Eulogy for my sister, Debbie Stanton.
Deborah Joe Stanton was not rich. She did not have a lot of stuff. She wasn’t a figure in the community, nor was she famous. She struggled with mental health issues most of her life and physical health issues later in life. But despite all of that, she had something that is not always freely given and is not always deserved: Love. She loved everybody, even those that she didn’t like. She had a warmth and kindness that few people do.
She loved her parents, who preceded her in death. She loved all her siblings, and when they married, their spouses. She loved her nieces and nephews and when they grew up and married and had kids; she loved them as too. Most of all loved her children. She took great joy in them, in their interests, in their passions, in their wins, and their losses. She was protective, sometimes more than she should be. But it was always well-intentioned. She loved her babies, and that’s what they were to her; her babies.
But honestly, we were all her babies. She helped raise many of us. Aunt Debbie, Debbie, Dee-Bra! Grandma Debbie. So many of us grew up with her watching over us. Making sure we happy and safe. Being sad when we fought with each other or were mean. She had nieces and nephews at her house all the time, and she was happy to let them stay. When her siblings, or friends, needed to get away for the afternoon, or the evening, or the weekend, she was there at her door and her arms open wide. She’d make sure you were full, comfortable, and safe. That’s who and what Debbie was.
Almost all of us have memories of staying at Debbie’s house. That stayed true even as we all grew up and had kids of our own. We knew we could count on her because she loved us, and she loved our children, and like when we were young she wanted us to be warm, content, happy and loved.
Love that is so freely and sincerely given has become rare. Debbie never seemed to run out. She had so much of it she seemed to burst sometimes. When you find somebody who has so much love and gives it out so freely, it never seems like it will run out.
But that isn’t true. It does run out eventually. And when it does, you realize just how much love that person gave. Debbie gave a lot. More than almost everybody I know. Now that she’s gone we can all feel that gap in our hearts that was filled with her love. It makes us gasp for its absence. But breathe deep and remember her and the times you had talked to her, playing at her house, spending time with her and you’ll feel it again. And you’ll smile because the love is still there.
Labels: Debbie, Family, Life, Personal, the basin, updates
Little posts.
I don't have anything epic to post. Well I do, but I'm not going to yet. Instead here are some thoughts.
1)I've read a few Creationist articles. I find it amazing that they are still harping about a "missing link" and the fact that evolutionary scientists and geneticists don't have all the answers when there are continuous advances in all the fields of evolution and genetics. This may make a larger blog post someday, but really, there are a lot of books out there that explain better than I could.
2) I am neither pro-gun nor am I anti-gun. Owning a gun is anathema to my own personal beliefs. That said, I do not currently begrudge anybody the ownership of firearms. That said, I'm really sick of both pro and anti-gun posts (primarily on Facebook) particularly pro-gun posts. Those that post them are trying to get their point across. I get it. Most of your friends on Facebook get. You fear your rights are being about to potentially violated and want to express it. More over you feel the need to make hinted threats towards the government in order to do so. If I were a leader of a nation, or in charge of intel collecting on possible dissidents of a free nation, you know where I'd go first to look for potential threats? Facebook. Perhaps I'll go into my personal beliefs sometime in the near future and explain why I am not a gun owner. But not now.
3) There's a lot of anger for President Obama. I get some of it. There are many things that I'm not happy with. It's amazing to me that I'm hearing the same rhetoric coming from my very conservative family and friends that I heard coming from my liberal friends during the Bush years. The thing that infuriates me about all of this isn't that they are angry (if not more irrational) but that much of the same stuff that they are rightly angry at Obama about were things that Bush did. They weren't angry then, perhaps because things didn't come crashing down until right at the end of the Bush administration (most of the people I know were not affected by it until Obama took office). So yeah, I think if you have a legitimate reason for being angry at Obama (and not one of the ridiculous reasons that so many people find) that's great, but make sure you're not angry at something that his predecessor is guilty of as well unless you're mad at them too. If not, you're just a hypocrite. This is something that I will expand on at a later date.
Labels: Personal
Hitler is No Comparison
Every President has their dissenters. It's to be expected. Republican or Democrat, there are actions that are simply going to be disagreeable or even alarming to individuals of the opposite political frame of mind. I've lived through six Presidents now, though I honestly don't remember Carter and can't say much about Reagan or George H. W. Bush- I was a child during all of their presidencies. They all took actions that had an effect on my life whether I knew it or not. Clinton was the first President I really took notice of. He was President through the better part of my time as a student at U.S.U though my interest in politics during much of that period was minor at best. The first President I took an active interest in was George W. Bush. I found many of his actions disagreeable, and to this day still do. That may peg me as a liberal perhaps, though I tend to shy away from either label when I can help it, but it doesn't make some of his more egregious actions any less alarming to me. I don't hate W. even though I hated many of his policies and actions. I just can't bring myself too. I have a hard time doing that with anybody any more really, but that's by the by.
The first time I ever saw anybody make a comparison between an American President and Hitler was during George W. Bush's presidency as well. Liberals leveled that accusation in regards to some of his actions. They were scoffed at, rightly so, by Conservatives for making those comparisons. Whatever Bush did that may have been ridiculous, even his most outrageous actions were not enough to warrant a comparison to Hitler. The same goes for Obama. His executive orders, right or wrong pale in comparison to any of the actions Hitler and his cadre of co-conspirators committed. Perhaps there's just a disconnect there between a vile action of a leader, whether the President of our country or another, and the actions taken by the Nazis through the 30's and 40's. Hitler and the Nazis are still the most tangible examples of evil we have in our society in contemporary times and when we disagree or are alarmed with a world leaders actions it's simple to make those comparisons to show that distrust and angst.
Hitler and Nazis are such visual examples of what evil is that people can almost make those comparisons cavallerly, if they see something as bad, evil or wrong then BAM! Hitler! BOOM! Nazis. It's easy to illustrate your disgust and how inappropriate those actions are by making those edge or your seat reactionary comments. Throwing up a meme on a social networking site, or a link to pundits who make those comparisons is an easy way to show that it's something that you do not approve of.
I can't help think there's a healthy dose of ignorance as well when making these comparisons. Our current generation is fairly removed from World War II and the events that preceded it. There are still vets alive that served in the war, certainly and there are still many survivors of the Holocaust still alive, but they are at the end of their lives and by the time those that are children now are adults there will be none left. All we'll have are history books, museums, monuments and a handful of landmarks that played a part in the major drama of that war and everything it entailed. Plenty of examples, but nobody directly connected to the events by actually having been there. It's one thing to read war stories (or any stories for that manner) in an article or a book. It's another to get the emotional connection by actually talking to the person. Soon we'll not have that. And while documentaries will certainly fill in some of that hole, by at least showing the emotional response of the individual, it's different also knowing that's your grandfather, or uncle and mother.
Obama's most recent actions have garnered this sort of criticism and comparison (as have some of his past actions). Disagreeing with this actions, and commenting on them is healthy to political discourse. My opinion on the matter isn't really the topic of this blog. I do have some opinions, naturally, and it's probably no where near what you the reader is thinking it would be, but I'll save it. This isn't about the gun debate, nor is it about healthcare or the budget. I don't want to discuss any of that. What this is about is understanding exactly what you are comparing when you hold up an individual, in a position of power and compare them to Hitler, who is regarded as one of the most despised men of history, and how making those comparisons does not simply illustrate your dislike of the actions but actually contributes to cheapen the memory of those events in the broader public eye.
But first a little background...
Hitler was a Catholic, an art student, a
homeless person and
soldier. But most of all Hitler was an antisemitic. His hatred of Jews grew over years, as a student, the time when he was homeless, and as a soldier fighting in World War I, but it
escalated with Germany's defeat after the war. He wasn't alone in his hatred of the Jews, antisemitism was widespread through out much of Europe during the early part of the 20th century. It waxed and waned through the centuries but during and after the Great War ended there was a general sense of loss and angst through out Germany.
The idea was spread that the war was lost because of protesting and anti-war sentiment back home and much of the blame for that was laid at the feet of the Jews and communists (which was gaining popularity during this time as well.)
During the first tumultuous year of the new German Democracy (
The Weimar Republic) there were large protests and riots between communists and anti-communists and many communists were rounded up and exe
cuted.Hitler had named fellow soldiers that he suspected were communist or communist sympathizer and this action got him reassigned to the intelligence department of the army. While investigating one of the many small political parties that had cropped up during the course of the post-war turmoil he found a small group of like minded antisemitic individuals and decided that the
German Worker's Party may be a political platform to help launch and implement his own personal beliefs.
Hitler, was talent-less and ineffectual but had a gift for making speeches. This ability and his irrational and passionate hatred of Jews and communists quickly propelled him into the leadership position of the party. His knack for public speaking not only increased the members rolls, but also increased the parties coffers immensely and the
25 philosophical points of the Nazi party appealed to a lot of Germans, particularly those dissatisfied with the government and those who felt threatened by communism.
As the people of Germany continued to be dissatisfied with the Republic, primarily due to high inflation, unemployment and a general morose feeling of
betrayal when the government agreed to pay back the outstanding war debt to France and Great Britain. Hitler saw his chance to over throw the government. In 1923 Hitler and 2000 Nazis and their supporters marched on the Bavarian city of Munich taking over a beer hall and trying to force the leaders of the city and province to relinquish control to the Nazis. This coup was repelled by the government, and
Hitler was tried for treason. He used the trial to speak out publicly against the government and Jews, and reiterate the Nazis platform of German nationalism. This only gained him more support and he only served 9 months in prison due to a lenient sentence from the judges. He used the time to pen the first volume of his book
Mein Kampf.
Hitler reorganized the Nazi's strategy after his release from prison, deciding to use his talents as a public speaker and strong nationalist propaganda to win over the population to the Nazi party. For the next several years Hitler and the Nazi party gained support through out much of German, and when the
Great Depression caused the Republic to quickly descend into turmoil and anarchy it allowed the Nazis to try to take over the government via the democratic process. With t
he government in shambles President Hindeberg dissolved the current government and moved to hold new elections. Hitler and the Nazis launched an intense campaign and gained 107 seats of the over 650 seats in the Reichstag in 1929.
The government continued to struggle through the next 4 years, the Nazis becoming more and more popular as their organization seemed to have a plan to get the country out of the mess it was in. Coupled with a strong sense of national pride and a convenient scapegoat they became more relied upon by the common citizen and garnered considerable popularity with industrialists and upper class. Aldof Hitler saw his chance and decided to run for President in 1932,
losing to the incumbent (who only ran to keep Hitler out of the position). Despite his loss the next year in 1933 the Nazis received a majority with 44% of the total seats. President Hindeberg after appointing several people the position of chancellor finally conceded to the popularity of the Nazis and appointed Hitler the position in 1933 and shortly there after died. H
itler quickly took over the government naming himself Furher and dissolved all other political parties and began the persecution of the Jews that eventually became the Holocaust.
From there we have a basic idea of what happened, even that above is just basic, Hitler went from an incredibly mediocre nobody to the most powerful man in Europe in a little under 15 years. People wonder how the Nazis could have come to power, pointing at coercion and violence as the primary tactics, failing miserably these days to recognize the use of propaganda and the cult of personality that revolved around Hitler himself. While violence and fear were certainly in the Nazis dossier of tactics -Dachau was originally built for political dissidents operating for 5 years in that manner before the Nazis began the wholesale destruction of the Jews- it wasn't the primary volume in
Nazi's tactics to win over the German people. While our own government (and every government in existence in this day in age) uses propaganda to an extent there has not been an individual with the level of Hitlers talent for public speaking or an organization with the such an effective approach to propaganda Hitler stood out in one other way with his signature hatred for a single group of people.
That, the last sentence of the above paragraph is the crux of the matter. Hitler hated. He hated so passionately that he infected an disillusioned country to that hatred. While political detractors were rounded up and executed, that pales in comparison to what Hitler did to the Jews, Rom, and homosexuals in Germany and in every country he conquered.
This kind of evil exists today. These sorts of actions still happen and have happened time and again by different groups of individuals from the end of WWII till nearly today: Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot, Stalin, the
list is extensive and it goes on and on both before and after the Second World War. But the one that still stands out, the one that still eats away at our minds is the Holocaust. This is the first time that modern society has seen life treated so cheaply. Seen that sort of destruction first hand and could lay their hands upon it. Could smell, hear and feel the cruelty. This is the first time where it was one man's
single minded hatred that caused this horror and we were able to bear witness to it.
I visited Germany just after my senior year in high school, part of the tour was a visit to Dachau. I almost didn't go. The idea made me sick. The thought paled in comparison to the place. The barracks the prisoners were housed in are gone. A replica stands so that tourists may tour and see the incredibly inadequete living conditions that the prisoners were subject to. There was a faint stench of death there, and of human misery, and at one point I almost buckled in a weeping heaving mass. I didn't. Some how I managed to make it through the better part of tour without weeping, but just barely. That was in 1995. The faint smell of death was still present even after 50 years at that time. I suspect it's still there. That's what evil is. That's what Hitler and his group of remorseless sociopaths left in their wake. Hatred like that still exists, but it's not as organized as the Nazis.
It's that fact alone, the single minded hatred, that makes comparing our current president, or any of our past presidents to Hitler or the Nazis ridiculous. Hitler certainly loved the prestige and glamour that power got him, read any of the links above you can see that, but his end goal ultimately was the destruction of the Jews. Seeing a President pose with children or try and pass through congress laws that you and I may disagree with does not equate him to Hitler, nor does signing executive orders or giving speeches to a crowded auditorium. Every time that equation is created, you blur the line just a little for the next generation of what exactly evil is.
Labels: Personal, Politics.
I miss theater.
It's not something that I honestly think about a lot, but it's there in the back of my head/heart/mind/chest nagging at me.
Music is too, and I miss it, but there's hope for music. I loved to compose and I'm seeing myself becoming interested again in listening. It comes in spurts, but it's there. I think theater had replaced it.
It's been six years since I've done a large production (something with more than one performance). In that same period of time that I was away with music my sense of loss was not acute In fact it was more of a regret. With theater it's different.
I don't think about it much, or at least try not too. It's hard not to have it come up with some frequency. Many of my friends on Facebook are actively involved in theater in one way or another and I get some murmurs from that source. Having friends continually doing plays makes feel like I should see them, not simply because my friends are in the plays, but because the plays themselves might be worth seeing.
I don't want to sit in an audience and that go type up a report of what I've seen though. Reviews are fun, and I've done a few, but they do not replace the experience of being on the stage.
I was made aware of just how much I missed theater when chatting with a friend of mine online the other night. He's got a great opportunity to go do a play-writing work shop back east. I hope he takes it. I hope he's able. It's honestly something I too should make an effort to do as well. The money isn't as problematic for me to come up with as it would have been -say- three years ago. While chatting there was a sudden acute pain. Not a physical pain. The pain you get when you realize that somethings missing in your life and you know what it is. That pain that sits somewhere in the back of your chest and chokes you, makes you dizzy. That's the pain I felt.
I nearly wept.
It's not easy to explain to people who are not involved in the performing arts. Not to have that outlet. I love/loved being on stage. Being in character. Being in a room full of people but the only other persons that really mattered in that moment were myself and whoever was on stage with me. There's a... innate sense of the audience, and what to do for them. But if the audience is receptive, then they're observers that lend their energy too. There's something magical. I miss that.
I never truly enjoyed performing music for people. There was a bit of the thrill and the rush, but the connection felt empty and at the end of the day I got the same satisfaction (or even more satisfaction) out of a really good rehearsal in music then I did out of a performance.
Not so with theater. Even a great rehearsal pales in comparison to a really great performance. That click and connection: with the audience, your actors, your tech people. It's wonderful.
There's nothing more exciting than starting a new show. There's nothing more depressing then closing one.
I'm not sure what I'm going to do. But I need to do something.
It's time to find and set some goals.
Labels: Personal
I am not interested in your religion.
That isn't true, I probably am, but it's mostly from an academic/curiosity perspective. I do not care what you personally believe unless you force me to care. If you want to discuss it, that's fantastic. As long as you don't become preachy towards me and try and convert me, chances are I'll be interested in what you have to say. Don't try to convert me. I'm not susceptible to it, and I'll consider you a douchebag if you do. Further more I'll have little else to say to you.
I am wholly unconvinced that your religious beliefs mean that deep down you are a good person. They can influence you. But look at the perspective of different believers. The Muslim who blows up a cafe full of customers considers himself a decent person, doing what needs to be done to further his religious cause. The Christian who blows up an abortion clinic also considers themselves to be furthering a religious goal. From my perspective there's not really any difference between the two. The notion that you must yield to a certain religious belief in order to be a decent human being is a perplexing one. Perhaps people carry that notion to help themselves feel more secure in their religous beliefs, I don't know, but it's not something that I have personally experienced.
You might think. Well sure I've met some nice decent folks who didn't believe what I do, that just shows that they all have a good kindly spirit. No, what it shows is that people can be decent outside of religion. Outside of your religion. Some of you are going to argue this point. Go ahead. I'll let you. You won't convince me. I'm fully convinced of my view, I've got sources to back me up. You're really only trying to convince yourself.
So yes. If you want to discuss religion Please let's do. I'm always happy to learn something. Do not assume that I share your religion with you. I don't. Do not assume that you can convert me. You can't. Do not assume that just because somebody is a decent person, they must follow your belief system as well. That assumption isn't true.
I'm not interested in your beliefs or your morals. I'm only interested in your integrity.
Labels: Personal, Religious Criticism
Change is in the air.
It's a quiet night this New Years Eve. I am home, not alone but surely in isolation, wileing away the last few hours of 2012 by watching movies, reading and surfing the internets.
Not the ideal way to spend New Years Eve, I've certainly had worse nights, though I've definitely had better.
I had made no plans, initially because I was scheduled to work tomorrow morning bright and early at 4:00 a.m. There was a possibility that we would get it off, mentioned as early as last Monday, but it was never a sure thing and we only found out for sure this morning in a short meeting.
I am not complaining. Tomorrow was my "Friday" and my regular days off this week are Wednesday and Thursday so having tomorrow off gives me a three day "weekend" so to speak. However if I had known for sure that I did have tomorrow off I would have made arrangements to go to Salt Lake or even Logan and spend the night bringing in the new year with friends out there.
Didn't happen that way, so alone I sit typing.
I want to reflect on 2012 a bit. It was sort of meh.
No, it wasn't horrible. In fact I did have some great times with friends and even a few with family. Playing my Pathfinder game with "the boys" a couple of times a month help to keep me sane. Sadly one of "the boys" is gone now.
Playing games with my nieces and nephews is always a joy. In fact I gave a few of them the pleasure and wonder of Pathfinder for Christmas and that is exciting. Bringing up the next generation of geeks.
Worked my first year at a the new job. Not quite as new now that I've been there a little over a year, but still going with it, even thought the company has had a rough patch of late. Aside from the early morning schedule I have to switch back and forth too, I don't mind it.
Did see some fun plays this year, not as many as I would have liked though. Drinking a beer with Tiny and JayC at Busybees (JayC didn't have a beer, but I did and it was tasty). Tiny even introduced me to some fabulous resturants when I went out for St. Patricks day.
Getting a pink birthday cake last year was probably the highlight. Tom and Anna are terrific. That baby of theirs is damned lucky.
All of these were great times. I have no complaints about any of it.
It's all the stuff in between. The day to day slog (I suppose this really includes the job, even though I don't hate it). It wears on a person.
I know in order to change things I have to make an effort to change things.
Well, here it goes.
Labels: Personal
Tragedy
A tragedy happened in this country the other day. Tragedies happen around the world on a nearly hourly basis, but when it is a large group of innocent people, namely children were killed by a young man, barely into adulthood, wielding a couple of handguns that he got from his home. He killed his mother, who worked at the elementary school, then proceeded to go to the school and start shooting kids. 20 children lost their lives, as well as 6 adults.
It's a tragedy that is both shocking and sickening all at once. It brings back memories of previous shootings, in particular the shooting at the Amish school in 2006 where a gunman took shot 10 school-girls, killing 5 of them. This seems to happen more and more often. I'm told (via the media) that it doesn't, but each time some evil atrocity like this rears it's ugly head the debate about gun control creeps back up into the nations conscious.
I'd like to tell both sides to shut the hell up.
To the pro-gun folks, a couple of things:
First, stop making the claim that "Guns don't kill people, people do." Yes, it's technically true. People do kill people with guns, knives, and a myriad of blunt objects. The difference between say guns and baseball bats (which I'm told are used considerably more often than guns) are that guns quite literally were only invented as devices to kill things. That was their original intended purpose and still remains so to this day. Comparing to them to automobiles is creating a false dichotomy and is incredibly stupid. So is comparing them to baseball bats or anything else which was invented primarily for any other purpose aside from inflicting death. So while guns are not the most used instrument of death used in murders, they are really only one thing (unlike say a hammer which was a tool first, or a bat which is used primarily for an athletic game) and that is a weapon that is used to kill things.
Second, stop bringing up Israel and Switzerland as examples where guns are prevalent in the society but there are fewer gun crimes. Israel is a country that is in constant threat of military and terrorist attacks. There is a very real threat that somebody could cause, or attempt to cause violence in many parts of the country. I'm not going to delve into Israeli politics with the Palestinians I do know that violence is a constant threat in many parts of the country so it makes sense for the population to be well trained in the use of guns. In fact, that's exactly the case. The majority of the population is military trained. They know the proper safety of guns. Some of you pro-gun folks know this and understand this, but I'd wager many of you do not. The same goes for Switzerland. Every male in Switzerland serves in the military. Until they're 50. They all have guns. They all know how to use guns. But most importantly they have a culture that values the community over that of the individual (the same could be said perhaps of Israel). America does not. We value individual freedom more than that of the community and it's important to understand that fact before you start rolling out examples from cultures that are very much not American in scope.
If you want to use them as examples of how responsible gun education and ownership leads to fewer gun related deaths in the general populace, I'd agree with that. But understand that it's the culture of those places not necessarily the presence of guns that attributes to the lower crime rate.
That being said, simply arming teachers, or allowing open carry every where is not going to bring shootings like what occurred this past Friday, or crime in general, under control. Most people who own guns, while practiced in shooting and have a fairly good understanding of gun safety are not trained to deal with their fire-arms in high stress situations. Chances are they really could make the situation worse. This isn't all gun owners of course, some are police officers (or were) and military trained, but that's only a partial percentage of gun ownership.
I'll stop picking on you for a moment.
Gun-control people:
First stop ignoring all the data. Yeah, I know guns are used in a lot of crimes. They are also used, quite successfully to help prevent crimes. It shows up regularly in data that is collected by several LEA but also in University studies and studies from outside groups (that are typically politically motivated). Guns, hand guns are risky in the home and certainly lead to more accidental deaths as well as being used in crimes (read murders) of passion and suicides, but accidental deaths can be prevented with genuine gun education.
Also, the pro-gun folks have a point: Taking the legal means to obtain guns will not prevent criminals from getting them. It's true, it won't. Perhaps it may slow them down a little, but they'll still get the gun if they want it. That seems like a shallow point to bring up perhaps. But the principle argument for gun-control is that it will help prevent violent crime (or at least decrease it). In general violent crime has been going down for the last two decades (despite the population increase), I don't think guns or lack there of are a huge contributing factors to that.
But I'm not writing this to take sides on the gun issue. I think we need better education in addition to a different type of control, but that's not even what I'm here to talk about.
I'm here to talk about how you both miss the bigger picture.
Fuck your guns or lack of guns. Part of the problem is you think that this is the crux of this issue. That kid in Connecticut wasn't thinking of gun control when he fished the guns from the closest to go on his shooting rampage. Sure if they weren't in the house, if gun laws had been stricter he wouldn't have been able to do that. (Could have got them some where else.) He wanted to hurt as many people as possible in a short amount of time. If there were no guns he was smart he could of certainly made explosive devices. But guns being there or not isn't the point.
The point is we live in a country where this sort of thing is common place. We live in a country where this sort of thing has become acceptable.
Yep, I said acceptable. Our media revels in it. Pushing the cameras into survivors faces, pontificating on the reasons why the killer did what he did. Mourning, very briefly, the victims and then waiting for the next tragedy like vultures in the desert. We live in a culture where as terrible as this tragedy is (and it's rare for something like this to have a grand effect on me, this one did so yeah it's pretty fucking terrible) it's become so commonplace in the collective conscious of the populace that our mourning periods become ever briefer with each one. And if it's not children or 15 to 20 people ending up dead we don't even give it much of a foot note in the news any more.
My question isn't whether there should be stricter gun laws or more lenient gun laws. My question is "What has society become, what social sickness have we developed that has led a young man to want to kill and hurt as many people as possible?"
What's the answer to that question? He was mentally ill? Well that much is obvious. Why? Why is he mentally ill in this way? How has society contributed to this? I don't think the answer lies wholly in guns or lack there of. Nor do I think the lack of religion is the case either (we are an incredibly religious country by all means, so claiming that it's lack of religion seems pretty laughable to me).
You can try to argue about the gun stuff with me. Really I don't give two shits about either side. I want to understand what is it about our culture that leads to these sorts of killings. If you have some insight then I'd love to hear it. However if all you've got is "MORE GUNS!" or "LESS GUNS!" I'm not interested.
Labels: Personal
Goals not fulfilled.
There is no way I'm going to finish all 15 movie reviews by the 31st of this month. Part of it is I insist on watching each film before I review. I've made a list and on that list roughly half the movies are ones that I've already seen. Of those I've reviewed exactly 0. Everything I've reviewed so far are things I haven't seen, though some I've seen clips large or small of. Now it's not that it wasn't possible. In fact the writing of the reviews at times easier than actually taking the time to watch the movie. So of the movies I've already watched (most of which I own), why don't I just review them? Because I would feel dishonest. I don't have a problem lying necessarily but I want to be at least somewhat honest to those few folks who read. Sure I've seen the movies, but it's been a year or two since I watched most of them and my mind is shaky. Besides watching the movie again will remind me why I liked or hated it and it would be considerably easier to comment on. Right now I still have nine movies to watch. I could watch 3 today and two on Tuesday and two on Wednesday, of course I'd still have two, but who am I kidding? I don't feel like watching movies after work most days. Which leaves me with my days off.
That said I plan on finishing this project, I'm giving myself one more week, which is to say the 4th of November. After that I'm going to go back to posting my randomness, but I will continue with my movie reviews. Specifically I'm going to take one director each month and take a look at a few of his movies. Not less than three, not more than five. To start it will be favorite director's but I'll soon branch out into those I haven't heard of before and those that are a bit more obscure. It should be fun!
Labels: Movie Reviews, Personal
Searching for the spirit.
This is a continuation of my last blog, if you haven't read it then read it here: Losing My Religion
Now for part 2:
Berkeley. George Berkeley.
You don't know him? Well, maybe you do. Go look him up. He's one of the philosophers I encountered in my Philosophy 101 class. He blew my mind. He's entire philosophy consists of the idea that there is no physical world, only a mental world. Nothing exists. Or at least we can't tangibly prove anything exists as our senses and experiences are interpreted through the mind. That's some pretty heavy stuff. My little 19-year-old mind reeled at that idea. For weeks I felt disjointed and awkward. Couple that with delving into Buddhist philosophy, particularly the concept of non-self, you'd think my mind would explode.
I survived. I flirted with those things for a while and managed the best I could with what I had been given philosophically speaking. I become more and more involved in music at the time and I found solace in composing. I needed that. I don't know if I need it today, which is why I may have stopped composing. I searched for answers. Yeah, I think I even said a prayer or two during what consisted of the next 3 years after my freshman year in college.
I read what I could, interacted with those around me, primarily LDS folks at the time. I did go to the LDS church a few times during this period. I thought about becoming active, there was an influence there that was definite. Two things led me both down and away from this course of action. One was an encounter with a Hare Krishna monk. He was collecting donations on the corner near the Fine Arts Center at U.S.U on a beautiful day. I had just got paid, so was flush with cash. Had just eaten, so was flush with the joy of a full belly, ok I did have cash, most were in the bank, but there was a 20 dollar bill in my pocket. He thanked me and gave me three books that he was giving out in exchange for the donations: two cookbooks (both of them vegan as the Hare Krishna's tend to be) and the Bhagavad Ghita. I read a good deal of the Bhagavad Ghita, probably more than any other religious text I own actually. Reading it I saw parallels where parallels don't necessarily exist. I take it for what it really is now, a religious text with some inspirational messages and some absurd-ism. Like most/all of them.
The other incident, I'm not sure what set it off: well maybe I do, I had just listened to a concert in the concert hall, I was feeling particularly spiritual. Not the same thing as faithful or religious, perhaps you could and should understand it as aware of my being. My self. I sat in the hall long after the musicians had left. They hadn't, nor were they ready to lock it up. It felt serene. Peaceful. Right. I've only other times I've achieved that feeling is after performing in a play. And even then it's far between. I resolved myself then and there to become active and church and try and go on a mission. Or at least I thought about it until I realized that it was foolish for me to think that. I wanted to capture that feeling. That awareness and serenity. It wasn't going to happen by going to church. I never get the warm fuzzies there.
The thing that finally broke the camel's back as far as religion goes was a man named Ludwig Wittgenstein. In my 4th year at the university, I come up with the misplaced idea of trying to complete two majors: one in philosophy and one in music, as well as working 32 hours a week. I was talking about 15 credits (wholly unrealistic) and doing poorly in one or two classes while doing ok in the rest. One class I did not do well in (primarily because I missed some tests and an assignment I believe, not to mention several classes) was contemporary philosophy. The first philosopher we read was Wittgenstein. He blew my mind. Even if I only have an inkling of what the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus was about it, like Buddhism, and Berkeley before it, made me see the world differently. Wittgenstein, by many accounts, wasn't an atheist, in fact, he was deeply spiritual but he saw it as a private matter, ne'er to be aired in public. The line that got me, the line that is the core of the book (at least one of the core ideas) is "That which we can not speak of, we must pass over in silence." I still, to a point, hold that as a very deep and meaningful perspective. That line is what made me agnostic.
Well, that's an oversimplification if ever there was one. That line made me want to learn more about Wittgenstein, his philosophy, and his thoughts. I owe a lot to the late Chuck Johnson for this. He was an avid follower of Wittgenstein. An expert if there ever was one. I got a D in the class, but it led me to several other classes where Wittgenstein was one of the core emphasis.
Reading Wittgenstein, and later Hoffer, and several studies on psychology, physics, and evolution, becoming very good friends with many pagans and encountering Jungian philosophy and the ideas of Joseph Campbell my attitude has shifted. I am an agnostic. I even consider myself, for all intents and purposes, an atheist. But I still quest for the spiritual. That self-awareness and being in tune with the 'other' the subconscious, or the collective unconscious. I get it now and then: during some movies, during walks, on stage, or even after closing a play.
There's a misconception that equates spirituality with faith, with religion. One can have faith, and be religious without ever encountering any kind of real spirituality. That's the rub, isn't it? I have said before that I find all religion and faith silly. I do, but some people do get a spiritual 'feeling' from those things. That works for them, and who am I to criticize them for it. I may not agree with their dogma, but I can't criticize the solace they find in it.
I'm going to leave this topic for now. Next up something less rambly and more... to the point.
Labels: Personal
Losing my religion.
I was raised LDS. Mormon. At least sort of.
My parents were never particular active in church. There was a time both my father and mother would attend, my mother had been raised Mormon, my father had not. For both of then, and my mother today, it was an opportunity for them to touch on their spirituality. Not quite the words they would use, but a good interpretation of it. "It makes me feel good." Simple enough. My father quit going when I was very young, it was several years after that before my mother quit. I remember being young and in Primary, as well as attending lessons about baptism, which I did do. It was a year, maybe two, that my mother stopped going regularly. I would attend occasionally after this, going with the neighbors, but soon it felt like a chore and even I stopped going.
Sundays weren't about church in my house, at least not once I got into my tween's and teens. My father often cut wood on Sundays, and I would usually go with him. I suppose it's possible that my mother went to church when both my father and I were out cutting wood, but it seems unlikely. My father found solace out cutting wood. He said he felt more in touch with God out there then he ever did at the church house. I'm not sure my father was ever baptized, I know he identified with the LDS church a bit more than his older sister or his mother who were both born again Christians. His two oldest siblings also converted to the LDS church, my aunt Evelyn was active till her death. My uncle A.D. is still quite active. As for aunt Sharon, the aunt who is born again, still identifies as such.
As for my own path, not being particularly active, and having some slight conflict at family reunions (not extreme, but arguments did arise) I identified as LDS never the less. I attended church sporadically, mostly going so I would be allowed to play on the church basketball team. Yes, there was a time I was nearly interested in sports. Two things happened that made me question my faith, or lack of faith (several things did, but two in particular during my teen years).
The first was an incident very few in the family talk about: my father, on a cocktail of different pain medication and other drugs prescribed to him by a fairly incompetent doctor, had a long bout of hallucinations over the course of a single night. Most of these were religious in origin, but many were, in hind-site, nonsensical. He had two clergy men come to the house, and LDS bishop and the pastor from the local evangelical christian church and spoke to them at length about stuff he was seeing. I'm not sure what the men made of it. I was shaken to my very core, as was everyone in the house that night (if I remember it was primarily my mother). Watching somebody hallucinate is not particularly fun, despite what some stoners might have you believe (and perhaps the perspective is much different you're hallucinating as well I don't know.) We got through that night, my father quietly apologized for what happened the next day, though I remain unsure to this day what he was apologizing for exactly. I've forgiven him. The family doesn't talk about it.
The second incident was, my father's death. My father was never in particularly good health during my life, he broke his back when he was in his late 20's and though he had a series of surgeries it only did so much. He was on disability for a while, taken off in the 80's during the Reagan administration, and forced to go back to work doing odd jobs and taking care of the family farm. He died on August 6th 1995, a few short weeks before I was to leave for college.
I was adrift at this point, not sure what to believe in. There was one point, about a week into school (I had been up there two weeks due to marching band) where I called my mother and told her to come and get me. I had got some money from her the day before via mail and had put it into my wallet. I lost the wallet. It was a couple hundred bucks and I absolutely felt at a loss. I knew she didn't have it, I knew the wallet was long gone. My mother told me that we'd figure a way out of it, and that there was no way I was coming home. A few hours after that phone call another resident in the dorm knocked on my door and returned my wallet. I had left it in the laundry room he had found it and brought it back to me.
It was that year I took my first philosophy class. I remember my uncle, when I mentioned to him on break that I was taking the class, expressing concern that I might question my faith. (I had none at that point, though I didn't realize it then). I loved the class, and excelled in it. I can not say that trend continued to this day but at the time I did well. It was also the year I was introduced to Buddhism. It was something I had a periphery interest in during my high school years but had no means to research in my backwoods little town. I remember reading a chunk of the Buddhist bible during that freshman year, and meeting a friend (Ken, not sure what happened to him) who was of Japanese decent and also a Buddhist. I attended church with him in Ogden on a couple of different occasions and they even lent me some books (which I'm ashamed to say I still have).
This is what set me on that path. The path I'm currently on. Death, philosophy and Buddhism. I particularly sticky combo. One that I wouldn't reconcile for a few more years.
To be con't...
Labels: Personal
Crazy Asshats!
So it's come this?
We've become a nation of crazy assholes who can't see the forest from the trees, and the little political game that plays out every 4 years has turned us from lunatics to raving lunatics.
Now, I'm not talking about one side. I'm not pointing just to the Democrats, nor the Republicans. It's everybody.
I honestly don't think anybody has a fucking clue any more.
Let's start with the Democrats: Not all Republicans are backwoods retards. In fact, most aren't. I'd wager to bet many don't agree wholly with Romney and Ryan's platform, but they are being told the things that they like to hear to one degree or another. Whether Romney and Ryan can deliver is moot. Many people are scared to death about the economy. I am, though that's another issue entirely. Those people don't see any change in their way of life, or the way of life in their community, other than the negative and have decided that Obama needs to go. Romney and Ryan is their option. Maybe not the perfect option, but it's the one that they see.
Now, I'm not supporting Romney and Ryan by any means. A majority of the population is relatively uninformed, and they get most of their "news" from pundits, whether they are right or left. Not only that but we as people tend to migrate to those who already share our views. So yeah, an old farmer, or rig-hand, or trucker is probably going to listen to Rush Limbaugh, for good or ill, because Limbaugh has painted an image (in their mind) as somebody who shares their values. I get that. I don't agree with it, but I get it. A lot of people want to blame somebody for the failure in their lives that they have no control over. I get that too. It isn't logical. The President has as much control over the price of gas as I do over where a bird decides to nest. He can get on t.v. make speeches. Make threats. But honestly it doesn't really matter. The markets will determine that price. But you know what, that's complicated shit, and some guy schlupping a 12 hour job five days a week isn't going to have the interest to put the time in to learn about that. Hell, I just barely have the interest in I DON"T work my ass off each day.
So yeah Democrats, I get your anger at the Republicans, but let's not paint them all in the same light. Their politicians stink, but so do yours, and yet you're fairly loyal to them. Why wouldn't they be otherwise? The vast majority of Republicans/Conservatives just want to continue with a way of life they see vanishing. They're afraid of change, and change makes people do crazy stuff. You know I don't think things would be vastly different on that front if there was a Republican in charge, but I'll get to that too. So why I don't agree with most of their stances on gay marriage, or what it will take to turn this economy around, I do understand where they are coming from.
And another thing Democrats, your politicians are guilty of a lot of the same shit the Republicans are. Pointedly Bill Clinton. He's a great speaker and spin-doctor, and I fully expect his wife to run again in 2016, but he revoked the Glass-Steagall act, which is probably the biggest nail in the coffin as far as our economy goes. Obama has made some pretty unwise choices as well. My biggest beef with the guy is him promoting Geithner and Bernake. But that's an entire blog on it's own. So don't pat yourselves on the back and say everything is honky-dory and expect everybody to buy it. It isn't. Maybe Obama is out of sorts on what to do. I don''t envy the man, but I do understand some of the anger that's there from the Right.
Now for you Republicans: FIRST! OBAMA IS NOT A SOCIALIST!!! Anybody who makes the claim is either selling something (a politician) or is woefully ignorant of what an actual socialist is. A socialist wouldn't have handed over billions of dollars to the banks with nary a slap on the wrist, nor the automobile industry. A socialist would have had the government take control of that shit. All those too big to fail banks would be one massive bank and fully under the control of the government at this point. The auto industry would not be 3 industrial giants still mismanaging funds it would be one large "company" under the government. The way socialism works is the government controls the public goods, typically economic goods as well, but it depends on the sort of socialism it is. There are certainly some socialist things in this country: Education system. Library system, hell even our roads and waterways to an extent. But Obama is not one. He's never been one and probably never be one. He's got to much to lose financially to become a socialist.
While we're on this topic: Obamacare isn't socialism either. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it actually gives large insurance companies more costumers. Yeah, there's a little more risk to them, but the government is not going to run the hospitals, and not going to enforce death panels on old people. If you still believe that it will, then you have no business speaking to me about the bill until you've actually informed yourself with information and not propaganda. I don't fully support Obamacare, there're a lot of things I don't like about it, but I'm not going to get into that. If you're going to make claims, then be able to back them up.
Another thing, the Democrats aren't looking for a free hand out, nor are they jealous of the rich. In fact, think about this: We live in a country where the housing market collapsed in on itself, it wasn't simply people who got in over their heads with houses they couldn't afford, but folks who spent 10 or 15 years in houses who suddenly lost jobs and could no longer afford to pay for them. Along with that we have people on the verge of retirement being told "Nope all the money you invested for your retirement is gone. Sorry!" while the CEO's of the investment firms and the banks were getting 20 million dollar bonuses. Almost none of them have been punished, some quit, and those that were fired were given huge compensation packages. But because Democrats call bullshit on that they are jealous? They aren't jealous. They are pissed. It's the same kind of pissed that the Tea Party started out with before they were consumed by the Republican party and Fox News. Wanting people responsible for one of the biggest fininacial crisises in our lifetime to be held accountable and not be rewarded with more money, which they laughably do not need, isn't wanting a free handout. It's fucking justice.
Along that lines. Republicans aren't fiscally responsible. If they were then the Bush/Cheney years would have looked markedly different. I'm not convinced that Romney and Ryan can pull us out of this mess. They haven't yet said anything to convince me otherwise. So yeah, the Democrats claiming that we can spend our way out of this Depression is nonsensical, but Romney/Ryan saying to cut taxes and reduce spending is akin to your dead beat friend promising to buy cheaper pizza while cutting back on the amount of hours he works each week in order to get out of debt.
For both of you: You don't like each other. I get that. But honestly, you're all fuck-wits and you all need to grow up. Stop watching Fox News and MSNBC and start researching shit. If you're going to make posts on news articles have something (a link maybe) to back up any outlandish claims you might add. That goes double for you assholes who publish on Facebook. All of you. Political memes can be made by anybody, so do yourself a favor RESEARCH before you hit share. Because otherwise you're going to look like an asshole perhaps because you are. Don't trust campaign ads, don't trust pundits. Don't trust your politician. The only thing they want from you is your vote and your money. If you think your guy is the answer and that anybody who disagrees with you is an idiot, well look in the mirror friend.
Labels: Personal, Politics.
Lakes
This isn't the blog I was going to write. That'll wait. Go into the rotation as it were. This is a different blog. And for most of you it will be way out of left field. I suspect any blog that is related to geek culture probably does, for one or two of you this may make sense.
I've become obsessed with lakes lately. I like lakes. Always have. Perhaps it's because I like the idea of large bodies of water that I can, theoretically see the other side of at certain points. Ok. Maybe not the all lakes, but most, dare I say 99%. That's a lot. Now this interest is recent.
I get bored at work at times, usually on the weekends. Now when I get bored one of my favorite activities is to "explore the globe" with the satellite imaging site I have to use for my job. It's alright there with a flick of the mouse wheel I zoom in and out and I can go where the cursor takes me. I've looked at the Eiffel Tower, The Temple Bar District, Mount Rushmore, Time Square, all from the comfort of my chair at work. But something that caught my eye fairly early on were two lakes in Canada: The Great Bear Lake, and The Great Slave Lake. Both of these lakes look massive, especially when looked at through the distorted perception of the map due to the fact it's a Mercator projection map, the appear larger than the Great Lakes, but they are not. Through the course of my explorations I've discovered a few things that I find fascinating: Lake Michigan-Huron is a single lake technically. There is a single lake bed that is separated by a narrow channel, that is all one evaluation. Lake Michigan-Huron is also the larges lake by surface area in the world. Lake Michigan by itself is the largest lake by surface area in a single country by surface area, and Lake Baikal, in Russia is the largest lake in the world by volume... and holy shit! While I think all of that is interesting, it's not. Not really, it's goddamned boring and I know it, but that's not why a bring it up.
I'm not an in-shape guy. I think mountains are awesome, and as cool as it would be to try and climb the largest mountain on each continent, that just isn't happening. Not for me. But, visiting the largest lake on each continent is a possibility. Hell all I have to do is drive to lake Michigan and I've got one to check off. Going to Lake Baikal would take some doing. As well as Lake Victoria, Vostok (which is under a mile of ice), Titicaca, and Lake Ladoga.
But there's more than just going to these lakes. I want to see all the Great Lakes, travel through Canada and see the both the Great Slave and Great Bear Lake. Go to Minnesota and see where the Mississippi River springs forth to wind it's way through the country, as well as the Missouri River in Montana. I want to hike around Wizards Island that sits in Crater lake and hang out on the shores of Lake Winnipeg for a week or two. That just covers a little bit of North America.
Someday.
Someday it'll happen. I'll explore the lakes of as many continents as possible. Until then I'll have to sate myself with the lakes around here. Pelican Lake to the south, Browns Reservoir which is a 5 minute drive from my house. Rock Creek, Moon Lake, or even the high lakes that take a hike or horse ride to get to.
Now the reason for this obsession is simple honestly.
Lakes are beautiful.
Labels: Personal
I hate AFHV
I hate
America's Funniest Home Videos. I don't know why this show is still on the air.
Why?
Why?!
I don't hate the videos themselves, a lot of them can be pretty funny or cute or what have you, the show that was built around the concept of it. Now I can't really say I ever really liked the show, but I could tolerate it considerably more in my youth when it first started airing than I could today. Today I hate it. My mother however likes it. She watches it faithfully, to the point that it's one of her must watch shows. She'll even watch old episodes that are on syndication.
Of all of her must watch shows this is the only one I deride her about. I find myself actually enjoying
Antique's Roadshow, despite myself,
the Biggest Loser I don't like but I can understand the appeal for her. Hell I introduced her to
Storage Wars, Pawn Stars and her love of those shows plus
Antiques Roadshow made
American Pickers an obvious fit.
But
America's Funniest Home Videos is... Well it pisses me off for two reasons: Youtube and Tom Bergeron.
See America's Funniest Home Video honestly doesn't offer you anything that isn't already on Youtube. Want to see cute pet tricks? Youtube. Want to see kids doing funny stuff? Youtube. Want to see men getting hit in the crotch? Youtube. It's all right there. In fact you can narrow it down so it's just kids dumping bowls of food on their head, or dogs having dreams and barking and kicking. You have absolute control what you want to watch or not watch.
My complaint about Tom Bergeron, is he's a T.V. Personality. He's not an actor, he's not a comedian, yet it's his voice that narrates the videos. He's really nothing but a glorified news anchor. A personality to talk to you and keep your attention between segments. He also narrates over half the videos. Which leads to another problem, one that isn't his fault: The writers of the show suck. Not going to mince words here. Could I do better? Probably not, but I don't want to. It would be awesome to have a writing gig on a television show (or an acting gig) but I'm not disciplined enough in my writing to consider that realistic, and I'm not down a path that would net me an acting job. So no, I couldn't do any better than the writers of AFHV, but I'm sure I could do as well.
There's an art to writing comedy, and to narrating comedy and Tom Bergeron is... horrible. Not that he's a bad human being. Actually I think he's probably a cool guy and would be fun to kick back and have a beer with, but he's not funny. HE'S NOT FUNNY. Why does he narrate? Well it's pretty obvious, because the videos that he narrates aren't funny by themselves. What's funny is they aren't funny with him either. In fact many are worse. The same thing was the case when Bob Saget was the host. Why show us shitty unfunny videos. The home movies that are actually funny don't have much in the way of narration, and you know what? They don't need it.
I point out to my mother every few months that she could watch Youtube and see funnier stuff. She either doesn't hear me or ignores me.
I actually do know why the show is still on. It's a game show. There's a prize at the end, a large chunk of change. Three videos are picked and the audience votes on them. I would really like to know what the producers criteria is for picking the three finalists, because they are usually not that funny. In fact it seems at least half the time they pick videos in which they have written narration for, and typically a lot funnier videos, that don't have narration, aren't picked at all.
Now I know that humor is somewhat subjective. I find a lot of shit unfunny, but friends, family and co-workers think is hilarious and vice-versa. But really does this show need to persist? No. Will it continue to as long as people hope they have the funniest/cutest/ridiculous video out there and think there's a chance they may get cash for little Jimmy shitting himself while dumping spaghetti on his head and while riding a dog.
Yep.
Labels: Personal, T.V. Reviews
itchy finger blues
My finger itches.
My pointer finger on my left hand. It itches whenever I touch it. It's not a constant itch, only present on physical contact, typically with myself, but I can almost always start scratching it and have the itch rise to the surface and become intolerable.
The thought has crossed my mind that this may be a bad thing.
It's been going on for.... months. Maybe even a year or more. I'm not sure exactly when this started but it's seems to be a constant. There's almost a dull pain to it. Even that's not a constant, but it's still present. With all that in mind what does it mean? I dunno. Maybe I have a brain tumor. That would suck, but I don't have any other weird neurological things going on that would make me worry about that. Maybe I'm just crazy. That thought has crossed my mind and given my family history of mental illness isn't entirely absurd.
I've consulted my dog on this manner and she is strangely silent on the subject.
So with the pad of my finger itching, when it's being touched (there is a subtle itch when I think about it as well, but not so much that I have the urge to scratch) I find myself scratching it with ridiculous pressure and vigor. I'm reminded of the folks on bad acid trips scratching their skin bloody because of the ants they can see and feel. Or the story of the woman who had a constant itch on the top of her head and scratched a hole through her skull.
That's serious business.
I've thought about the possibility that I may scratch a trench in my finger tip. That would be a hard one to explain to the doctor. "It itched so I scratched it till i hit bone." Yeah. Probably not a good idea. That may lead down the path of institutionalization.
I suppose I should seek medical help. But I suspect the doctor's will want to run a smorgasbord of tests on me which I am mostly convinced are only be requested to line their pockets with insurance money. Not that they wouldn't be sincere in wanting to help me, they would be. But the actual help that I would get would be a recommendation to a specialist. Yeah. That's what I thought doc.
I suppose if it becomes any more... intense I will seek out medical help. With out that finger I won't be able to accurately point to shit when gesturing.
And learning to type with out it will be a real pain in the ass.
Labels: Personal
Come on get down with the fatness.
Ahhh... the fatness.
I'm overweight. And by that I mean I'm fat. Now don't comment to say that I'm being hard on myself. I don't need a pep talk, I'm not depressed. I'm actually in a pretty good mood. I'm stating a fact. Perhaps a more PC term is obese, but that sounds vulgar to me. I'd be lying if I said I struggled with my weight. Oh, I do occasionally get on a health kick and try to "straighten up" and "eat right" and it lasts anywhere from a month to three, but I decide I want a kitkat and before you know it I've ate three. I know that dieting doesn't work, so I'm not wasting my time with it.
No dieting doesn't work. You have to change. You have to change your outlook. I have a coworker who, like me, is a pretty big guy. Real nice guy. Sweet and likable, bit awkward. He's been looking at different diets. He's -not desperate- perhaps anxious to lose weight. He's in his early 20's and is considerably larger than I was at that same age. I hope he's successful but without a completely different outlook he's doomed. He does have a cousin who's pushing him. She's making him walk for two mile each day and encouraging him to keep at it. His attitude about it so far is very positive, but he's still looking for the diet aid or fix to help him out.
I suppose I had my bout with that too. They weren't successful, I become realistic about that path several years ago and have just resigned myself to being me. But my outlook is changing. I work early in the mornings about half the time, as I mentioned, I fell back into drinking energy drinks. After six months it occurred to me that the things were making me feel funny. They didn't really help me stay awake and they were only contributing to me feeling stoned at work. I gave them up. I gave up soda as well. Ok, to a point. I have no problem drinking soda now and then, but for the most part it's gone. I haven't had one 2 weeks. Before that it was another 2 weeks. I've begun to pay attention to my portions and actually stop eating when I feel full. As for sugar, well candy doesn't hold the same appeal. Whenever I have it, I regret it and if I'm going to indulge I'd rather have cake, pie or pudding (PUDDING!) over simple candy or chocolate. That being said I do feel better, and that's the important thing.
It's a slow process. One has to change their entire perspective in order to lose weight. Which is something skinny fuckers have no understanding of. Yeah, I'm lazy I freely admit, but don't for a minute think that it's simply sheer laziness that has made me fat. My entire outlook on life is twisted, as well as my appetites, and anybody who's overweight can relate to this. You feel defeated before you even begin.
Babysteps.
If you can do one thing each week to make yourself a healthier person then you should do it. If it takes two or three weeks to implement that one thing? That's fine too. You can't let yourself become defeated. If you have to take small steps, that's what you do. Maybe it's giving up soda at first. Then walking. Then giving up sugar and subbing fruit...WHOA! Hold on. Babysteps. Let's start by introducing fruit in lieu of some of the sugar, and go from there. That's what I'm doing. That's my goal. My goal isn't to lose 100 lbs by this time next year. My goal is to start walking a mile each day. My goal isn't to eat only healthy food. My goal is to eat more fruits and vegetables than I do junk food on a daily basis. My goal isn't to diet. My goal is to change my outlook so that my natural inclination is to make the right choices.
The reality show The Biggest Loser is notable in that it helps people make these kind of changes. Very rapidly. Kudos for that show for making such an impact on the culture and bringing the obesity epidemic to the forefront of the American conscious. I fucking hate it. I don't hate it despite the fact they help people. The trainers are very sincere, 99% of the people on the show are sincere in their desire to change. I hate it because it turns it into a competition. Maybe that's the only real way to get so many diverse individuals to make the changes they need to make in that short of time. I find it as capitalizing on those individuals suffering, and when confronted by said suffering it is a painful reminder of what we personally have as weaknesses. In other words, it's for ratings. People love to see other people have emotional breakdowns.
What you skinny fuckers need to understand, and what you can see in The Biggest Loser, is that for we the obese to make such drastic changes requires an enormous change in not only perspective about who we are as individuals, but how we physically exist as humans. Our bodies have become accustomed to certain things, more calories than we need, relative immobility, and to change that makes them scream out as if somebody were to take your skin off starting at your face. It's not easy, and despite my loathing of the show it does do some good. If only for the few months it's on it helps to inspire some people.
As to my co-worker. I hope he succeeds. He's heavier than I was at his age and it scares me to think of where he'll be at in 10 years when he's the age I currently am. We both work a very seditary job and it's easy lose oneself in the cycle of unhealthy snacks while at work and relative laziness outside of work. To be honest, most of us at work are overweight, and my co-worker isn't the only one whose desperate to lose weight. But for me. There's no desperation. I'm not going to discuss it with anybody but the ethernets for now. No there's no desperation. Just babysteps.
Labels: Personal
Well, the weekend is here, at least almost. For me it's the last
day of the weekend, I go back to work tomorrow. Saturday. It sucks, but where I
currently work the weekends are actually the nicest days to work. No
hassle. No hubbub. No supervisors leaning over your shoulder.
Where do I work.
A water trucking company.
I quit the grocery store after 3 1/2 years back at the end of last
November. I can't say I don't miss it. I do. Though obviously not all of it. I
was getting to where I genuinely enjoyed myself at work. But... there wasn't
much in pay in advancement.
The grocery store is locally owned. The owner is still pretty
active. There's a general grocery manager and then the owners youngest son who
is learning the trade to take over duties for when his father (and uncle who
runs the hardware store adjacent) inevitably retire. Each department then has
their manager. For the last 2 years I was there I was an assistant manager.
Filling in the day to day between managers, covering their shifts as needed.
Mostly though I bagged, stocked and checked like everybody else. Then the end
of October something happened.
I hurt myself.
Nothing terrible, at least I don't think so. While crossing the
street in Salt Lake City on the weekend of Halloween I step wrong and sprang my
ankle pretty bad. I had to stay off of it for a week. So while sitting bored at
home, lamenting the loss of income, (which I'd experience a lot of a few months
earlier after having surgery for a hernia), I perused the job boards and saw
that the water trucking company was hiring. I printed off an application,
filled it out and turned it in when I went in for my doctor's visit
at the end of that week.
Well, long story short I got the job. The biggest reason was the
loss of income. I hurt my ankle, but the job at the trucking company requires
me to be at a computer all day. I could have gone to work had I been working
there. Not so at the grocery store. My last day was the Saturday after
Thanksgiving. My first day at the trucking company was December 1st. I've been
there almost 8 months.
The job itself isn't bad. My responsibilities consist of looking
at orders that have been completed by drivers. Tracking them to verify there's
nothing fishy going on with them, double check that who we're charging and what
we're charging is correct and approve it. It's
a pretty short process, taking anywhere from 2 minutes to 10 minutes depending
on the order.
Now, for some people, they may not know what a
water trucking company does. Well they haul water, specifically water for
drilling rigs, work over rigs, and waste water away from oil well locations. It's
part of the oil industry. They do water dirt roads (to keep the dust down), and
there are a couple of trucks in each area that a specifically used for hauling
potable water. There are occasional jobs for domestic services as well.
But mostly they haul water to and from oil wells. They also haul drilling mud
to drilling rigs as well as brine. Both are used to suppress gasses and fluids
in the hole while it’s being drilled.
The job doesn’t suck. I actually enjoy it for the
most part. Though… like the grocery store, I have nightmares (real and
imagined) of becoming stuck there indefinitely. Beholden to the job because of
the compensation it gives me, not because I love doing it. I have decent
benefits, medical, dental and eye-care. The money is good as well, I’m making
nearly 350 to 400 bucks more a pay period than the grocery store, and this is
one of the lower paid positions at the company.
There is a political climate however. While
getting along with my supervisors fine, their immediate supervisor(s) seem to
have it out for my department. There’s tension there: We get blamed at times
for things that we have no control over, we also get blamed for things that are
our responsibility. But the environment is stressful.
I don’t care about that. I’m confident in my
ability to find another job. After I’ve been at the company for a year or more
I could probably even find another related job in trucking. That being said, I
will have to quit eventually. I need an environment where I don’t have to
continually self-censor on politics, religion or societal issues. Given the
nature of the company, and the location, that’s simply not going to happen
here.
There are current events, which I will save for
another post in the near future, that worry me that I’ll have to spend more
time working here than I first anticipated. I have a lot of thinking to do over
the next couple of days, and weeks. But till then… Yeah, I should probably hit
the hay. Work comes early at 8:30, it’s better than the 3:00 I have to go in on
other weeks.
Labels: Personal
Days of 47.
Pioneer Day.
It's considered a Utah holiday, but for me it's honestly just an extra day in the summer that I can light off fireworks. Of course not this summer, but normally, when things aren't so dry. The day itself is to commemorate the founding of Utah by the Utah Pioneers. Those persevering Mormons driven from their homes because hate and bigotry. Not just directed at the Mormons, but coming from the Mormons as well, but perhaps that's another post. The point of this post is that the Days of 47 celebrates Utah as a state, and it makes no sense, and really, is just a religious holiday.
I'm ok with religious holidays. I'm not religious. In fact I'm an anti-theist agnostic, but do in fact still celebrate Christmas.
But really, what is heralded as a state holiday (and it is treated as a state holiday) is little more than a religious holiday. If the state honestly wanted to celebrate it's statehood it would celebrate in January (the 4th specifically) as that's when it became a state (in 1896). Hell if the people coming up for the celebration of statehood wanted to dial it back a bit they could have the holiday be on September 9th, the day the Utah became an actual U.S. territory (in 1850). But instead we celebrate July 24th, the day the Mormons discovered the Salt Lake Valley in 1847, saw how dismal the place was and rightly reasoned that nobody would bother them. Oh yeah, and they called it Deseret.
I don't have a problem with the holiday. I do have a problem that with the idea that I'm supposed to celebrate it and get in on the hype of it because it's a state holiday. It is, but not really. It's biggest promoter is the LDS church, or church members. Sure a lot of communities do things for it, but when you consider 60% of the population is LDS (and most of the 40% that's not is in the Salt Lake Valley area) of course they're going to do something. Most of the people on my Facebook feed that had something to say about it are LDS (come to think of it, all of them were) including several friends and family members who are members of the LDS church.
So yeah, it's a religious holiday. I don't belong to that religion. Yeah, I pseudo celebrate it with bbq's and fireworks now and then, but I could care very little about the miraculous overtones of the day itself. I don't think about St. Patrick "chasing the snakes out of Ireland" when I'm deep into my cups on St. Patties Day, why would I care about any of the myths surrounding the Mormons settling the Salt Lake Valley?
Ok, so part of the last paragraph isn't true. I love Irish Mythology. LOVE IT! It is by far my favorite cycle of myths followed closely by the Norse. That being said, I don't know anybody who actually believes in the myths anymore. Not that there isn't, just, I have never met them. There's actually a lot of cool Mormon myths. Some epic stuff going on in that little book of theirs. The problem is (and the same thing holds true for the Bible as well) there are too many people who believe in it for me to really delve in the mythology of it all. When the find out you know about it, they become excited. Start asking questions about where you served your mission, or what ward you belong too. When you tell them you don't believe in it at all, just think the stories are cool... woooo... they don't like that. Usually that results in them trying to convert you. No thanks, seen what you had to offer, not my thing, not interested.
I'd be interested in the truth. Or at least as close approximation of the truth as I can get to. I'm not a Mormon historian, but if I had the cash I'd almost be willing to drop it on the current small press printings of A Journal of Discourses just to be able to have the history accessible to my finger tips. Some of the stuff in those books 26 books have actually caused people to question their faith. The LDS prophets and their apostles didn't mix words back in the day, and honestly a lot of stuff in the early Mormon Church (and the middle years as well) would just not sit well with today's population (or a lot of today's members).
There are a lot of people who celebrate Pioneer Day here in Utah (read 80 to 90% of the state) and there are, honestly, quite a few non LDS folk that contribute to the day. But when the state shuts down (though nothing that is at a federal level of course) what more can you do than get in on the celebration? I suppose I'm just becoming a grouch, but really Pioneer is not a celebration of Utah's statehood, it's a celebration of Mormons. Hey, that's ok. With all the flak the LDS church has been getting lately, perhaps I should just let this one go.
I won't. But I probably should.
Labels: Bias, Personal, Religious Criticism
Well, Revenge of the Sith will have to wait, as well as the original trilogy of films. The copies I had were bought for my nephew by me. He paid me for them and I ordered them from Amazon for him. He came to get them before I had a chance to watch the final film of the prequels earlier this week. So you'll have to wait a couple weeks till I pick up my own copy of the films.
Till then I'll focus on other things.
I'm not going to talk about Batmen (haven't seen it) or the horrible tragedy in Colorado (rather not give commentary to that right now) I would rather talk about...
My dog.
My dog is pretty awesome. My niece (cousin to the nephew above) found her in a little draw that she has to drive up when going home from Roosevelt. She was bedraggled and starved half to death. She took her home and fed her, give her a brush (though it only helped a small amount) and took care of her for about a month before I got her.
I'd just lost my own dog about a month and a half before, and through careful manipulation, and constant badgering my sister convinced my mother to take the dog, which they had named Shasta, with the promise to have her spayed.
So a little over 3 years ago (it was July 3rd if memory serves me correctly) Shasta was brought to the house. She was skittish, and still is around a few certain people. But mostly she was lethargic. She'd just gone through a major surgery. I fawned over her, and held her (when she got well enough to hold) and soon her and became best buddies. Now she's my constant companion when I'm home. She doesn't like to fetch, she likes to run though and man can I get her running (with surprisingly little effort on my part). We don't feed her table scraps, though she does get the occasional crust of bread or bit of cheese. (She loves cheese!) She loves her belly rubbed. Though most of the time she's doing it to show submissiveness to folks.
She's incredibly territorial. Which is usually a male dog trait. I've seen her chase dogs out of the yard that are three times her size. She doesn't fight though, and she loves to chase after the wild cats that live around the house.
I sure love her. She's probably the one thing that helps keep me sane.
Labels: Personal
