Just to be clear--

This will be brief, because I am TIRED and it's 3AM.

About the Newsweek story.

Some people are confused. At least the people on CBS Up to the Minute are.

The story was retracted. Under considerable pressure from the Bush administration (oh, btw, I recently bought a copy of George Orwell's 1984, I saw it at Half Price Books for $3.98).

That actually means nothing as to the truth of the story. Why did they issue a retraction? Their source was anonymous.

Does that mean it's an unreliable source? Well, Newsweek has relied on him or her before. He or she is a top ranking official. They have been consistently accurate. There is no reason to doubt that this story is true besides the fact that the source is anonymous.

This is like the whole CBS/Dan Rather thing. Just because the source is iffy (in the CBS case, forged), doesn't mean the story is untrue. In fact, there's quite alot of evidence suggesting that the story in Rather-gate is true. But in both cases, people assume that because the story was retracted there's no truth to it. Of course, a difference is that in the CBS case there was a forgery. Not true here.

Here's the question: should we censor ourselves if there is a tangible risk that comes from printing a story? Lets assume we know absolutely, for sure, that the story is true. We also suspect that printing it will quite reasonably make people mad. It might even provoke some to violence. People could die. How do we balance the responsibilities of the media to report the truth and the "news" (how do we even define that), with a responsibility to society (do they have one and what does it consist of?)?

Anyway, I'm tired (and probably incoherent), so I'm going to bed. I just wanted to make it clear that a retraction doesn't mean it's not true.

Edited to add: they've brought on an "expert" to talk about the meaning of this for Muslims (burning of the Koran). He's saying that "The Koran is the ultimate word of God to every single Muslim. Unlike in Christianity, where denominations believe different things, all Muslims, regardless of denomination, believe the same thing about the Koran." Ummm. No. I personally know some who don't. *sigh* Also, the anchorwoman just said that the Newsweek piece damaged America's image abroad (as part of the reasons why it was bad). Should our media focus on maitaining a positive image of us? The very idea is scary. Did I mention that I recently bought a copy of 1984?

Read the news, people;

this is how fascism starts.

The Audacity

So, the purpose of this blog is to rant, and so I have a big one just now. It may seem silly or unimportant, but, darn it, it's my blog, and this just pissed me off so very much just now, listening to a local right wing radio host.

He was talking about the UN Oil for Food scandal. I don't know much about it, I'll be honest with you. It was one of those stories that I didn't pay attention to when it first broke (for various reasons), and, thus, whenever I later saw a story on it, I would skip it, telling myself, I don't know enough about it--later I'll do lots of research. Same thing happened with the Scott Peterson case (though that one's less important... well, I guess if you're the mainstream media, that's arguable, but, alas).

Anyway--this guy was saying that Kofi Annan should step down and something about 2 billion dollars being lost.

Dude.

Have you no shame? No sense of what's going on in the world? Are you in your happy little I-only-see-what-I-wanna-see land?

The utter audacity of these people, the total fearlessness and hypocrisy. Two billion dollars, you say? A little nepotism, some cronyism?

Sure.

Is that a problem? Sure.

But OH MY GOODNESS.

Look at Iraq.

NINE billion dollars LOST.

Halliburton receiving awards from the government for exemplary service (and billions in BONUSES) when they aren't feeding the troops (which they're paid to do). They outsource the job to companies that have no money, so they're feeding them peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.

Halliburton has also failed to deliver on $12 billion more in contracts as well. Yet it gets new contracts and bonuses for good service by the month.

Companies with ties to the Bush family get lucrative government contracts which they didn't have to bid on at all.



Lets looks at who's making money off this war... hmmm?

I'm sorry... But the Oil for Food scandal may be bad. But these are the people we have voted into office not only making money off a war that we were pulled into by deliberate deception (plans for the war were made up pre-9/11, Bush et al knew via the CIA that Iraq had no WMD while they were making the case for war, doing the war in the spring because, and I quote, that's the best time for a "product launch."), but also actively endangering our troops. The very troops that they claim to support.

It's disgusting.

Did this talk show host know this? Is he aware? Surely. But maybe not. The mainstream media doesn't report on this. Why would they? Most are owned by large companies who have a vested interest in continuing the war. Why would General Electric (NBC) report on things that would decrease popularity for the war? They make weapons. Iraq has given them a tidy profit. The military was happy to have embedded journalists. By setting the tone of the relationship (taking away objectivity by making reporters one of the troops) and restricting access of information, they were able to control the PR of the war. No, mainstream media might not have given this guy (or any of us) an objective look at the realities of war and its aftermath.

But, if he is aware, that's even scarier, that the right wing today has the audacity to be so hypocritical. Take the plank out of your own eye, please.

Did You Know?

Watching tv church sermons tonight/this morning (my sleep schedule is all off, and I've been up since 3 this afternoon and will probably just stay up till I go to bed at a regular time tonight). As tomorrow/today is Mothers' Day, you can guess the topic of many a sermon. As a feminist, I was surprised to learn the following facts about feminism, child rearing, and life in general:

• feminism is, in fact, all about worshipping the feminine. Christians thought God was the measure of all things; Humanists came along and said man was the measure of all things (never mind, of course, that humanists came before Christians!); now feminists are saying that Woman is the measure of all things. We should worship Her (for examples of this insidiousness see the United Methodist Church and The da Vinci Code).
• when feminists become pregnant, if they do not abort (which most do), they immediately "dump" their kids in day care because their careers are the most important things (men, of course, are perfectly fine if they go to work the day after their child is born.)
• feminism=evil=Satan
• "current psychology" says that having a mother (rather than going to a daycare center) makes a child more empathetic. People are kind of doomed if they didn't grow up with a stay-at-home mom. oops.
• Dads won't do just as well. No, this pastor insists, it is female contact that does the trick, not parental/loving/caring contact in general. hmm. (too bad it's not true)
• the current increase in school violence is directly correlated to mothers working outside the home. (I wish I could send this to that pastor) (and I won't go into all of why this is wrong *sigh* you are all better social scientists than this)
• married women have longer, more fulfilling lives than unmarried women (Actually, this is untrue, married men have longer lives and rate their lives more satisfactorily than unmarried men, while the opposite is true for women).
• women who don't have kids are sort of useless and unfulfilled (implicit in many sermons). There was no mention of this for men.
• Christian couples have more and better sex. (Where he got his data, I don't know, but I can't say that it's wrong. It is interesting.)

Anyway, I was wondering why all of these sermons were talking about women. Now I realize that the role of women is important in many of these churches, and they'll probably talk about it alot. But three of them? Giving almost the exact same sermon on the exact same day? And then it hit me: it's Mothers' Day.

It's funny to think that Mothers' Day was originally begun in order to protest for peace. Ahh, what is has become. No longer is it a celebration of women and their capacity to change society. No, it's a celebration of their continued, subordinated place in patriarchal society.

Million Dollar Baby

Yesterday, I went to a movie. By myself. See, I hadn’t planned on doing it that way, and, indeed, I’ve never gone to a movie by myself. But I did. And I think that says something about how well I'm progressing in getting rid of my social anxiety.

I was on my way to a meeting that was cancelled at the last minute. Not really at the last minute, but I didn’t find out about it being cancelled until the last minute. I was already out, and so I decided that a dollar movie would be just the right thing. Million Dollar Baby was showing. Even better; I’d been wanting to see that one for a while.

I walked out of the theater still a bit stunned. It was an amazing movie.

But as I began to think about it more (mainly in anticipation of writing up this post), I started to see more and more reasons why I don’t like it so much.

Better get this out of the way now: gender. Most reading this expect my main complaints to be about gender, and they’re not. A little quibble: well, Maggie is supposedly this strong, independent woman. Yet, she must have a man to coach her. And, she must have a man to die. (See medical/legal inaccuracies later on in this post.) She was totally dependent on Frankie. Her whole existence was defined through him. Why do we need yet another movie in which a man is redeemed through the death of a woman? Frankie is absolved of his estrangement through his daughter by his attachment to Maggie.

This movie has been condemned by pro-lifers and disability rights activists both. IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN THE MOVIE AND DON’T WANT SPOILERS STOP READING—BUT: I went into the movie knowing these spoilers and it didn’t hurt the experience, I don’t believe.

Ok, so, in the end, Maggie suffers a debilitating disability. The Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) condemned the film for the way it advanced ''the offensive and dangerous message that death is preferable to life with a disability.” Maggie wanted to die. If she couldn’t box, then there was no point to life. (“If I can’t walk/see/hear/etc, then life has no meaning” isn’t really a good message.)

The problem for me, on re-thinking this, was not that Maggie thought that her life would be worthless without being able to box (ok, that was/is a problem, and I agree with the disability activists). My main problem is that while I was in the movie, that kind of made sense to me. Because the only portrayal of Maggie was as a one-dimensional character, defined by her boxing. If she couldn’t box, the character was sort of useless. We know nothing else about her (Well, her family, but I’ll get into that later). That’s not the fault of Hillary Swank, who did a superb job. I don’t know whose fault it is, but her character didn’t have the depth that Eastwood’s did.

Medical inaccuracies: why was Maggie in a nursing home rather than in rehab? Where were the PTs and others? It is unlikely that any staff would let her leg get to the point that it did. It was easily avoidable. Why did the facility have no lights on in the corridor? No people watching who comes in and out? And WHY did he take her off the ventilator? And why did he do it before administering the adrenaline. Why did he do it at all? It wasn’t necessary. And kind of cruel. Maggie’s death would’ve been excruciating.

Legal inaccuracies: I think that legally, Maggie could have requested to stop the ventilator. With proper drugs (beforehand), I believe that this would have been a humane way to die. The disability rights people would still be upset (and the pro-lifers, for that matter), but I guess relying on Eastwood to do it makes it that much more dramatic. Nevermind that in real life, it’s murder (regardless of the actual moral issues involved, legally, it IS murder), and it is not at all likely that he escapes and runs away into the woods to run his store and eat his lemon pie.

None of these things were things that bothered me in the movie. If you’ll read back to the very beginning of this blog, you’ll see where I complained about not being able to sit through movies anymore without having a constant script run through my head with the things wrong with it. Except for some of the stuff I’m about to talk about in a second, none of this went through my head during the movie. Except the pulling-out-the-ventilator-tube-before-the-medicine thing. That was annoying.

I think the difference is this: this was a truly awesome movie: the script, the actors, the story, the directing. I was enthralled and not able to spare a synapse to think about the problems. Other movies are easier to sit there and critique while watching.

As for the stuff that DID bother me throughout the movie:

I find it vaguely ironic that for all that the right complains about the “liberal elite” in Hollywood, the movie that the establishment chose to honor above all others was one that so catered to and bought into conservative ideology.

Maggie’s family is poor, lazy, and welfare dependent. Oh, and southern. They have “accents straight from central casting.” (I read that in a review for another movie and thought I’d steal the phrase.) This movie represents the worst in stereotypes about the poor, poor women in particular.

Maggie’s mom doesn’t want Maggie’s gift of a house, because if they find out about it they’ll take her welfare away. This character’s primary concern is defrauding the welfare system. And she’s good at it. Now I know that everyone knows about that one woman who a)has multiple kids to keep her welfare check, b)lies about how many kids she has, c)has a real job but doesn’t tell anyone about it so she can get her money from taxpayers, too, d) all of the above, or e)something worse. There’s also that family that doesn’t know how to do anything because they’re just dependent on welfare.

How did you hear about her? “Well, so-and-so told me about her.” Or “I heard it on Rush Limbaugh.” Or “Don’t you remember when Ronald Reagan talked about that welfare queen?”

Yeah, I hate to tell you, those don’t count. Firstly, people don’t know circumstances; also, Rush Limbaugh has a lying (and an oxycontin) habit. And that Reagan thing: yeah, that’s proven to be not true. Sorry to disappoint.

The majority of people on welfare are on it for less than a year. But, isn’t it convenient, in this time of deep conservatism, to have straw figures of people who abuse the welfare system, ripping off good tax payers like you and me?

In the end, Maggie stands up to her welfare-queen mom: “You never signed those papers like you were supposed to because you were worried about losing your welfare. I can still sell that house right out from under you. And if you show your fat, lazy hillbilly ass around here, that's just what I'll do.'' Yeah Maggie, the conservatives chant, show those lazy hillbillies!

Are there people who abuse the system? I’m sure there are. But, the people your friend told you about, or the family Rush likes to talk about, or that one woman you saw on the news… yeah, that’s probably not true. It’s certainly not representative. Because the majority of people on welfare are struggling to make it, they just have to contend with a society that doesn’t really want them to.

So, here’s the ideology of Million Dollar Baby, in a nutshell: If you work hard, try hard, and want something really, really badly, like Maggie did, you can make it! It’s a matter of will; escaping poverty has nothing to do with the social structure. Mobility is an individual thing, a personal responsibility. Maggie’s mom and sister: they were just too lazy to get off their asses and work. Maggie could do it, why couldn’t they?

The problem with this, and with most movies, most media, and, well, most people in America, is that it ignores the social structure. I wish I could scream this at the top of my lungs and everyone could hear: from my friends, to my classmates, to my family, to talking heads, to policy makers. You can’t just blame everything on the individual and not take into account their social circumstances. Yet, this is what this movie (and this society) tells us to do.

MDB portrays the harshest and most inaccurate stereotypes. But they’re useful for certain groups in order to validate their agenda. If people who try hard enough can make it, and people on welfare are lazy, why have welfare at all? I’m sure many of you ask this all the time. If Social Security becomes, as is Bush’s new goal, a plan for poor people (he wants to make special protections for the benefits of low-income people, and while that sounds nice, it’s making SS into a welfare program rather than a general social right for everyone), then it becomes a target of these stereotypes. And there are people (not naming names) who have been hankering ever since the time of FDR to get rid of Social Security. This is their chance.

Pro-life groups have called this movie ''Hollywood's best political propaganda of the year,'' and I agree with them (though in a totally different sense, obviously). And yet I still can’t bring myself to say that it’s a bad movie. It’s a well-made movie. With a bad message.

So, not a fan of boxing? Me either. Not a fan of conservative ideology? Me either. But I still recommend that you see this movie.

End of Semester/Beginning of Summer

I have no good reason or excuse to explain my laziness in updating. So, I won't try.

On the positive side: I got all As and an A+ for the semester, so I'm happy!

Also, if you'll notice, on the right hand side of this blog (scroll down a bit--below archives, above blogroll), I have added a list of things (mostly books) that I am consuming. Or, at least that are on my list to consume this summer. Some of them are books that I started earlier this year but have since set aside for other books or because of classes. I think I'm in the middle of five books right now. I'll finish those first, and then get started on the rest of the list. They look really exciting. And that means I'll probably have lots of ranting and raving blog posts about them.

You see, I am determined to have an exciting and productive summer. Which involves lots of reading. And, also, finding a job. I've applied for quite a few, but, as usual, have had none call me back, mostly due, I am certain, to my lack of retail or office experience. Of course, there is no way to get said experience unless someone actually gives me a job.

To do this summer:
--get lots of exciting reading done
--become a better blogger (more interesting, more frequent)
--study for and become Master of the GRE
--narrow down some graduate schools to apply to
--make money
--continue with work out plan
--cut back on caffeine, must stop addiction
--come up with fascinating yet practical ideas for senior theses (one for sociology and one for gender studies)
--re-learn Spanish; this just seems like a fun and useful thing
--beat high score on Snake game on cell phone; it is so frustrating--I haven't been able to beat my best score for like a month

game plan for tuesday

For anyone following my sordid tale of an off-balance sleep schedule, I have decided to go the stay-awake-30-hours-and-then-go-to-sleep route, which should not only set my sleep schedule right, but also give me enough sleep tomorrow night that I will wake up on time for 8am study session.

To do today:

• proofread paper for graduate class
• proofread final take home exam for gender and education
• -->both of these will be done while at Starbucks. I had planned on doing this later in the day, but I think I'll get the coffee first off, as I'm starting to get tired
• come back and make revisions to papers, email final versions to self
• go see Dr. K about social movements exam, I have a question
• go put money on copy card so that I can print out final drafts of paper and test (am not only out of black ink, am out of computer paper!) and make copy of article for non-utd friend
• go print out final copies
• get a haircut?
• go buy studying supplies for tonight/tomorrow (ie notecards, caffeine, and something sugary)
• study for management and social movements
• make cards for class, status and power study group wed. morning
• CLEAN.

oh the things you'll see

It's funny the things you see on tv at 6 in the morning.

So, there's this commercial for Everest College.

The premise of the commercial is that these two twin girls ("people think we're identical, but we're totally different!") go to EC and study totally different things.

One is very "hands-on" and thus got training and a job as a medical assistant "where she works with doctors." This is said as she is shown near a good looking man in lab coat.

The other sister studied medical insurance billing and coding. "It totally fits her personality!"

What does that mean? And what does it say about you if medical billing fits your personality?

Bleh.

My sleep schedule is so very messed up. Darn finals week.

See, on the weekend, it's ok to not go to bed 'till 5 and not wake up till 1 or 2. But that's less cool on weekdays.

Because I did not wake up until 2 this afternoon, here I am at 5:15 in the morning, with a meeting at 8:30, unsure of what to do. I could just stay up for a looooong time and go to bed tomorrow night normally. Maybe super-caffeinate myself in the interim?

It's tempting to get like two hours of sleep. The problem, of course, is that there is always the chance that I won't actually wake up. Of course, I have three alarms set. But that hasn't stopped me before. I am perfectly able to wake up, switch off alarms, and promptly go back to sleep, totally forgetting that that whole series of actions occurred. Does that qualify as sleep walking?

Hmm. Even if I did try to go to bed, there is no guarantee that I would be able to get to sleep. I had a diet dr. pepper around 11 and the caffeine from that still has me wired.

Alas.

Black Ice

This is an excerpt from Lorene Cary's Black Ice that really resonated with me as I read it just now:

It was high-church at its best, and I knew it as well as I knew my mother’s voice. I ached with the sound and the sight of it. Distant gobbledegook at first, the seraphs, cherubim, and thrones resonated deeply now. How many times had I argued with that song? Why was it that this rich, rich school had to get dominions, princedoms, and powers to praise their God? Why were our worshipers “disconsolate” while theirs were “gracious” and “bright”? Who had told them that God was pleased with them? Was it the “goodly heritage”? Was that the proof of God’s love? Well, what about the rest of the world, whom they asked God not to forget? What about them? What about the dirty, ragged, cramped, stupid, ugly motherfuckers? When would they be crowned with honor and length of days? What made St. Paul’s so cocksure? What about the rest of us? What about me?

I cried then because the music was so beautiful and I loved it so, because loving it was treachery, because I had scribbled the words on scraps of paper and looked them up in the dictionary to learn them, because I could not bear to be so far away from a God who smiled on such exquisite praise. I have read the word of the Lord out God until my eyes burned like the very fires of hell. And still you have not found grace? Still not made Tillich’s “leap of faith”?

I wanted to leap right then. I wanted to leap into a big, big faith: as big as the sky on a black night, big enough to hold Ward A.M.E. and the Chapel of St. Peter and St. Paul within it. I wanted an infinity inside of me that could hold it all. I wanted to fly out of my skin, to leave it draped over the chair by the window and fly up into the welcoming night.

Made

About a month ago I was watching "Made" on MTV. I've only ever seen it once but the general premise is that if you want to be "made" into something (for example, like in the episode I saw, a wrestler), people will come and train you in how to do it and make you awesome. In the episode I saw, the coach-people were pretty tough on the guy.

That night I had a dream and I was thinking about it again today:

They should have a graduate school applicant episode of Made. Seriously.

Another forceful motivator would call me up every day to see how my classes are going, making sure I'm not suffering from senioritis or anything, screaming at me to get my reading done.

I would have professional editors and such looking over and critiquing my statement of purpose for each school. Maybe a panel of judges that would critique every last sentence, but help me to make it perfect in the end. (I know, it's like I'm mixing my reality tv shows, but, hey it was my dream).

Shots would show me in a rush at the last minute calling up recommenders to make sure they got my letters out (I know some people applying this year who had lots of trouble with this) and then calling schools confirming that they got my apps.

Then, of course, the obligatory tense, angsty scenes awaiting responses.

Maybe a teary rejection or two.

THEN--an acceptance. Or, better still, an interview.

Now, it's like "What Not to Wear," as I get to go out and buy all new clothes, with two fashion experts critiquing my style. I get a haircut and a makeover and interviewing practices. Maybe they make me watch a video of my performance and then judge it like on that WB Actress show.

Yeah, it was an exciting dream.

They would never make the show for all sorts of reasons. 1)No one cares if some Texas girl gets into grad school, 2)I would never get on tv, even if they did decide to do a "Made: Graduate School." But it's fun to think about.

The Rape of Mr. Smith

note: in case it wasn't clear, this is supposed to parody what women are put through at rape trials. Many believe we should feel free to question them about their past sexual activity and what kinds of clothing they were wearing. This is an example from a play (thanks, anon!) turned on its head, applying this standard to a man, victim of another sort of violent crime, to demonstrate how ridiculous it is.

Investigator: Mr. Smith, you allege to have been help up at gunpoint on the corner of First and Main.
Mr. Smith: Yes.
Investigator: Did you see a gun?
Mr. Smith: No.
Investigator: So, you made a conscious decision to comply with his demands rather than resist?
Mr. Smith: Yes.
Investigator: Did you scream? Cry out?
Mr. Smith: No.
Investigator: In other words, you didn’t try to get help for yourself.
Mr. Smith: I was afraid to.
Investigator: I see. Have you ever been held up before?
Mr. Smith: No.
Investigator: Have you ever given money away?
Mr. Smith: Yes, of course.
Investigator: And you did so willingly?
Mr. Smith: What are you getting at?
Investigator: Well, let’s put it like this, Mr. Smith. You’ve given money away in the past. In fact, you have quite a reputation for your generosity. How can we be sure that you weren’t planning on having your money taken by force?
Mr. Smith: Listen, if I wanted…
Investigator: Never mind. What time did this hold up take place?
Mr. Smith: About 11:00 p.m.
Investigator: You were out on the street at 11:00 p.m.? Doing what?
Mr. Smith: Just walking.
Investigator: Just walking? You know that it’s dangerous being out on the street late at night. Weren’t you aware that you could have been held up?
Mr. Smith: I hadn’t thought about it.
Investigator: What were you wearing?
Mr. Smith: Let’s see - a suit. Yes, a suit.
Investigator: An expensive suit?
Mr. Smith: Well, yes. I’m a successful lawyer, you know.
Investigator: In other words Mr. Smith, you were walking around the streets late at night in a suit that practically advertised the fact that you might be a good target for some easy money, isn’t that so? I mean, if we didn’t know better, Mr. Smith, we might even think that you were asking for this to happen, mightn’t we?

via auroraluna

Very Cool

I have had a ridiculously productive weekend! But, rather than brag by listing all the books I read and essays I wrote, I will instead complain:

I need a new phrase. Not that I would ever claim "very cool" as my phrase, because, certainly many people use it, and I have no desire to claim it. I don't know why I use it. But it has, gradually, sneakily, become my default conversational filler. It really didn't bother me that much until I met Dr. SuperCoolFancyPants and after anything she said, all I could say was "very cool." So, a challenge: what else can I say?

I suspect that all of my problems with "very cool" would be solved if only I had interesting comments to make in general and weren't ridiculously shy (well, I wouldn't really consider myself "shy" except with, like, authority figures, or people who are massively smarter than me). I'm always afraid that if I do say something un-bland (instead of "very cool" or something similar) I will come off sounding stupid, like I don't know what I'm talking about. I have this paranoia during class, alot of the time as well, though not so much in the past year.

Either way, I need a new phrase, or some new confidence, or something. Preferably both.

Anyway, off to try to be more productive.

Intellectual Fulfillment

This is a short post. I'm about to go to bed but I just had to write about the wonderful sense of intellectual fulfillment and excitement that I'm experiencing right now. Since noon today I have been working on academic-y things non stop (some school related and some not) and my head is positively swimming with new thoughts and ideas and ways of thinking about the world. I want to write about it all here, but I know that I am not yet to the point where I can structure my thoughts in any comprehensible way.

Suffice it to say that I haven't felt this excited. satisfied, and hungry for more in a long time.

Why the Internet Rocks

Posting will be light for a while, as I have a large paper due Wednesday that I am only just beginning to theoretically shape.

I just have to say, though: the internet is awesome.

I desperatley needed a particular book from the library, but it was checked out. BUT--they had an online version! Heretofore, I had scoffed at online books, preferring to have a print version.

But, my opinion is certainly changed.

Wish me luck on this paper!

Precisely because...

...I just realized that I have to do a presentation tomorrow, I figured that now was as good a time as any to procrastinate by blogging.

What shall I write, though?

I shall complain. I am good at that.

My schedule for the remainder of the semester:
4/8: report due, presentation (both unprepared at the moment)
4/12: in-class presentation, essay due
4/13: term paper due that I haven't started yet, essay due in another class
4/20: essay due, in-class presentation over honking-huge paper that I haven't even started yet
4/21: final exam, essay due
4/26: final exam
4/27: honking-huge paper due, final exam
4/28: TWO final exams

4/29: SLEEP.

It's weird how I have this thought process, at the near-end of every semester, a sort of fatalistic mindset... I know that everything will get finished, so I tell myself not to worry about it. It will get done in the end. Even if I procrastinate until the last minute and turn in a bunch of crap, the work will get done. And, it won't be a bunch of crap. I think I have this (false) feeling of invincibility that, not only will it "get done," but that it will get done well. Obviously, I'm not going to write a bad paper. *rolls eyes at own arrogance*

I can put it off until the night before, but it will get done and it will get done satisfactorily, so I justify continuing not to do the work. In fact, I am engaging in this risky game right now, telling myself that I can spare the time to write this post. I mean, I know that the presentation and report will be ready by tommorow, so why worry about it?

The Pope and the Right

Today I was listening to Sean Hannity, a professed Catholic, on the radio*. Now, I’m not denying that he is very sincere in his beliefs, but one thing just irked me to no end: he kept bringing up the Pope, talking as if John Paul subscribed to the same ideology has he, Hannity, does.

Yes, the Pope did coin the phrase “culture of life,” but, he used it consistently. This meant no to abortion, but it also meant no to the death penalty and no to war without just cause. The Pope was against the invasion of Iraq.

How dare right wingers co-opt the cause of Pope John Paul II? Have they ever heard his teachings on the poor? It’s Jesus style liberalism, folks. Sean Hannity doesn’t believe that stuff.

I wish he would stop pretending. The Pope’s politics didn’t fit into anyone’s neat little ideological agenda, whether you’re Sean Hannity or Michael Moore. Please stop trying to stuff him in yours.**

*I also listen to Rush Limbaugh. It makes me laugh.

**Lest I come off as trying to stuff him into mine, let me just say that I would never try to claim the Pope for the left. I disagreed with him on many issues, many of them relating to gender. But I agreed with him on a lot and it’s frustrating to see those parts of his record downplayed when he is crammed into a certain mold to fit someone’s agenda.

Dude--

I have like two seconds.

One thought: I forgot how much Jane Austen rocks.

And the Bronte sisters. Yes, I know, sort of opposites, but, dude, they rock. I'm rediscovering this. And I'm finding that they rock in ways that I hadn't considered or picked up on before.

Anyway, I'm off to class!

My Poor Car

So, many of those who read this blog are aware that Remus, my 2000 Cavalier, has a great big honking dent on the side, which he has sported since 2001, when I unhappily ran into a metal trash can at a gas station. Long story....

Anyway...

So, ever since that fateful day, I have had random people come up to me asking if I need some body work done on the car.

The first time I was in a parking lot and another car came up and signalled to me to roll my window down. The guy then proceeded to ask if I needed the dent fixed and that he could give me a good price.

Sure, I'm going to pay for some random guy to fix my car... It was weird, but I dismissed it.

Later, I was getting a soda or something at a drive-through when a woman got out of a car from across the street and headed towards me. I didn't even know she was coming to talk to me until she was at my window. It was already rolled down and she started talking: my husband told me to come over here and ask if you needed that dent taken care of.

This was getting weird.

Then, one time at a stop light, I got a roll-down-the-window signal and another guy asked if I needed it to be fixed.

This has happened at least 5 times.

Today I was in Starbucks, caffeinating myself while reading for tonight's class. A guy walks in and asks, "Does the green cavalier belong to anyone in here?" Oh no, I thought, has someone smashed it to bits? Has it rolled away and caused a massive accident in the street? Was I parked improperly and given a ticket?

"It's mine," I said tentatively and a guy walked over to me.

"Hey, I saw that dent, and I was wondering...."

*sigh*

Poor Remus needs to be repaired. But, rest assured that when I do, it will not be done by a random guy (or gal, even) who stops me in parking lots, at stopping lights, or at Starbucks, to ask about it. So stop.

Apologies and Excuses

I am sorry for being a poor updater recently. I can't say that things will improve much in the coming weeks.

Have you ever had that feeling where it seems like everything is temporarily on hold and in a little bit you'll have time to fix everything? It's been like that for almost this entire semester.

Every week I'll clean my room a little bit, always thinking, "next week I'll give it a really good cleaning." But next week I tell myself the same thing. And it's built up. Now I just say that I'm waiting 'till the end of the semester.

Also, I'm eating healthy, right? It's so easy to say, "well, I don't have time to shop or cook, so for now I'll go to the convenience store and get chips because those last a long time." I don't even like chips, really. But it is my main diet right now because I keep telling myself that it's only temporary. :-/

Schoolwork: "well, I don't have time to work on this paper as much as I should, but I'll do the next one better."

I'm living as if I'm always waiting for tommorow. Living in a messy apartment, eating terribly unhealthy food, and turning in sub-par papers. But tommorow comes and I do the same thing. And it gets harder and harder to change because the mess is built up, and before I can start over right I have to clear away all the stuff that's been building up over the past few weeks.

Ugh.

In good(ish) news: the schedules for summer and fall have been posted and there are exciting classes. I just wish they didn't conflict with each other, time-wise!