view, because as many people as there are on earth is as many points of view there are.

    After a few months of day dreaming about it I settled on 6 possibilities (permutations). Since driving was the inspiration for the theme I kept it as my model. But we could just as easily use an example of dining in a restaurant.

    The First Perspective is driving a car by ourselves. It does not matter so much how we drive (unless we are being unsafe to others). We are alone with our thoughts and awarenesses. Like eating alone and sitting at a table.

    The Second Perspective is driving the car with a passenger in the front seat, we need to be more aware and thoughtful of that person sitting next to us. Our driving style and our conversation impacts them. Like eating with a friend and “driving” the conversation, or just doing the talking at that moment.

    The Third Perspective is from the passenger in the front seats point of view. The passenger is now sitting at the table. Each time the conversation shifts back and forth one person is either in the second or third perspective.

    The Fourth Perspective is that of a passenger in the back seat. They may be participating or not but they are observers. This would, for example be someone in an audience, an observer on an event. Or perhaps a person at a dinner table not really being addressed but watching. Theirs is actually  privileged because they may notice things in the dynamics that others do not see.

    The Fifth Perspective is the time we spend sleeping. Since these Six Perspectives take up 24 hours of each day time we spend sleeping must be included. We are not so aware during that time though.

    The Sixth Perspective is not really a perspective it is imaginative but it might be most important one although it is very hard to achieve. I am calling it the ultimate perspective. In order to try and have the ultimate Perspective we must try and exit our humanity. We must pretend or imagine that we have not interest in human affairs. So, when I want this insight I imagine I am a science officer on an interstellar space craft. I do not really care about human affairs. I am not myself, an American Jewish man that is 55 years old and from California that likes watches. When I take this Perspective I am free to decide right and wrong good or bad and up and down. Things are much more clear from this position. In fact morality is just a changing concept.

    In my case the Second and Third Perspectives are the ones between my former girlfriend and I, and myself and my former girlfriend. I am continuously to exhaustion either the passenger or the driver and cannot seem to explain that our differences are more to do with this simple idea than anything else.

    I have noticed this dynamic in another area which I will try and explain. It is something like this. As a child we argue when someone older then us tells us not to do something. We will argue with them that, because they do it, we can do it. It goes something like this, we have all been in this moment. You tell a child not to eat with their mouthful, but inevitably we do the same thing so they argue and say “you do the same thing”. In my case, with my young daughter we sometimes say yah instead of yes. She does not use the word yah and is always correcting us, (this example is almost the opposite of what I am trying to say).

    As adults we have the same problem but this time when we say, “you do the same thing” we mean something else. We are accusing the person of not being aware that when they are in the Second Perspective they cannot imagine themselves in the Third and vice versa. This is the problem I have, trying to convey this very simple idea of trying to see oneself as we might be seen.

    I do not know if I am clear on the one above. It has been very difficult for me it articulate it. I actually was trying to find a philosophical numeric system or a way to quantify this last one. It is so common between people that it is almost a normal way we react to things.

    (the-vu Editor’s note) there has been considerable study of perspective in the field of psychology, but when someone acquires a need to consider perspective due to real and personal circumstances, it brings the concept to practical life.

    Metaphysical Binarism in Culture and Practice

    By H.E. Whitney

    binarypictureSport and Ethics

    Metaphysical binarism is our cultural mythology. Take for instance sport. Popular sports events that are team and/or individual oriented pose two contestants or two sets of contestants wherein the outcome of play must determine a winner and loser. Sports can have no meaning unless this outcome is satisfied; teams or individuals competing are only characterized by what category they fall when competition has concluded. While there are such things as ties, the goal is in most sports to continue play until a winner can emerge.

    Most systems of behavior and belief partake of metaphysical binarism. Each seeks to define good and evil as the only relevant or possible objects of human action. Ethical action, presumably, cannot terminate in an unclear or ambiguous object. To achieve good, as an end, requires satisfying a debt; to achieve evil, as an end, requires the failure to pay a debt. When our ethical systems are constructed along these lines, is it possible for an action to have ambiguity as a goal? If we can find an example of such, it would seem that good and evil are not the only ends of human action. Given this possibility, we can perhaps then claim that good and evil are merely privileged or preferred ends among many.

    So what might constitute an example of human action where good and evil are not ends or where ambiguity is the sought after object? Suppose I am invited to a party of friends. If I choose to go, I will perhaps have a joyous time and maybe my friends will too. To attend the party would thus achieve good. If I fail to go, I will perhaps regret my decision and so will my friends. Now evil isn’t necessarily the outcome of my failure to attend the party but nonetheless the outcome is not good, which is sometimes how evil is defined.

    But what if I suspend the choice of alternatives and decide that I may or may not attend the gathering? This suspension of action or choice is nonetheless an action, but it is an action of which we would be presumptuous to label good or bad: we simply must wait to see if I decide on one of the alternatives before imposing a value claim. Nevertheless, the suspension of choice is an action where in some cases, it may be inappropriate to assign a value of good or bad. Obviously, it is highly likely you have committed an evil act if you suspend judgment on whether or not to attend a dinner date with your devoted spouse or significant other on your anniversary.

    So what have we learned here? What I wanted to suggest is that all of our actions do not necessarily terminate in a good or bad value. If the contrary is absolutely the case, then our ethical (or even aesthetic) systems are limited in terms of the possible range of values that can describe a (human) action. This limitation then suggests that a binary system of values cannot neatly put all human actions into diametrically opposing categories.

    Arithmetic

    I don’t want to spend much time here on the subject of numbers but mathematics also suffers from a heavy dose of binarism. Arithmetic functions mostly by the use of binary oppositions such as addition and subtraction and multiplication and division. Quantity can only be added to or taken away. The question for our purposes is whether quantity can neither be given or taken away, added to or diminished and still make sense as a value. If the value of the variable is zero, then if it is added to or subtracted from itself, its value remains the same. Yet, against the idea or absolute binariness in arithmetic is that out of all real numbers, zero is neither positive nor negative. Additionally, zero is a number which seems to resist being divided by any other number to yield an actual quantity (i.e., the result of dividing by zero yields an undefined result, a non-number). [link]

    Logocentrism and Capitalist, Heterochauvinist Ideologies: The Social Consequences of Binarism

    There are several issues I would like to point out with logocentrism. First, logocentrism has a fascistic obsession with binariness and imposing binariness wherever there is none. For example, there is the idea that the moon must either be made of green cheese or either it is not. We can, of course, empirically verify this, and “safely” side with the negative. Yet the fact that we must choose either horn of the dilemma as being true or false is only one prescription for dealing with dilemmas out of many prescriptions: we could just simply ignore deciding upon the statements’ veracity or lack thereof.

    What about “Either God exists or does not exist”, a quite polarizing binary that we are well familiar with? What is problematic about this is binary is that it pits against each other two opposing views and assumes that only one of them must be true and the other false. But what about the position that there simply is not enough information, theoretical or empirical, to form an opinion one way or the other? This must also be taken as a point of view in its own right, but not necessarily a negation or affirmation of either of the opposing views.

    There is an applicant for a job and on the application, neither M or F (male or female) is marked for sex. Again, the logocentrist fascistic obsession with binariness emerges and we seek to equate gender with specific biological parts when identity is problematic or fluid. A person with a vagina must be a woman, although they identify behaviorally or socially as a man; a person with a penis must be a man, although he may lactate.[link] Vestiges of evolutionary origins seem to point to either androgyny or sexual reproduction without the assistance of the combinatorial fusion of egg and sperm.

    The binary fetishism of heterochauvinism seeks to put people in discrete, twofold, M/F categories where seemingly most sexist or heterochauvinistic stereotypes arise. History used to assign reason to men and emotion or sentiment to women and claim that reason was the higher faculty (thereby seeking to justify man’s exalted place in the great chain of being as well as in marriage): as if emotional expression in men was always unfit or superior intellectual ability in women was an aberration to be ignored and even ridiculed.

    There is also, finally, the capitalist ideology and its addiction to logocentric binariness. The obvious goal of capitalism is to profit from either no labor or from laborers who will accept the least compensation, in comparison to other laborers, to improve their material existence. The assumption here is that labor must eventually be abolished or that laborers must be made to produce more at the least possible market rate for their services. The problem with this either/or situation is that one the one hand, if you abolish labor, society has no lawful means to support its existence as a whole or as individuals. On the other hand, the assumption that people must be made to produce more at the least possible market rate assumes, without any shred of evidence, that laborers would not work harder (i.e., produce more) if they were paid more. But most importantly, capitalism functions when a product has value (i.e., something external to what it (the product) is which is nevertheless abstract). Its real value or price and the profit to be made from its sale can be never the same which seems to suggest that any product that you buy must always have an inflated price. This is a fundamental charade of capitalism: the value the consumer pays for a product must necessarily be higher than what the seller pays for the product. The consumer is thus giving the seller money in addition to purchasing or paying the real value for the product.

    Conclusion

    To have a conclusion here would seem to suggest that what I have said above are premises in an argument to lead to a particular conclusion. It is the presumption of binariness that all arguments need to have a conclusion: whether valid or invalid.

    I conclude nothing here. The only thing I would like to suggest (and logic can only prescribe truth instead of deriving it) is that we perhaps need closely examine the notion of binariness that is not only a part of our Western intellectual tradition but also our common social discourse and broaden our thinking to seize alternative ways of conceptualizing the world. Would such a reconceptualization be practical? I think of HTML as a not so binary language (i.e., not every tag needs to be closed) that is practical.  And its goal is to arrange or create a representation (i.e., a web page) that informs: as opposed to ruling, by absolute deference to a set of arbitrary rules, whether a particular argument is valid or invalid.  The logic of good and evil, truth and falsity, validity or invalidity, either/or, neither/nor, are lenses that narrow the scope of the mind, while over-adherence to these binaries leads one to assert their metaphysical finality and necessity: the grid by which all is to be measured and judged. A restless, searching type of critical thinking dispenses with such intellectual indolence, and recognizes binariness as a prescriptive quality or structure, among many, that is perhaps imposed upon the world as opposed to being found within it.

    H.E. Whitney, Jr. is a PhD student in history at Florida State University. H.E’s fields of study are the history of science, intellectual history, and technology and culture. H.E. is originally from Suffolk, Virginia but has called California, Ohio, North Carolina, Massachusetts, and Florida home at some point. H.E. has taught philosophy and graphic design/multimedia studies at the college level and enjoy creating digital art when not pontificating on scientific, cultural, or historical matters

    Dark secrets behind today’s trends. Part One

    By Oxi Singh

    Warning, you have been tricked into doing and buying things that are not in your best interest.

    sknyjSkinny Jeans.

    These make your feet look big. Smaller looking feet, in proportion to your legs, are more desirable. Skinny jeans aside, any pants, trousers, suits that have narrow foot openings, that do not extend over the entire instep and reach the creases of the toes, make you look like Bigfoot. Of course if you try to buy anything other than the above in any man’s clothing store in 2009, then you are limited to boot legs jeans, or gangster pants.

    Low slung pants, trousers or shorts.

    Some shorts are so long, they are essentially long pants that are too short. The crotches are so low, you cannot take a full size stride. Basically, this Hip-Hop inspired look makes you look like you are 80% torso and 20% leg. It is ugly, silly, impractical, unflattering and may even get you shot. Get that crotch up where it belongs and get leggy.

    Rap.

    Yes I know, criticizing Rap makes me a racist, blah blah blah. Well fuck you. Rap is crap and nothing else is true. Forget that nonsense about it being valid poetic commentary on today’s society. It is rubbish, plain and simple. The vocalists have no talent. The backing music is simplified to the point where a flea would get bored. The drums are a button on a mixing desk, and there’s not an ounce of musicianship anywhere in sight. If you purchased a rap recording, you are a sucker. If you recorded or performed one, you are a thief and guilty of stealing intelligence from your fellow human beings. If you are African American and you are into rap, you are pissing on the graves of your jazz ancestors, the intellectual heroes of the 20th Century.

    Vitamins and food supplements.

    Waste of money, ineffective and no substitute for good fresh healthy food. Take them all to the toxic waste dump, write of the thousands of dollars you wasted and enjoy some healthy fresh real food.

    Feel free to attack me via the comments.
    Love from Oxi.

    Oxi Singh is the non de plume for a certain angry chef in Torrance, CA

    Bells, Gargoyles, and University

    by H.E. Whitney, Jr.

    University Archaisms: Campus Bells, Gargoyles, and Reflections on the University’s Purpose

    welcometoflorida1The central campus bell at my university clangs promptly at 8am (beginning of the school/work day), noon (lunchtime), and 5pm (end of the work day, although classes still begin and last long after that hour). A different campus bell that is off in the distance softly chimes each hour and each half hour between those three all-important hours.

    I have often wondered whether the university really needs a campus bell to mark specific times during the day since virtually everyone on campus—professor and student alike–has access to time through cellular devices.  (I would perhaps, in a less sober state, argue that the cell phone is probably even more ubiquitous than time itself.)  Moreover, the campus bell’s marking of time appears somewhat superfluous when we consider that the human body has its own internal chronometer (e.g., the lunch hour stomach roar or morning caffeine withdrawal) to direct our actions.

    Perhaps the real reason for the campus bell is not simply to signal specific times throughout the day but to provide a rather sentimental image of the university’s religious past. Obviously, most listeners would think of a church when hearing the campus bell. But would this perception be valid for universities or colleges that have had no historical affiliation with any particular religious congregation or sect? This image would be particularly ironic for an institution dedicated to the pursuit of truth when there is nothing in its history to signify an affiliation with a religious past. While my institution does have such an affiliation in its history with religion (the university originally began as a seminary), other universities that make prodigious use of campus bells–universities whose origins or history have had no religious roots whatsoever—seem to be promoting a false image of themselves and their history.

    464541gargoylefountain0Gargoyles populate my university’s campus (probably more prominently than students) and some of them are built into the sidewalk to serve as barricades for limiting vehicle access to walkways. One of the original uses of gargoyles during the age of Gothic architecture was to serve as water conduits on building tops. So there is some awkwardness in seeing gargoyles springing from the pavement instead of howling or spewing water from the roofs of campus buildings.

    Additionally, one of the important uses of the gargoyle during the age of Gothic architecture was to scare off evil spirits. Yet I seriously doubt universities that adorn their landscapes or buildings with gargoyles wish to be even seen as postulating the existence of spiritual realms since we are so far along now in the age of force, gravity, and quarks. (Ironic, isn’t it, that science has perhaps enabled us to discard outmoded occult powers and entities for its own!)

    The archaisms of the campus bell and the gargoyle raise several questions. Should we think of the university as a monastic institution? If we do, then such a thought would seem to suggest that the university was a secluded, regimented sort of place where the study of scripture and the striving for the religious ideal were dominant goals. We certainly don’t have anything close to that anymore in academia: modern universities in America have for the most part become skill factories and groupings of social networks geared to prepare students for the work life instead of for the next life. In many universities that have dominant business and/or technical programs, students in those programs will probably have taken little or no classes in religion or the human disciplines for the matter.

    In light of business world criticisms of the humanities disciplines, should we be concerned that universities now want to limit the exposure of their students to the human disciplines by requiring undergraduates take a bare minimum of “mandatory” or “required” classes that involve writing and/or critical thinking?

    It is one thing to make writing a “requirement”: advertising any class as a requirement generally frightens the student into taking the class. And when they finally take the class (sometimes after much delay), they put little effort into it (sometimes only barely passing).

    It’s another thing to make such subjects appealing as pleasures for their own sake. Universities need to show students how writing well can not only enhance their lives materially (obviously no employer wants to hire someone who can’t put together a sentence) but also provide a genuine source of intellectual pleasure. This would also be true of critical thinking which teaches students not only how to detect fallacious reasoning but to craft valid, sound arguments. The problem is that the all too familiar routines and character of modern life–with its churning, whirring, push button, bleeping, pop up, point and click efficiency–often resists critical thinking and literariness. Modernity, with its obsession with technological domination and instant satisfaction, has perhaps relegated the very idea of intellectual pleasure to the dustbin of archaisms.

    I guess this is just a midday mental meandering. Or a tea-time rambling: depending on what time your internal chronometer tells you it is.

    H.E. Whitney, Jr. is a PhD student in history at Florida State University. H.E’s fields of study are the history of science, intellectual history, and technology and culture. H.E. is originally from Suffolk, Virginia but has called California, Ohio, North Carolina, Massachusetts, and Florida home at some point. H.E. has taught philosophy and graphic design/multimedia studies at the college level and enjoy creating digital art when not pontificating on scientific, cultural, or historical matters

    The hazards of imagining countries

    By Jeffrey the Barak

    Nomadic tribes move independently of each other and occasionally come together to interact through trade, war, sport, cultural exchange, intermarriage, murder etc.

    In the dense jungles of South America and Africa and Asia, the boundaries formed by geographical features such as ridges and valleys are all it takes to keep two nomadic cultures apart in language and traditions, until they either form non-nomadic civilizations or continue to roam independently of their neighbors. Then there is fate. One tribe may come into contact with, and survive contact with, outsiders and end up with new lifestyles and technology such as outboard motors and clothing, whereas their immediate neighbors may escape detection for decades afterwards.

    Tribes evolve into societies and eventually countries. We have seen it in today’s Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and surrounding areas and due to the fact that so many people have been exposed to the Old Testament of the Bible, and therefore have some awareness of nations and ethnic groups of the last two or three thousand years, it is easy to see how more modern politics and assumed differences can evolve into borders drawn on the map.

    If just one or two things had happened differently in history, the map of the Middle-East might be totally different, because in all that famous history, recorded in the world’s best selling loosely-historical book, there were only a few hundred or a couple of thousand people involved in most of those old conflicts.

    If you have a chance to find a map of the region that is now Afghanistan and Pakistan, a map made in the early or mid 19th century, you will see numerous regions defined by the make-up of the nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes and their leaders of those days.

    Today in the United Nations, you will never see little signs naming Tribes of the Turkmens, Buhara, Pamir, Darwaz, Roshan, Shignan, Badakhshan, Kunduz, Khulm. Chitral, Maimana, Herat, Kafiristan, Dir, Kohistan, Svat, Buner, Shinaki, Punjab and more.

    But these were names of regions, if not countries, on the maps of the day. Most are now either part of Pakistan or Afghanistan. The people of these regions are not necessarily Afghanis or Pakistanis, but the modern map tells them that’s what they are.

    There are seven main ethnic groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and many more obscure groups, some extremely small and hardly known to this day.

    And a failure to understand who these people are, who they were, where they came from and where they live now, means that occupying armies really do not have any clear idea who they are defending or who they are trying to kill.

    Add the complication of different religions, most of which are opposing or slightly differing views from within the Islamic umbrella, and the complications deepen.

    Shift West a few miles and look at Iraq. Like Pakistan, it is a modern country created not very long ago by outsiders. (The British, if you want to name names). Until the start of the current war, it held it’s violence and hate simmering below the surface, united by the common fear of their evil national dictator. But how many of those who voted to approve the invasion of Iraq had even a glimmer of understanding about the basic differences between the various peoples in the region? How many even knew anything about Sunni’s Shi’ites and Kurds, as they stood on the floor of the House and painted a picture of Iraqis cheering for parading American liberators marching triumphantly into Baghdad a few weeks after the Air Force blew it to bits for the good of the people.

    Perhaps it is too late to swap the Iraq on the map for numerous ethnic regions, and too late to swap the Pakistan and Afghanistan of today into the little countries and regions that existed before. But on the other hand, perhaps these people can never be unified into countries. The very model of a country may not be applicable to people such as these. They remain tribal and separate, in culture and language.

    Israel, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, all examples of relatively new countries, each with their own set of problems. Without ever understanding much about the people within, outside military forces jump in to help, and end up killing or displacing thousands and thousands of people either directly or indirectly

    Surely a little research would be advisable?

    Why you shouldn’t keep goldfish

    By Jeffrey the Barak

    Oscar Night (the goldfish)

    I once worked as a “cubicle farmer”, in an office. To provide a soothing distraction, I raised a couple of batches of “Sea Monkeys” and at the peak of their success, I was able to project their shadows onto the wall and enjoy their company for a very brief time.

    Following that experience, I bought a single Comet Goldfish for a dollar and a simple plastic bowl. He (or she) was an exceptionally attractive goldfish with large spectacular fins and tail, and it was only a matter of time before escalation took place with progressively larger tanks and filters and other fishy friends for Oscar Night, as I called him.

    In the end, my office desk sported a 30 gallon aquarium with a large canister power filter system under the desk. Water changes and tank cleaning took up many hours and it was a lot of work, but I feel that Oscar Night made the years spent inside a cubicle for forty hours a week much more bearable, and he provided mood enhancing entertainment for dozens of fellow employees who passed by my partitioned universe.

    I like goldfish. They have faces, they have intelligence and they have personalities. Tropical fish, albeit sometimes quite beautiful, are wild, and they are the eat-or-be-eaten type of animal that you never really get to know as friends.

    A goldfish is a poor man’s koi.

    But knowing what I know today, I would not recommend keeping goldfish as pets unless you can promise that each fish will have twenty gallons of water, and that you can commit to keeping the tank clean, the water properly balanced and will be able to maintain a proper feeding, cleaning and water-changing schedule. Anything less can be cruel to a fish. And if you follow the recommend cruelty-free ratio of water to goldfish, then you will have a largely empty aquarium to look at. After all, if you add gravel, rocks, plants and decoration, then the thirty gallon tank may only have room for twenty five gallons of water. One large goldfish!

    A goldfish might survive for a long time in a bowl, if you change the water once a day or even twice a day when it grows, but after two years, that pet store goldfish will need a large body of seasoned water to swim around in while it survives on it’s way to becoming an old foot-long friend over the years. And since they are social animals, it is only reasonable to keep a minimum of two pets, so they can interact with each other and remain sane while you are away from the other side of the glass.

    That’s right, experts recommend a big, empty forty gallon tank with a large external filter, for a pair of humble goldfish. It is unlikely you will ever find any goldfish enjoying that kind of volume.

    If you start with a jar and you love the fish, you better have a plan to set up a large pond someday. That one dollar goldfish might cost you a couple of thousand dollars if he makes it through the years.

    Or you could plan on constraining the escalation, and stopping at the goldfish-bowl level, at the expense of the fish’s well-being and life-span. Perhaps if you rescued a doomed “feeder fish” you can justify that.

    Jeffrey the Barak is the publisher of the-vu.

    The consequences of the befriending of bees.

    By Sig Shonholtz

    It happened a few months ago, I noticed some dead bees on my patio, odd I thought but then I went on with my day. A few days later I noticed some bees in the corner congregating around, buzzing it up and what have you. Finally I realized that a family of bees had made a home inside the wall of the patio, it did not really bother me because they were in the corner. Now personally I like bugs, at least most of them, in fact if they do not threaten me I am rather encouraging and supportive, spiders are a favorite of mine. After a short while we came to an understanding and cohabited quite nicely, I tried not to step on them and they in turn bee hived (haved) by not stinging me. Soon we were great friends; if I had my breakfast outside they would sit on the table and buzz on about things that were important to them. Pollen, honey and such things as that were always a topic of conversation, and the queen also. You should have heard them complaining about her, a real princess they all said. Although secretly I think they wanted to bee with her, if you know what I mean.

    I really appreciated the opportunity; living in a concrete jungle it seems there is never enough nature around us. I considered it a gift, to have this bee hive on my patio. Anyway…. one day I came to them with some very sad news, the building was going to be fumigated soon because of a termite infestation, and they were going to have to leave. Bee reasonable I told them, it’s not my fault, as far as I was concerned they could stay. In fact if they wanted to blame somebody they should complain to the director of the termites, it was their incessant eating that was the problems. Sadly, the ants who like to eat the eggs of the termites had left town and now the termites were taking over, that was the real problem.

    It was then I learned that the bees and termites were bitter enemies. Apparently there had been an argument and finally a brutal battle between the two groups, about 100 million years ago. It seems a queen termite had fallen in love with a worker bee and the rest is history.

    So on Friday I packed up my things, and asked them one last time to hit the road and bee t it. I left for the weekend.

    When I returned on Sunday I immediately went to check on them at first glance it looked like they were OK, but then I realized that it was just a few left over soldiers that had been on patrol when the tent went up. There they were hanging around waiting for their hot queen to buzz them in, but no signal ever came. Soon the last ones died and I was once more left alone on my patio.

    Sig Shonholtz is a master watchmaker and philosopher and is from Los Angeles.

    Dodging Rocks in the Holy Land

    By Patrick Mascoe

    I am not a Jew, nor am I a Palestinian. But for one month this summer, Jerusalem was my home.  During my time there, I had the opportunity to travel through Jerusalem’s Jewish and Arab neighborhoods and into the West Bank.  Reading about the Israeli-Palestinian struggle from the other side of the world is really no match for observing it from within.  When I read a journalist’s rendition of the Middle-East conflict I notice how in vogue it seems to criticize mighty Israel and defend the oppressed Palestinians.  Other journalists inevitably stay on the politically correct neutral path claiming both sides are to blame for the on-going dispute.  The trouble I have with these views is that this is not what I saw.

    As I stepped off the bus in front of my hotel, the first thing that caught my attention were the two soldiers on the corner decked out in full military gear.   Both were carrying Uzis and looked ready to use them if necessary.  I noticed that they weren’t the only ones carrying weapons.  The hotel security guards all carried side arms.  Within five minutes of my arrival into Jerusalem I realized that guns are a way of life here.  For Israelis, guns are merely accessories, much like cell phones.  Later that evening I also saw how security had permeated the Israeli mindset.  Going to a grocery store required a search of my knapsack by armed guards, before passing through metal detectors.  Outside on the street, soldiers were sweeping for bombs under parked cars.  My immediate thought was who lives like this?  My next thought, is this really necessary?

    Israelis live everyday under the threat of violence.  Hamas in the West Bank openly and vocally support the destruction of Israel. They believe that the land was consecrated to Muslims by God and is not negotiable.  Israel fights with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria and battles daily with countless militant groups in Gaza.  Insert into the mix Iranian president Mahmoud (the Holocaust never happened) Ahmadinejad and his continual threats aimed towards Israel.  Include the fact that the entire Muslim World seems to be siding with the Palestinians, and that a number of them are willing to fight on their behalf.  Add it altogether and you see why Israelis seldom smile.

    The sad reality of life in Israel is that yes, you always need to be on high alert.  I almost learned this the hard way one day while sightseeing.  After visiting the Mount of Olives, three colleagues and I decided to walk back to the Old City. Along the way we stopped and watched a group of Hassidic Jews immersed in prayers.  Suddenly, a rock, the size of my fist, landed a few feet to my left.  There was no traffic at the time and no instant answer as to where this rock had come from.  Someone yelled out, “Take cover, they’re throwing them from up there.”  Sure enough, from the Temple Mount, people were throwing rocks at the Hassidic Jews below.  The fact that I wasn’t Jewish didn’t seem to matter.  The fact that Hassidic Jews are a non-violent sect of Jews who refuse military service didn’t seem to matter.  The fact that the Temple Mount is considered a holy sight to Muslims didn’t seem to matter to those throwing the rocks.  The rocks finally stopped, the Jews kept praying, and life simply carried on.   Welcome to the Holy Land.

    The internal administration of the Temple Mount was handed over to the Muslim council by the Israelis as a gesture of good will. They did so under the agreement that both Jews and Christians would have access to visit the sight.  I tried three times and every time I was turned back with the same message, “Muslims only.” So much for good will; at least no one threw a rock at me this time.  Coincidently, I was never turned away by Israeli Security from entering the Western Wall.  Judaism’s most holy site is open to all. Unlike the Temple Mount, which is considered the third most holy site in the Islamic world, after Mecca, and Medina.  It is also considered sacred to Jews as it is the site where Abraham bound and almost sacrificed his son Isaac.  Unfortunately, the Temple Mount is also the site of a great deal of controversy between Muslims and Jews.

    Regrettably, this was a trend that often repeated itself during my time in Israel.  I had read in my guide book and had been told by local Israelis that it was not safe to travel into any of the areas that were under the Palestinian Authority, such as Jericho and the City of David. Another area that was considered out of bounds was entering the West Bank and visiting Bethlehem.  However, being a Christian and coming all the way to Israel, I simply had to see the birthplace of Jesus.  Much to the dismay of my Israeli friends, off I went.

    Crossing from Jerusalem into Bethlehem requires going through the eight meter high separation wall that is today at the heart of much public debate.  For Israelis the wall is in place for their protection.  According to David Horovitz, Editor in Chief of the Jerusalem Post, before the wall was erected and during the second intifata, Israeli citizens never knew if they would make it home from work each day.  Bombs were going off every second day. The security wall has been the reason for the radical reduction in suicide bombings in Israel.

    Those opposed to the wall feel it disrupts the movement and lives of thousands of Palestinians trying to get to work or school and that it stifles the West Bank’s economy and drives more Palestinians to extremism.   One of my colleagues saw the wall as an oppressive barrier that demeans the Palestinians and referred to the West Bank as an Apartheid State.  When I asked him if he would like to travel into Bethlehem with me his answer was a quick “No I don’t think it would be safe to go there.”  So, is it the wall that oppresses the Palestinians or is it their actions behind the wall that restricts their development as a people?   The answer is probably a bit of both.

    While going through the checkpoint into Bethlehem, I was surprised by the large number of Palestinians that possessed Israeli work permits.  One gentleman told me they were easy to get and that there is always work to be had.  As you leave Israel the last thing you see on the separation wall is a giant sign wishing, “Peace Be With You.”  Once on the other side of the wall, now under Palestinian Authority, you are met with various messages of graffiti, none of which make you feel very welcome or secure.  I saw the Star of David with a swastika through it, which might explain why there are no Jewish tourists. Slogans such as, “Death to America,” apparently $100 million in economic aid buys you little love in the West Bank, and “Globalize the Intifata,” advertising suicide bombers, may prove to be a poor way of attracting tourism.   To be fair in Jerusalem I did see a painting on a wall of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with bunny ears. However, within two days it had been painted over.  The graffiti in Bethlehem has been there for a while and I would be willing to bet it won’t be painted over any time soon.

    Once inside, and traveling around Bethlehem, the Palestinians that I met seemed very nice.  I ate at one restaurant and spoke openly with the owner who told me he had no problems with Jews and at one time they had all lived side by side.  He felt the wall was responsible for hurting his business and stifling the Palestinian economy.  He seemed like a pleasant, open-minded fellow. “We just want to live in peace and have our independence.”  If only his fellow countrymen felt the same way.  The problem again is that what I heard wasn’t what I saw.  Outside the restaurant, plastered along the walls of the buildings, were posters commemorating the deaths of the Palestinian suicide bombers.  Looking back into Israel you could see where smaller walls have been built around Jewish neighborhoods to help defend them against the small arms fire that occasionally gets aimed their way from Bethlehem.  One cannot claim to want peace and independence while supporting suicide bombers and a political ideology that calls for the destruction of your neighbor.

    Israel is not without fault with regards to their conflict with the Palestinians.  Israelis themselves will tell you this.  But from what I saw and experienced in my short time there, was that the tolerance I witnessed by the Israelis was far greater than any I saw on display from the Palestinians.  Most Israelis accept that the Palestinians should have their independence.  Most Palestinians reject the idea that Jews have a right to a national existence in the Middle East.  Palestinians claim that the Israelis are stopping them from gaining independence, yet, three times it was offered to them and three times they turned it down.  Israelis feel the Palestinian Authority needs to guarantee and provide Israeli security.  According to a 2007 Pew Global Attitudes survey, 70% of Palestinians support suicide attacks.

    The real irony here for Palestinians is that their independence is within reach.  In all honesty, why would Israel even want the West Bank?  The assimilation of millions of Arabs would be a complete nightmare for the Jewish State.  The demographic landscape would surely change with their arrival.  Palestinians want independence, but along with that right comes responsibilities.  The Palestinians need to recognize Israel’s right to exist.

    The fact is Israel does exist and has existed for close to sixty years. In 1949, after Chiang Kai-Shek lost the Chinese civil war to Mao Zedong, he moved his government to Taipei.  Mao Zedong declared that government an illegitimate entity, yet today Taiwan is universally recognized as a legitimate country.  Pakistan was formed in 1947 as a result of Muslim separation from India. These countries, even those established by violence – once established – become part of the international community and are not forever denounced. Present Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, must do what Yasser Arafat never wanted to do and that is accept the U.N. offer of a two-state solution.

    The Palestinians must come to an agreement of peace with the Israelis and keep their word.  The desire to reach a peaceful settlement would be done not due to any change of heart that they have erred in their disdain for Israel, but instead out of need for the development and well-being for the people of Palestine.  As long as Israel feels the need to have to defend itself, walls, road blocks, and security checks will all remain.  Both sides claim to want peace – but until the Palestinians start showing that the love of their children and their future is greater than their hatred of Israel, there will be no peace in the Middle East.

    Patrick Mascoe is a well published freelance writer who has in the past shared travel articles with the readers of the-vu. He has just returned from Jerusalem where he was one of ten Canadians to receive an academic scholarship to study this summer at Yad Vashem. While in Jerusalem he had the unique opportunity to travel into the West Bank. This is a first hand account of actual events.

    Belief: Step One to Knowing Who You Are

    By Matthew David Ward

    In this short rant, writer Matthew David Ward shares with us this stage in his personal development. He is expressing the realization that he is free to believe whatever he determines to be the truth, regardless of pressure from those around him.

    I guess the first step in self improvement is to figure out who you are and what you believe. Without knowing yourself how can you improve? So, in spite of living in a Bible-thumping, George W. Bush loving area, I tend to be in the minority and walk against the grain. I have a very complicated view on organized religion. But, basically, I believe it does good in the sense of fellowship, support and peace it provides to the congregation. Once it gets into the “I’m right, you’re wrong” area, I part ways. I have nothing against any religion, but I don’t buy into any of them either. I’m completely satisfied with my own spirituality separate from the organized religions. And don’t get me started on King Bush II.

    I also seem to be in the minority in my area when it comes to my stand in gay rights. I’m not a homosexual myself, but I do believe they should have more rights than they get now (be able to marry, at the top of the list). This is the main reason I am very supportive in separating church and state (the Christian bias in the law seems to be the main reason given why homosexuals shouldn’t be allowed to marry). We live in the “Land of the Free” yet we still ostracize certain groups of people. We do it with so many groups and it’s really sad. I’ll just add a note that it happened with slavery and we finally got past that (for the most part). I’ll step away from this subject since I could go on and on.

    I tend to develop my own beliefs and thoughts. I got this way from reading a lot and trying to understand others. The fact that I wasn’t raised in a religious household or background allowed me a more open view. We are all human beings after all. No one better than the other. We’re all fighting the same damn fight, but we’re still holding and pushing each other back. I don’t want to be part of that. There’s already too much hate, prejudice and anger in the world.

    I used to back down when people asked me what I believe or thought because I was always in the minority. I came from Eastern Kentucky (not necessarily the most open minded area) to the heart of Bush Country. I think I used to believe my opinion counted less than someone else’s as if their beliefs were always one step ahead of mine. This is a dangerous way to think and I’m beginning to allow myself the knowledge my opinions and beliefs are just as valid as everyone else’s. So, only in accepting and standing by what I believe will I actually be able to grow as a human being. Maybe this has been what has been holding me back for so long?

    Matthew David Ward is a 21-year-old college student who currently makes his home in Tennessee with his beloved border collie. He is an amateur poet and writer. He currently shares his opinions and thoughts via his webblog, The World As I See It (http://matthewward.blogspot.com).

    Cruelty

    By Mark Bernstein

    Children can be cruel. Adults can be cruel. And I’m not talking about torture, or rape, or child abuse. I’m talking about everyday acts of cruelty which almost go unnoticed. I can remember most of the mean and cruel acts I have done in my life and those done to me, all with vivid detail.

    It starts early. I remember at our little summer cottage an older boy (BC) took me under his wing and taught me cruelty. He schooled me in the art of fellatio and then used to make me give him blow jobs in the big white canvas tent between our cottages. While I did it he would tell me stories about girls he had made out with, or felt up, or fucked. After all these years I can still remember the name of one of the girls (CH) and the exotic image of her I had conjured up in my mind as I listened spellbound and a little frightened to his erotic tale. I was too dumb or vulnerable to ever question what I was being made to do.

    One summer while bicycling on a country road near our cottages he and I met up with a teenage boy who seemed rather slow and had a large head. We used call him “blockhead”. Later of course I realize he had suffered from hydrocephalus (“water on the brain”) as an infant resulting in his large head and mild mental retardation.

    Another summer we walked around with long metal nails which we would throw end over end like knives at frogs, trying to kill them where they sat. Fortunately our aim was very poor and I don’t remember ever hitting the mark, but the intent was there. We also had a bow and arrow and shot a crow that was attacking the nest of a robin in a haw tree in front of his cottage. But we killed the robin by mistake. We both cried. I guess BC wasn’t such a tough guy after all. I like to think that much of my bad behavior with him was due to huge influence from an older person but I guess I’ll never know. I have not seen him since I was about 14 but I have heard he became a police officer.

    In public school there was an unattractive and rather slow girl from a poor family who amused us. She had a funny and unbecoming mannerism of scraping one of her oversized front teeth with the nail of her curled little finger. We used to walk around doing that and calling her “dumb H……” (we actually said her last name). I have thought of her often. To NH, if you’re reading this, I’m so sorry for being the insecure, pathetic little boy who apparently had to hurt you to feel better about himself.

    I remember one of the first girls I had a crush on in public school (DB). She was quiet, gentle, ladylike, and beautiful. She was one of those girls who could walk almost without moving her legs. I loved her so much that my friends (supporting me I guess) and I used to throw stuff at her from a distance because we were such cowards. I guess it was the only way we knew of showing any feelings. One day one of our twigs cut her under the eye and the principal, who seemed seven feet tall and had eyes of steel, collected all of us together and verbally undressed us.

    In high school I had a group of male friends who were apparently all as insecure and pathetic as I was. We played mean games on each other, usually using words as our weapons. I haven’t seen many of them since I left high school, wanting to put that part of my life behind me, but I did have a warm reunion with one of them a few years ago.

    That same friend and I were beaten up for no reason while walking on the street in the evening as boys. We were about 13 and both small and our assailants were five or six big teenagers. Today it would have been called a swarming. They smoked, and smelled of liquor, and swore, and beat the living crap out of us. Fortunately we only got broken noses, black eyes, and loose teeth but I’ll never forget the feeling of helplessness, violation, and raw fear at being attacked for no reason.

    In university one year I shared a slummy apartment with two other science geeks like me. One night we had a party and a poor social misfit we had invited left a Pink Floyd album on top of a radiator and it heated up and started to melt and was destroyed. I remember it was Pink Floyd because they’re one of my all-time favorite bands who I’ve seen live a bunch of times and own most of their CD’s. I can still remember blurting out in a loud voice to all and sundry: “Look at what R did”. He must have been mortified but I only thought about it that way sometime later. If you’re out there RS, I’m sorry. I was probably pretty wasted but that’s no excuse for gratuitous meanness.

    After my B.Sc. degree I went to medical school and I don’t remember doing any cruel or mean acts since then. But I’m sure I’ve done them – I just don’t remember them. And I vividly remember some perpetrated on me. In the late 1970′s my first wife said something to me in a matter of fact way which I will always remember for how much it hurt me. And she was a gentle, kind person. I’m pretty sure it was an innocent moment of thoughtlessness. About 15 years ago I was at a Conference in a far away city and had a reunion with one of my dearest friends from medical school – we hadn’t seen each other in about 10 years. He said something cruel to me about a secret we shared in medical school – he said it as matter-of-factly as if he were talking about the weather. I guess he also meant no malice. But I was crushed and still remember the moment as if it was yesterday.

    Why do we do these things to each other and why do I recall all these episodes so vividly? I do not feel I am unique in having been involved in these little acts and/or remembering them so clearly. And I challenge every reader to not remember at least one act of cruelty they did or was done to them that they would do anything to erase. I guess as we evolve we are mostly taught good values but feel the need to explore the dark side of our nature, or are too weak to fight the peer-pressure of others. Or maybe we simply feel better about ourselves by diminishing others. Or maybe we explore this behavior to learn firsthand how awful it is so we don’t make a lifelong pattern of it. I hope it’s the latter.

    Mark Bernstein is a neurosurgeon at the Toronto Western Hospital and Professor of Surgery at the University of Toronto. He and his wife Lee (a native Los Angelina) have three daughters and two pet Labradors. He has written extensively in the medical literature for over 20 years and for the last few years has been trying his hand at non-medical writing. He is the world’s second worst saxophone player.

    Feline Fury!

    By Lynda Murtha

    The moment the men in blue, the “To Serve and Protect” guys, shot the cat on our front lawn was neither the beginning nor the end of the story.

    The story began one sunny June morning. I noticed that the door to the shed in our backyard wasn’t quite closed. Sliding it open, I was startled as a mangy looking cat flew out past me and I felt a shiver as its matted and dirty fur rubbed against my bare leg as it fled. A prayer of thanks would have been in order then and there, but what did I know?

    The cat then squeezed through the fence into our neighbors yard where it started a sequence of events none of us could ever have predicted. Gwen, my neighbor of many years, sat enjoying her coffee and the morning paper under the trees. Her beautiful Katie, a startlingly beautiful white Persian cat, languished in the sun on the deck nearby. As the intruder entered their backyard Katie shot forward to protect her turf, followed closely, likely more out of curiosity than anything else by Shandy, their quiet little Sheltie. Hearing the commotion before she saw it Gwen bolted out of her chair. Fur flew as the feline-canine threesome rolled in a snarling tangled ball on her deck.

    Instinctively trying to protect her pets she grabbed Katie in an attempt to separate all of them, and it was then she believes she received the scratch on her arm. She eventually separated them with a garden rake and the invader flew out of the yard and across the street. Carefully Gwen calmed down her beloved pets. She checked them over and determined they had escaped unharmed thanks to their heavy-coated breeding and that she in fact was the only one who had suffered a scratch.

    Across the street, the crazed feline immediately attacked another neighbors cat minding its business on its own front lawn. That cat didn’t fare as well as the pets next door and was badly bitten. At this point a gaggle of neighbor were out on the street comparing notes on the poor creature and the fact it had apparently been seen in the neighborhood for days. The question was what should be done? Someone called the police figuring the situation was dangerous and more than a little beyond a wait for Animal Control. Within minutes the police arrived and quickly assessed the situation. The cat, now slinking around the bushes at the front of our home, was shot on the spot. One bang, then another….Dead cat!

    But, as I mentioned at the beginning, this was not the end of the story. As pet owners, most of us think that when we have our cats and dogs vaccinated for rabies, that’s it. Not so! The aftermath of this encounter was enormous. First of all, the cat across the street was not up to date in its shots, and they were ordered to put their cat down immediately. The children were devastated; the parents embarrassed and sad that their neglect had caused the immediate demise of their much loved family pet. These precautionary decisions were made before the results of any testing on the feral cat could be performed, and it was days before we heard that the results were conclusive — the cat did indeed have rabies!

    In the meantime, with no evidence of any damage, Gwen’s cat and dog, vaccinations up to date, were ordered into quarantine. They had to remain under direct observation of a veterinarian able to take particular precautions in their care. Many hundreds of dollars were spent on their maintenance while everyone awaited the results of an autopsy on the shot-dead-on-the-lawn cat.

    But the worst was yet to come. Well before the results on the cat came back, Gwen was informed she had to start rabies injections. They lasted several weeks, and were painful, and the worry over the consequences was considerable. She tried to find the funny side of all of it, including a story that her husband had tried to increase her life insurance during this period of time, but we all knew this was a chapter in her life she’d rather have missed.

    Gwen remained convinced that her own Katie had in fact scratched her as she tried to separate her from the fierce battle that day, but there was no way of knowing for sure, and erring on the side of caution was certainly in order in this case. In terms of the animals, the problem was enormous. They were informed, in spite of the fact the pets were both completely up to date in their rabies vaccinations, the cat and dog would have to stay in quarantine for several months. The cost was horrendous, not only in terms of the many thousands of dollars it eventually cost them, but also in terms of the anguish to their family at having their beloved pets removed from their home.

    We wondered many times how other families coped with this unusual situation in terms of cost. Having our pets vaccinated is a must, but do people realize there are still severe consequences should your precious pet come in contact with a rabid animal? I think we naively believe once vaccinated that’s it.

    Many weeks later, after all the fur settled (literally), Gwen and I returned to our chats over the back fence. Gwen is a quiet, kind, gentle woman. I can’t recall a time I’ve even heard her raise her voice, let alone utter a curse. That morning, however, in her exquisite Queen’s English, never dampened in any way by her years in Canada, she said to me, ‘The next time I see a strange cat come into my yard, I’m not going to try to help, I’m just simply going to yell…Get the Fuck out of here!”

    Lynda Murtha writes from Toronto, Canada.

    Claws In The Floor

    By S.D. Craig…….
    or is it by her dog Nikki?


    S.D.Craig responds to the article in Dinky Dog and Me

    Don’t make me do it.  I’m a dog.  Name’s Nikki.

    I’m here to tell you all, I don’t want to go these places SHE takes me.  I am content to lie on my butt, growing wider and surveying life at large from the couch.  Yeah, that’s a pun.  So what?  Like I said, I’m a dog, not a writer.

    A Pomeranian to be specific.  At 11 lbs. 4 oz., I’m a furball and a spitfire.  Well, I used to be a spitfire before a certain “ahem” operation a few years back.  Now, I’ve become like a smoker gone bad, quit the habit but gained weight.  Yes, you know the type.  Always excuses.  Need I say more?

    However, I do feel adored, if not left behind one time too many on the weekends around this place.  HE pets me and lets me lick his hands and talks to me in that special voice.  You know the one.

    “Oh, you’re such a dog.  Such a dog,” as he pets my belly and scratches me in all the right places.  He calls me funny names and, come to think of it, they each have their own set of these names for moi.  To her I’m female ones like Snickerdoodle, Nikkipoo, Nik (when she’s a bit tense that time of month.  HE calls me really weird ones like Dogster, OHyou’reAdog and Dogsbreath.

    SHE has a hissy fit if I lick.  She likes to be clean and showers twice a day.  Shhh, don’t tell her I said so.  I must be precious and cute because SHE buys me expensive food and then, need I mention, takes me to the groomer once a month where I need it or not.  I’d rather the OR NOT part.

    Claws in the floor.  That’s me.  I don’t like visiting sterile places, with slick shiny floors and antiseptic-smelling devices and computers.  SHE’s got a computer at home and that’s enough for me to get sick about.  That’s another dog tale.  Later.

    But when it comes to visiting the bath place or the vet, I stick those claws out and down hard.  Still trying to figure out why they don’t work like ABS brakes on a Subaru, though.  Somehow, I’m always going where I don’t want to go.  I wish SHE’d take the hint.  SHE never takes me to, say the pool when she swim laps, where I could feast my lovely brown eyes on some little Poodle FeFe, or to the market, where I can sniff new foods and pick up bits on the floor.

    Someone needs to warn this woman.  Dogs CAN run away.  Claws or not.

    Signed,

    Clawed In San Diego

    SD Craig is a freelance writer and editor of LovingYourCurves.com and was given the nickname “Chatterbox” by fellow writers. At age fifty, Craigs Southern flair and sense of humor give her plenty to write about with a rapier wit and a wacky outlook. Her articles on body image (her biggest passion), marriage/divorce and relationships, family, friends, career issues, computers, the Internet, horses, baseball, movie reviews and writing tips remind one of Erma Bombeck or Dave Barry. A freelance writer who once juggled five columns then got real, Craig welcomes your e-mails and feedback on her articles. Drop her a hello at sdcraig922@yahoo.com or stop by www.lovingyourcurves.com.

    Curbside ethics around an injured skunk

    Curbside ethics around an injured skunk: what would you have done?
    By Mark Bernstein

    Recently one beautiful late spring morning I turned south off a side street onto a busier street which takes me right downtown to my hospital. Even though it was 5:00 a.m. I had to wait for about five cars to whiz by me before I could turn right. After I had completed the turn and was headed south I immediately noticed the car 100 yards in front of me suddenly swerve sharply to the left as if it were avoiding something in the road. I slowed down as there was no-one behind me and there in the middle of the road was an injured animal. It stunk to high Hell and I immediately recognized in the luminescence of early dawn that it was a badly injured skunk. It was squirming around without making any forward progress flopping pathetically from side to side with each effort to move. It had presumably had an encounter with a car in the dark. I parked by the curb 10 yards away from it with my hazard lights flashing, staring at the poor beast, and contemplated my options.

    I figured I had four: 1) I could stop and pick it up and drive to an all-hours veterinary clinic (I knew the whereabouts of one due to a recent illness in one of my two Labradors); 2) I could keep driving and forget about it; 3) I could call 911 or information to get a number for the Humane Society (assuming they have an after-hours number); and 4) I could try to somehow put the poor thing out of its misery.

    Number 1 didn’t seem doable or safe as skunks have sharp teeth and claws and are carriers of rabies. Furthermore its pungent scent would ruin my nice suit of clothes and the inside of my car and I had no blanket or box anyway. And was I prepared to pay a ridiculous amount of money (trust me, I’ve been to that clinic) to help a feral skunk? Number 2 crossed my mind (as it obviously had for other motorists before me) and was certainly the easiest, but it just didn’t sit right with me. Number 3 seemed impractical. What could the police do? And the animal was likely fatally injured so I strongly doubted the Humane Society would be interested in spending time or resources on it. So I chose number 4 and decided to end the animal’s suffering quickly using my car as a lethal weapon.

    I put the car in drive and slowly drove over the poor beast in my heavy Toyota Four-runner truck. I felt the front wheel roll over the animal and a second later the back wheel. I stopped a few yards away and stared back for a good five seconds and it remained motionless. I was satisfied I had done the job. I proceeded down to work, driving slower than usual, deep in thought and feeling a little nauseated but convinced I had done the right and kind thing.

    I parked my car in the underground lot at The Toronto Western Hospital. When I got out I immediately noticed the uniquely unpleasant odor the deceased animal had left on the car  embedded in the rubber of the tires. Later in the morning I had to give a lecture on bioethics which had been scheduled for months. At the teaching session at the Joint Center for Bioethics of the university of Toronto, I decided to start my session by engaging the audience with my dilemma, citing it as a real-life example of ethical decision making: trying to do the right thing in a given situation given a few options, none of which is great. The same options I had considered were offered and none of the class of about 40 mature learners (e.g.. other physicians and surgeons, nurses, administrators, clinical bioethicists, etc.) showed any revulsion when I disclosed what I had done. In fact, many nodded their approval.

    A lovely woman, a bioethicist who I knew, remarked that she took the same route to work a few hours after me and she had actually seen the very skunk I had put out of its misery. Another person applauded my courage. Another woman was matter-of-fact but sympathetic to my situation and added irreverently that at least no-one would likely steal my car because of its new repellent smell. That might be an upside for me, but certainly not for the skunk. I guess it was an attempt to lighten the moment with a little humor, or she didn’t worry too much about the welfare of animals. Later in the day I consulted my best ethics advisor, my wife, and she thought I did the right thing although she confessed that she probably would not have been able to do what I had done.

    Sometimes in life we have to do unpleasant things but must take comfort in knowing we felt it was the right thing. Exercising tough love with a child with major problems such as drug abuse would be one example. Another would be kicking a child out of the house when you feel they have overstayed their welcome and their life is not going forward because of their desire to stay in the protection of their parents’ womb. Another would be a doctor reporting to a family an error done in the course of caring for a patient. Another would be breaking the heart of a 29 year old woman, wife, and mother by having to inform her that the brain tumor you have just removed is highly malignant. Maybe these aren’t exactly analogous but you get the idea. Sometimes you need to do something difficult but carry on and go forward knowing you did your best under the circumstances. There are countless examples in our everyday lives. We can go through life hoping we never encounter such dilemmas but we’re kidding ourselves if we believe we will be that lucky.

    Mark Bernstein is a neurosurgeon at the Toronto Western Hospital and Professor of Surgery at the University of Toronto. He and his wife Lee (a native Los Angelina) have three daughters and two pet labradors. He has written extensively in the medical literature for over 20 years and for the last few years has been trying his hand at non-medical writing. He is the world’s second worst saxophone player.

    Hell hath no Fury, like a Plymouth scorned

    By Mike (Roadie) Marino
    Published May 2004

    Lights, camera’s, action! Quiet on the set! The casting couch and the Golden Age of Film. It was the heady Hollywood heydays. Glitz and glamour were personified by Gable and Garbo, and it was the same era of over consumption and arrogance that inspired the Gloria Swanson/William Holden film treatment of the great washed up stars of the Hollywood Hills…”Sunset Boulevard”. It was Hollywierd at it’s gluttonous best. Premiers, autograph’s, paparazzi by the busloads…and the cars, oh man, those cars. These were the V-8 and V-12 chariots of the gods that had descended from the heavens to walk among us mere mortals. Cadillac. Stutz. Duesenberg.

    Ragtops purring, humming, wind in the hair, racing without a care down the Malibu coast, full moon on the water, waves silver tipped, racing shoreward to engage in oceanic intercourse with California’s golden beaches. Gay laughter and witty repartee punctuated the night with scarves flying and whipping in the West Coast breeze…flags of the Republic of Celebrity. Gasoline was being consumed in gargantuan quantities as film land flaunted itself to the delight of a hungry public. In time the Golden Age would pass, the patina would fade from the movies and the stars themselves, and in the coming of age, piston pubescent era of the 1950′s – 1970′s roadhead, the cars would become the main attraction.

    Take two moonshining pretty boys, add some backwoods mayhem with a slurred southern drawl…a kissin’ cousin-type sister in painted on hot pants from the planet Salivation, and you have the makin’s of a recipe for success with “The Dukes of Hazzard.”

    John Schneider and Tom Wopat perfected the roles of the deep fried southern troublemakers who gave heaping plateful’s of grief to Boss Hogg and Sheriff Roscoe Coltrane. Car chases, car crashes, car near misses. It was a piston pumping inbreed festival of stars and bars, as well as cars. The women were awed by the sinewy brothers of the backwoods. One blonde, (only his hairdresser knew for sure), and the other the obligatory brunette, dark, swarthy and deep. In other words, The Anti-Blonde!

    Now we need something else. Something the guys can relate to. Soon the seas of sexuality parted with divine inspiration and from the fog emerged everyone’s backwoods dream…Daisy Duke. Heaven itself in hot pants, and the sexual thunder that emerged from her rocked our world, as we waited patiently in line to get a direct hit by her lightning. If other sex symbols of the day were mere thunderstorms, then, Daisy Duke qualified as a full-fledged hurricane!

    Although women dreamed of going to the moon with Luke or Bo, and the guys wanted to search for a needle in Daisy Dukes haystack, the real star of the show was an automotive phallic symbol named “The General Lee”. Named after the spirited leader of the Confederate Army, the car symbolized the muscle of an era gone by, and when The Dukes debuted in 1979 it was already considered late Sixties and early Seventies nostalgia.

    The venerable V-8 Dodge Charger was chosen for a reason. Power. Power…and more power. Mucho, macho, machismo muscle. The Charger won 22 of 54 major NASCAR races in 1969, so why not take the king of the track and make it the king of the backwoods. Give it a distinctive blaze orange paint job, add a Confederate flag on the roof, have the horn blast out the opening notes of “Dixie” and you have one deep south southern-fried mo-sheen.

    The Charger itself was a thinly disguised street racing screamer that rocked and roared as the engine came to life with the power of the beast from 20,000 fathoms. Raw power and energy unleashed, and the timing couldn’t have been better. The country was full of hollow-eyed asphalt junkies, and a gallon of gas fix was just pennies on the dollar and it all got jammed into the gasoline vein of the Charger to burn up fast at 10 mpg.

    The “Dukes” production company had around 17 “Gen’l Lee’s” and some models were ’68′s, some were ’70s, but there is no doubt about it, the Charger was king of the streets. Soon there would be change on the Charger horizon and the muscle era itself would surrender at the environmental equivalent of Appomattox, but, thanks to The Dukes of Hazzard, “The General Lee” marches on.

    The Sixties were Pow! Bang! Zoom! when it came to high camp and pop culture. Water pipes and tailpipes were coming to a high point, and nowhere were the pipes higher than on the turbine powered Caped Crusaders mighty crime fightin’ vehicle, The Batmobile! Only Batman and the Boy Wonder could pull off a leather and leotard 1920′s Berlin cabaret look and actually make it look manly. The crime-fighting duo took on a cast of characters straight out of a nightmare. The Joker. The Riddler. Mr. Freeze. Devious devices designed to destroy were thwarted by the two tightfisted men in tights. On the other hand, dress Julie Newmar up in ass-hugging Catwoman leather pants, high black boots and a whip, and you have a dream come true.. Colorful crime fighters, indeed, but the real star was not Bruce Wayne, not Alfred, and no, not Dick Grayson. It was no less than a turbo charged jet-black one vehicle Panzer division with batwings known simply as The Batmobile.

    The car had class. It was starship power with the sleek svelte look of that classy chassis. pulsating and rippling, black Sabbath metal and fiberglass, whirring turbines and enough gadgets and gizmo’s to chock James Bond on a Martini olive of overkill. “Holy Headers Batman, this beast kicks asphalt!” Bruce Wayne nods, “Yes, it does Boy Wonder. May I call you Boy Wonder? This magnificent machine is an asphalt eating crime fighter, way beyond its time. Let Superman have his yellow sun induced gravity fighting super powers, me, I’ve got horsepower to the max, Baby.”

    The roots of the legendary Batmobile are lodged in the year of our Ford, 1955. The designers at Ford-Mercury were developing a concept car, as all auto manufacturers were doing that year. The styling alone was alien inspired and you’d swear Michael Rennie was ready to make the earth stand still with his mighty robot Gort. The car was called the “Futura” and designed by the Versacci of auto design of the day, Ghia of Italy. Fast forward to the Sixties.

    Hollywood. Batman is on the drawing board and ready to leap to life from the pages of a comic book to the small screen. The producers scratched their heads. “We need a car. Not just any car either. We need, a car with chutzpah, and chutzpah to spare, and even more chutzpah after that.” The design challenge was finally dropped like an excited salmon in the lap of the King of the Kustomizers, George Barris, and he had three weeks to pull it off. Pull it off he did, and created a pop culture icon that still revs and races through the dark, wet Tim Burton streets of celluloid Gotham City.

    George actually made three of them and they went on tour like a comic book USO troupe and even participated in staged racing events at drag strips across the country, and while actors like Val Kilmer, Adam West and Michael Keaton have had their shot at portraying the mighty man in black, there will always be only one George Barris. Three Batmobiles, yes, but only one George Barris, the caped customizer of the POW! BANG! crime fighting generation of the heavy on the pop-goes-the-culture 1960′s.
    The forces of good versus evil has played itself out on the human stage for daily performances since the day the Garden of Eden lost it’s virginity and it’s innocence, and the 1960′s were the ultimate personification of social upheaval and the perception that the world was filled with violence without meaning. No sense to the nonsense, and a duality that led to schizophrenia, and raised the question, “just who are the bad guys anyway”?

    This problematic scenario was played out on the big screen in the early 1970′s in the Dennis Weaver, cult masterpiece, “Duel”, where a traveling salesman with humongous oversized aviator sunglasses tries to outrun the 18-wheel version of the Headless Horseman. It’s a 90-minute monologue with accompanying chase scene that pits a hungry Peterbilt against, of all things, a slant 6, orange-red, four-door sedan Plymouth Valiant.

    Faceless, motiveless, the pit bull of a big rig chases our hapless hero down the asphalt and up the asphalt. Climbing uphill, the valiant Valiant is loosing power. The radiator, now red-hot, begins to overheat, the needle racing into the dreaded red zone Dennis Weaver sweating drops as big as Buicks, panic etched into his face looks in the rearview. The truck is noticeably absent, he enjoys an inward chuckle as a sense of momentary relief overcomes him, even in the sweltering heat of the California day. A deep sigh and a slight twinge of joy. It’s over! It’s over! Then dread and terror returns as the truck reappears and begins to round the bend, gain speed and close the gap. The knife plunges deep into his spirit, slices clean through his fragile psyche and reaches raw bone, as he falls screaming silently further and further into the depths of his own personal asphaltian hell, his fears, dancing a macabre dance of death in the shimmering mirage in the road ahead, as he finally realizes. Objects in the rearview mirror really are closer than they appear. David has finally met Goliath, and now Goliath must fall.

    The Plymouth Valiant is the kissing cousin to the Dodge Dart, and why Spielberg chose a 1968 Plymouth to be the automotive anti-hero to the Peterbilt diesel anti-Christ in this superb thriller is anybody’s guess. The car certainly lived up to it’s Valiant name in this conflict flick of a time that was stretched tighter than a polyester leisure suit that was two sizes too small. The Sixties were a confusing time, and the Seventies sought to untangle the tie-dyed mess that was created, and in the process gave us a wonderful film and cheap sunglasses along with a most valiant Plymouth that could hold it’s own against diesel evil incarnate.

    San Francisco. Frisco to the old-timers. Ess Eff to the uninitiated. The streets of the city have been haunted by writers, poets, dharma bums, beatniks, hippies, sinners and saints. They’ve all found solace and comfort in her shroud of fog. The Golden Gate Bridge, the Catherine Hepburn of bridges, stretches from Marin to the tip of the peninsula, while the heavy metalesque Bay Bridge, spanned the gap from Oakland to The Embarcadero. Magnifico structures that shuttle commuters to and fro, from frenzy to fury at times, to the slow and go madness of the rush hour at others, that makes travel halt and congeal like a slow moving line of caramel by the sea, until it heats up, thins out and races along again at 60 plus miles per hour. The Golden Gate and the Bay Bridge, standing as sentinels over the bay, but they’re not the only bridges in San Francisco. Not by a long shot. Let’s face it, San Francisco just wouldn’t be San Francisco, without it’s Nash Bridges!

    Don Johnson introduced us to the art deco architecture of Miami, as well as the audacious flair of men wearing pastels with pride, and still being macho. Those fashion statements conjugated with scripts and storylines of modern day piracy, and created a TV child that regaled us with bedtime tales of Columbian drug cartels plying their trade in the salty seas of the Caribbean on televisions cult classic, “Miami Vice”. Crockett and Tubbs, made “Vice” an instant cop-pop culture hit, but soon Sonny Crockett tired of wearing pink, and decided to escape the beach culture of Miami, and seek Bohemian peace in the Victorian quietude of the San Francisco Hills. It was against this most Rice-A-Roni of backdrops that became Nash Bridges and decided to trade his cigarette boat in for one of the most recognized Motor City muscle monster mo-sheens to ever grace and race up and down Lombard Street. A drop dead lemon drop, lemon twist yellow 1971 Hemi ‘Cuda.

    Don Johnson and Cheech Marin. Johnson, a Crockett without a Tubbs, and Marin, a Chong-less Cheech, were flawless as buddy-pal-partner cops, Nash Bridges and Joe Dominguez. Crime fightin’ television with not only a sense of humor, but more importantly, a sense of flair and high fashion. That sense of fashion was most prevalent on the street as the crime fightin’ Nash and Joe banged around the Baghdad by the Bay in the ‘Cuda. Bare in mind, Amigo, this is not just any old Cuda. This one had more class than Princess Grace. Hell, this one had panache, and not just any old panache either. This one had Nash Panache.

    In 1964, Plymouth came out with it’s first of the line Barracuda’s. Ford was getting ready to unleash the Mustang from the muscle corral, and Plymouth’s horsepower hind-end was up against the asphalt wall. They needed something to out distance the Ford monster before it hit the pavement, and they needed it fast. The engineers took their trusty Plymouth Valiant, touched up the front-end and gave it a rear window that wrapped around. Then they gave it a shot of medicated muscle, and from the automotive womb emerged, kickin’ and screamin’, the infamous Plymouth Barracuda. The name alone conjured up images of a man eating fish ready to draw first blood and tear into a victims tissue and render them, well, you know…dead. The Barracuda was ready to strike and hit the sales floor and the asphalt two months ahead of the dreaded Mustang, but even with it’s head start, the Barracuda was not the sales beast Plymouth thought they had created, and the Mustang was officially crowned king of the wild horsepower realm.

    The 1970′s brought a muscle makeover to the fallen Plymouth hero, and the Barracuda was given a hemi transplant and enough power to be damn near psychotic on the street. Woodward Avenue in Detroit was the testing ground of this new wild child, and the re-born 1964 east, become known affectionately as the ‘Cuda. High performance with a demonic grin and a rock and roll attitude.

    In the Nash Bridges storyline, the car was given to Nash when his brother, Bobby, went to Vietnam. He never came home and ended up instead as MIA. As a result, Nash and Joe had one of the hottest rides on the tube. The color chosen for the show was “lemon twist yellow”, which was actually one of the original 18 colors available for the Cuda. Incidentally, most of the ‘Cuda’s seen on the show were in reality 1970′s that were made up to look like ’71s, if your a purist that will have great and deep, if not a downright religious meaning for you. The rest of us, however, just close our eyes and pretend we’re at the wheel of pop cultures most famous Cuda and racing down the hills towards Fisherman’s Wharf and wearing a really cool jacket fresh out of Nash Bridges closet. Only in San Francisco can high fashion and hemi horsepower wear flowers in its hair.

    Car boosting was elevated to museum quality in the film, “Gone in 60 Seconds”. Nick Cage and Angelina Jolie, along with a memorable cast, hot-wired their way through the streets of Long Beach in southern California. Memphis Raines on a Holy Grail rampage of high speed grand theft auto action, in an effort to save his brother from the junkyard crusher, just more proof, that blood is indeed thicker than 10-W-40. But wait. there’s still one more car to go. The one that even the great and holy Memphis Raines fears. The almighty automobile known as Eleanor.

    Eleanor was a sexy, man eating, asphalt eating Motor City dream machine complete with phallic apparati and a sweet Jesus fuel injection system to give her the automotive equivalent of a high octane, high speed Detroit orgasm. In the Nick Cage version of “Gone in 60 Seconds”, Eleanor was a Shelby Mustang GT500, but in the 1974 original, she was a 1973 Ford Mustang Mach I.

    Flashback! Flashback! In the polyester year of 1974, there dwelt in the kingdom of the junkyard, a King. The King was surrounded by all manner of metal and junk, discards and throwaways, formerly loved, but now forgotten automobiles, piled high on a trash pile, unholy ground, about to be blessed by the prophet/king. The king’s treasure chest grew full. Pieces of metal, a car door here, a hood ornament there, a side view smashed mirror over there amid the piles of aluminum scrap fascinating him as they glimmered as brightly as gold and silver in a chaotic treasure house. Then it came to him in a V-8 vision that only a junkyard junkie could conjure from the spiritual depths, to put the pieces of these old relics together and create a tribute to what they were in their glory days, the days when they just rolled off the assembly line, loud and proud. Their style, beauty and grace all but blinding, and what better venue than the celluloid pedestal where this monument could last a lifetime. It was at this moment of realization that H. B. Haliki wrote, produced, directed and starred in the original “Gone in 60 Seconds”, which was released to drive in and indoor movie theaters across the country in 1974.

    The original film had our protagonist on the prowl for just 46 cars and not 50 as in the remake, however, there were more chase scene mileage per hour than the Cage motion picture vehicle, and most importantly, the elegant Eleanor was a 1973 Ford Mustang Mach I and not the equally exotic Shelby Mustang GT500 of the remake. The flick was a hit with the asphalt crowd and they roared and cheered as H. B and Company revved and redlined their way across the cinematic landscape and when the closing credits rolled down the screen, the salivating road heads eagerly anticipated the making of “Gone II” as though they were waiting for the chrome-magnon version of the Second Coming, and it wasn’t too awfully long in coming. H. B. decided in 1989 that enough time had passed and the public was ready for Part II, but it was during filming and the performing of his own stunts that the man who gave life to “Gone”….was gone himself, in less than 60 seconds.

    Cage/Jolie rock n roll, lock n load in “Gone: The Remake”, and no, yes, Angelina’s red hot pillow soft lips and gleam in the eye warm the heart and soul, but it’s that damned Eleanor that makes the heart race faster and faster, jet propelling our erogenous zone to the outer limits of comfort. Her redlining engine on fire with petrol and passion. Her sleek, svelte body an alluring aluminum vehicular vessel of lust. Tail pipe searing hot to the touch, the leather seats exciting the senses, and turning asphalt into hot tar at a glance. Eleanor Rules!

    Memphis Raines is no match for the intoxicating Shelby Stang, and he knows it, better than anybody, and in the end, after a chase sequence that is not bad by any standard, he presents a limping, scratched and badly beaten up Eleanor to the obligatory bad guys who proclaim, “I asked for 50 cars and not 49 and a half”. More chaos, more machismo, more punches, and eventually Memphis reigns supreme, good guy wins and all that stuff, and in the end not only gets to keys to Eleanor, but gets to hotwire Angelina as well. Now, just who the hell is Carroll Shelby, and why are they naming cars after him?

    Carroll Hall Shelby came out roaring down the quarter mile track of life in Texas in 1923, and after a stint in the Air Corp, that need for speed led him the world of asphaltia, and in 1952 had raced his first quarter mile in a rod outfitted with a flathead Ford V-8. By 1961, Shelby teams up with a British auto manufacturer and after much Trans-Atlantic haggling, the culmination was the creation of the Shelby Roadster 260 that was brought to life in the Shelby facilities in southern California. The name comes to Shelby literally, in a dream, for his new dream machine, The Cobra. The car is test driven, and in April of 1962 makes it’s first public appearance at the Auto Show in New York with the Ford display, and as a result, orders for the new monster defy imagination. The Cobra had struck a nerve. Soon, Shelby and Ford become synonymous, and by 1966 the first of the ’67 Shelby Mustang GT350′s and GT500′s are produced. By 1969 the thrill is going, going, though not quite gone, and the Shelby project ends. The leftover ’69s are upgraded to ’70 specs and production finally ceases. The Ford-Shelby Era is now a thing of the past, but thanks to H. B. Haliki there will always be a Motor City elegance known simply as the Marilyn Monroe of automobiles, Eleanor!

    It was a night of fire, blood, and fear. The gym was alive, with death, all around, surrounding it like water surrounds a peninsula. The screams soon reaching to the sky and to no avail, and soon the night fell quiet. The journey through the tunnel of terror was not over. It was just beginning.

    Blood poured from the elevators and filled the hallway of the Overlook Lodge. Danny had the “shine”, but daddy had the axe. “Heeeere’s Johnny!”. Suddenly, Cujo jumps at his throat and lays him to rest, at peace, six feet under in the Pet Cemetary.

    Stephen King, the King of Horror, has given us killer dogs, killer writers, killer storms and yes, actor Tim Curry as a killer clown, but when Arnie Cunningham lays eyes on a 1958 Plymouth Fury named, Christine, it truly is a classic car to, well…die for. Christine is more than a car, she is a primal love story of geek meets gadget. The more time Arnie spends with Christine, the more possessive “she” becomes. Arnie polishes and restores her lovingly. Her fins thrust out proudly, her engine finely tuned, her body wet with wax and God help the fool who tries to interfere and come between Arnie and his gearbox soul mate. “Arnies got a girlfriend, Arnie’s got a girlfriend”! The film was more than an automotive classic, Christine was, and is still the Motor City bitch from asphalt hell.

    In addition to the film, it is also a must read for any fan of classic cars, and of course, fan of Stephen King’s. There are some discrepancies concerning the actual model of Plymouth that Christine is supposed to be. In the book she’s referred to as a 1958 red and white, four door Plymouth Fury, however, on the back jacket cover, King is sitting on the hood of a ’57. Plymouth Fury’s were only available as a two-door hardtop from 1956 to 1958 and it wasn’t until 1959 that you could get a four-door model. All that aside, it doesn’t really matter, Christine put V-8 fear into all of us and proved once and for all….Hell Hath No Fury Like A Plymouth Scorned!

    This Dharmabum Roadhead writer’s work has been described as DELIGHTFULLY WIERD and WICKEDLY WONDERFUL!! Mike (Roadie) Marino is a publisher of an on line magazine called ROAD TRIPPIN’ USA. It’s an asphalt kickin’ journey of Roadside Nostalgia and American Pop/Car Culture for the Chrome-Magnon in all of us. The style is lock n load and deals with the realm of where Pop Culture and Chrome meet Asphalt and Art!!

    Mike also writes a monthly feature column under the banner THE ROADHEAD for the award winning Offbeat Travel zine. His column deals with bizzare ashpalt and roadside oddities and locales from mechanical museums to Cadillac Ranch. Mike is also a freelance writer of travel and history pieces that have been published in magazines and ezines in the US and Europe.

    Most current project includes toiling endlessly on his first book about Pop and Car Culture in America of the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s. Although born in the rustbelt of industrial Detroit, he’s also been the definitive son-of-a-beach and has lived in a treehouse in Honolulu, the tie dyed spare change neighborhood of Haight Ashbury in San Francisco, as well as the North Beach district..where the Beat Goes On!!

    Today Mike (Roadie) Marino lives in Missouri near the banks of the Missouri River with his word processor. In addition, to writing and backpacking, Mike has a penchant for Hawaiian shirts, Jimmy Buffett albums and Corona Beer. If you would like to use any of Mike’s articles some of which are included here, contact him at the email address below or at dharmabumroadie@yahoo.com He also accepts contract work and what the hell, a good agent wouldn’t hurt either. So contact him for rates and information. Now…Have Fun Reading…Grab A Cold Corona..And Kick Asphalt!!!

    Size Matters, Especially When It’s Fat

    By S.D. Craig

    Anyone who thinks size doesn’t matter, doesn’t live in America. You can laugh all the way to the grocery aisle packed full of Slim Fast and diet candy, but you can’t imagine the world we live in without the words non-fat, low fat or no fat, can you? Not if you’re able to buy, hear or read.

    What is awful is the fact that a large person, a person of size, someone bigger than the life insurance charts of old, really isn’t made to feel they matter in this, the good old U.S. of A. They are, in spite of their bulk, made to feel invisible, or worse yet, made fun of.

    Who decides what normal is and who decides that seats for airplanes, amusement park rides and movie theatres are just so big? Who figures out that a restaurant chair can’t be comfortable enough for a large derriere even though they’re willing to feed that same person until the cows come home. Or that a bathroom stall can’t accommodate someone larger than 180 pounds unless they sheepishly sneak into the one handicapped stall?

    It matters not what the reason or even if there is a reason, it’s humiliating and needs to be stopped. Size does matter and it matters most to those of size. If we preach that we should not discriminate between race, between skin colors and languages and backgrounds, between first class and middle class, the rich or poor, than tell me, what is the difference if thin, short, tall or fat?

    There shouldn’t be one. Shame on you.

    Seats need to expand, hearts need to accept, the world we live in needs to relax on this issue. Models need to be heavier to look like the American public and need to eat beyond saltines and lettuce (I know this as I’m related to a former model). Actors need to be realistic in size. We can’t imagine ourselves as Meg Ryan and Colin Farrel. We just can’t.

    But what we should know, feel and experience is how badly someone of size is treated, and see that it is the meanest form of prejudice. Size matters, but it shouldn’t.

    Love and acceptance should.

    SD Craig is a freelance writer and editor of LovingYourCurves.com and was given the nickname “Chatterbox” by fellow writers. At age fifty, Craigs Southern flair and sense of humor give her plenty to write about with a rapier wit and a wacky outlook. Her articles on body image (her biggest passion), marriage/divorce and relationships, family, friends, career issues, computers, the Internet, horses, baseball, movie reviews and writing tips remind one of Erma Bombeck or Dave Barry. A freelance writer who once juggled five columns then got real, Craig welcomes your e-mails and feedback on her articles. Drop her a hello at sdcraig922@yahoo.com or stop by www.lovingyourcurves.com.

    Beauty and the Beast

    By S.D. Craig

    The beauty industry is a fine thing. After all, where else can we go to have our feet and hands petted (which makes us sleepy, isn’t that odd?), our hair shampooed (feels sooo good when someone else does it) and fixed (thank the Lord), our faces steamed and puffed up (so we take years off our age)?

    Well, I have two sisters in the beauty world. One does nails and one does hair. I am a licensed masseuse myself, in addition to being a writer. You join our family, you’ve got it made. We can make you feel better and then, I can write about it. It’s true, a writer’s friends and family do always live in fear.

    A beauty salon is a hotbed for gossip, gossip of any sort. Especially in a small country town. There isn’t anything sacred in the town where my sisters work that they don’t hear about before the local newspaper does.

    I’ve never understood why having someone trim your hair causes you to spill your guts about Aunt Martha’s inheritance going to cousin Leonard instead, the fact that your period has been off and on for a year and is it menopause, and that your husband is cheating on you with his best friend. Yeah, another guy. Do you honestly think your hair stylist WANTS all this information? Not really.

    But if you’re paying someone fifty bucks for a perm you feel you can say whatever you please and they must listen. It’s a captive audience thing, right? Right.

    I’ve heard my sister often remark if she could do nails without people being attached to them, it’d be great. Just drop their hands off at 9, pick them up a few hours later. Shh, you didn’t hear that from me. This is fiction. She’s not a people person, however, she has a delightful personality. She just would rather not have to use it during her workday. My other sister has been doing this a few years, so give her time. She’ll probably ask that they just drop off their heads, too.

    Makes you wonder just how many times do the beauticians, those faithful people who work through thick and thin, have to stand on blown-up feet and work with aching shoulders and hands that are numb while listening about your Uncle Ned and his four mistresses, his way-cool corvette, and his loser son, Buck? Give them a break.

    Get a massage. Hey, nothing wrong with that. It’s the best feeling in the world. Well, okay, the second or third best. What I don’t get is why people think that because I have a license to do massage therapy up on the wall, that I’m also a licensed therapist. I might as well have a couch off to the side with my legal pad and pen poised. I can assure you, more of my clients have quit going to their therapist because they see me for a massage. It’s the funniest thing.

    Do they ever remember what they’ve said to me afterwards? Hell no, I’ve got them in a state of relaxation, they can barely exit the table. I had one client go into my walk in closet in my office a few years back, and when I began working out of our home, the last one went into the hall closet by the front door. They dress inside out and leave their jewelry. My favorite one was the guy whose wife had a massage at the gym where I worked. Their kid was in the nursery downstairs. He worked out, then came up next for his massage. He drove home, ten miles away, and they’d both left without their kid. Yeah. I could make a killing writing about it, but I won’t. This is all.

    Let’s just say these hands are lethal weapons. I can make any person on that table melt, and when they sit up (which is a rather large effort after), they have no idea who they are or who their bosses are. That’s what I get paid for. For an hour, they don’t have to remember. Okay. I know, I said that was all about massage.

    Next time you’re at the beauty salon, do me a favor. Let the gal fixing your locks talk. Let your manicurist, who puts you into a trancelike-state, give you her story. You won’t be bored.

    Last time I had my hair done I tried it. I liked it. I gave away no secrets of my own.

    And guess what? I got material to write about!

    SD Craig is a freelance writer and editor of LovingYourCurves.com and was given the nickname “Chatterbox” by fellow writers. At age fifty, Craigs Southern flair and sense of humor give her plenty to write about with a rapier wit and a wacky outlook. Her articles on body image (her biggest passion), marriage/divorce and relationships, family, friends, career issues, computers, the Internet, horses, baseball, movie reviews and writing tips remind one of Erma Bombeck or Dave Barry. A freelance writer who once juggled five columns then got real, Craig welcomes your e-mails and feedback on her articles. Drop her a hello at sdcraig922@yahoo.com or stop by www.lovingyourcurves.com.