puntiglio.com

Last weekend I was sitting in a Wendy’s restaurant when a mother and her two children sat down at the table next to mine and began eating their lunch. As soon as the oldest boy (I’m guessing 10 years old) tried his first french fry, he reported to his mother that they were far to salty and that she needed to return them and get him new ones.

This is where it got interesting.

Before responding to her sons request, she took out her phone, opened up Google and found this image (I’m sure you have all seen it before – it only took her about a minute to find it on her phone):

Showing her son the image, she asked, “how do you think the child in that picture would feel about you throwing away those fries because they have too much salt on them?”

To my amazement and delight, the young man then asked his mother if it would be okay for him to wipe the extra salt off before he ate his fries, or if that would be bad as well (she said “that would be fine”).

Kudos to both of them…

Annually in the United States 34 million tons of food waste is generated each year, 33 million tons of that is simply thrown away (the other million tons – 3% of the total – is recovered and recycled). The average American household throws away 14% of the food they purchase. There are some good resources for managing your food waste here

My take away from all of this was a personal wake up call to take a look at the areas in my life where I am a bit too entitled. I won’t be sending back a steak because its a touch over-cooked any time soon… that’s for sure.

Remember way back when I did movie reviews… here’s one for old times sake.

There is probably going to be a spoiler or two… so think about that if you haven’t seen it and intend to do so.

I’ll cut right to the chase, because, despite there being a lot to like about this movie, there was one aspect that left me walking out of the theater wishing it was made while I was still in college so I could spend the entire night/weekend/whatever talking about it with my oh so smart and worldly (sarcasm there, in case that wasn’t obvious) friends.

The last scene alone would have provided hours of poetic waxing about the commodification of sex, the dysfunctional aftermath of abuse, and the joyously flawed character reveal… tantalizingly delayed until the very end and yet not really withheld at all.

There are so many conclusions that can be drawn throughout the movie about the relationship building between Lisbeth and Mikael; however, in the end – regardless of what you thought would happen, or what you thought should happen – it went down exactly as it should.

In the movie, we do not see any significant relationship building between the main characters. While we witness extreme circumstances leading to outlandish actions, we are made aware of nothing foundational between Salander and Blomkvist. We see sex (which at first seems like mercy sex, and then seems like utility sex, but never appears to be passion or affection), we see inter-dependence, we even see a life saved; but we never see commonality or synchronicity.

Surely, to Lisbeth, the act of sexually communing with Mikael was a major investment. Her sexuality has always been an unhealthy yet integral part of her value. People have abused her for it and blackmailed her for it and now she had found a place where she actually wanted to not only use it… but perhaps find meaning in it.

Mikael, by contrast, in sleeping with Salander, is cheating for at least the second straight time (that we know of) and appears to tragically undervalue their physical intimacy. It was inviting, fun, and enjoyable…but never appeared to be terribly significant.

The inevitable collision of these values was foreshadowed well by his distraction during their encounter in the hotel and climaxed (pun intended) fantastically in the final scene.

Blomkvist, of course, goes back to his life – including his married girlfriend; oblivious to the idea that anything significant was going on with Salander. Lisbeth, by contrast, confides in her most (only?) trusted companion that she has started forging a relationship with someone that he “would like” (or “approve of”, can’t remember which word she used but the intent was the same); only to find him laughing arm in arm with the previously mentioned other woman.

The couple in front of me at the theater, as the credits started to roll, began to speculate on whether it was his daughter (we only see the woman from behind, so the part about his being with the married woman above is my speculation… and clearly what you are supposed to think), or if he was going out with her one last time to break up with her… or… or… or.

I haven’t read the books (although I am about to start as I see tremendous potential beyond just a good intrigue novel now), so I don’t know what comes next. Perhaps the half-fullers in front of me are right on one of their guesses; and, honestly, I won’t have my feelings hurt if they are and everything I have speculated on is dead wrong. There is a certain pleasure to be taken in thinking that these two broken people might be just what each other needs to cobble a happy and productive life out of their respective pasts.

But, if their not, and it is as I saw it… while it won’t be all “happy Hollywood,” this movie is a great and candid look into humanity and the ravages of abuse… and one hell of a conversation starter.

Even if it is just a few years too late for me to take full advantage of it…

I often think that dedicating ones time to eradicating propaganda might be a more productive undertaking than the fight against hunger, homelessness, or the pursuit of world peace. In fact, the former might just be the most effective method for hastening the realization of the latter causes.

If we could get beyond who’s fault the situation is, and focus – instead – on the situation in need of repair; it seems to me that we would become infinitely more capable of fixing what ails us.

So here’s a thought… spend a week (longer if you wind up enjoying it… or finding it productive… or both) finding no fault in others. Feel free to recognize situations that need remedy, and certainly feel empowered to work toward resolving them. However, do not seek the cause (other than to assist with the solution, of course), do not seek to blame, do not seek accountability. Don’t even seek a learning/teaching opportunity (other than the example you set by working to rectify the situation). After all, if a situation is bad enough enough to solicit blame, there is probably something more important to do anyway (i.e. fixing it).

… right around 98.6 (give or take a degree or two) to be specific. That’s pretty hot, right? The average bath is just over 100 degrees, and I know that’s hot. If they get much colder, its not so good (for either of us).

What I don’t like, however, is our society’s obsession with looks and body size. What I have always looked for (physically) in a women is someone who takes care of themselves, is healthy, and – because of these things – has a reasonable expectation for being around for the long run.

If you care enough about yourself to eat (relatively) right, be at least somewhat physically active, and keep your mind going by reading, playing games, or whatever… I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE.

If you are a few pounds “overweight” (whatever that means) or a few pounds “underweight” (ibid) and it is your natural weight for your lifestyle, then you are doing it right.

Note – this is not an endorsement for obesity, personal neglect or sloth. What I am advocating is an active natural lifestyle, and the results that come from that.

Study after study shows that an active and engaged mind is one of the leading “symptoms” of people who reach advanced ages. So, if you are exercising this all important organ as well… you’re probably my kinda gal.

Because the longer you stay alive… the longer you’ll be right around 98.6… and at the end of the day (or the year, or the decade, or – if your really lucky – the century) every guy loves a hot chick!

Dear Better,

With all due respect… I do not like you, and – as an adjective – I find you to be a false prophet.

Adjectives are supposed to describe something. You, by contrast, either describe something *else* or, at best, somethings relationship to something else. How am I supposed to impart to my children that their self worth should be based on a true and honest reflection of themselves and their character when every judgement you make is measured against an external bar? One of my pet peeves are people who elevate themselves by bringing others down… you do this like it’s your job (which, I guess, it kinda is).

I prefer a world where things are simply good or bad, on their own accord. See the difference there, there is no comparison to something else, the evaluation is based entirely on the thing being considered. That cheeseburger is good, or that cheeseburger is bad. At least the cheeseburgers in question have something to build upon… they know where they stand in the world.

Anything else – other shades of grey – are simply conditional preference. For example, “fish sticks and steak are both good. Tonight I believe I prefer the fish sticks.” Or, “fish sticks are good. While, to me, clam chowder is bad. I think I’ll go with the fish sticks.” (Did you see how that worked… either way I got yummy fish sticks!)

Stop your passive aggressive behavior and your back handed compliments, “better,” stop them now! They are unnecessary, hurtful, and add no value to the world that cannot be achieved via different means (i.e. by taking the approach outlined in the previous two paragraphs).

If we were in elementary school together my mother would call you a bully or a jerk and tell me not to hang out with you. I think I’m going to take that advice and do my best to avoid including you in any of my conversations going forward. It may be hard to do (at lest at first), habits can be hard to break, but I think it’s worth it. After all, I can’t really expect my children to judge themselves by looking in the mirror when I don’t even expect as much from myself when evaluating different brands of cookies.

Regards,
Soren

This morning on the radio I heard that the results of one of the congressional public opinion polls showed that the notion of a communist takeover was more popular than our current elected legislature (I’m not making this up… they really said that).

Wow…

Moving on… one of the refrains I have heard time and time again recently is the well thought out and solutions based answer of “throw the bums out!”

Well, I agree… kind of anyway… although I think my target is a completely different group of “bums.”

So hear it is, without delay… step 1 in my (at least) 1 step plan for “fixing” our country’s political system.

Fire each and every member of the media who has used the word “win” or “lose” (or any derivative word of those words) regarding a political action (special exemption for election results) at any point in their career. No severance if they used it in reference to the governing actions (or inaction’s) of a particular political party (i.e. “passing this legislation is a real win for the ******’s”).

Governance is not a sport or a competition. It is the process of setting the rules, climate, and societal norms under which we live as a nation. It should not be decided on a scoreboard, but rather through thoughtful deliberations by people whose primary concern is the best interests of the nation they serve. How can this be accomplished when the actions of elected officials are constantly being graded out as wins and losses… not for the people they serve, mind you, but for the political party with which they are affiliated.

Describing the governing process as a series of victories and setbacks is divisive at best, grossly negligent at worse, and should not be tolerated from those entrusted to keep the public informed of the goings on in Washington (or state capitals, or counties, or cities, etc.). The only “team” anyone involved in government should be playing for is The United States of America; and the only wins and losses recorded and acknowledged, should be for the nation as a whole.

As for all of those newly out of work political reporters… ESPN must have like 37 channels by now right? Seems right up their alley…

As good (or bad) as the Occupy movement is in your mind, it continues to grow, evolve and attempt to shape the future of our nation. I have heard this grass roots movement compared to everything from the Arab Spring, to Kent State to the Tea Party movement. All wrong, in my opinion… but I can see where each of those comparisons was born.

I have gone back and forth on the value of the measures, mission, and message a number of times in trying to figure out my level of support v. my level of criticism, but to date have not really established a definitive position on it.

However, on my way in to work today I did have a thought that I think I can hold fast to. If the Occupy was a start up company, I do not think I would be willing to invest my money in it.

I could point to things like scope creep, lack of leadership, and embracing “hope” as a strategy… but the crux of my position rests on (the lack of) one simple guiding core tenant of a solid startup. Some sort of viable exit strategy.

I’m fairly convinced that no one (involved in the movement or not) knows where this thing is actually going, and what is going to come if it. There is no quantifiable measure for success, there is just ambiguous action.

Their voices have certainly been heard… so that’s not what they are waiting for.

Many have invoked police action elevating it from a protest to actual civil unrest… so they’re not waiting for that.

They have drummed up support across the country… so that can come off the “to do” list as well.

And yet… there is no real change in the movement, no new goals, no plan for action. And again, perhaps most importantly, there is no path to disengaging. You cannot simply protest forever (well, you can… but you can’t accomplish anything by doing so).

It’s great to be “about” something, and I get that they have a mission and message worth at least considering… but… like that guy in college who could wax philosophical all night long, but didn’t actually do his homework, graduate or get a job… until you do something (other than talk) about the principles you have developed, ultimately, there is no point in having done it.

What would i need to see to change my tune? Something like “we are here until **** changes” or “we are not giving up until **** is repealed.” **** can be a list, I get that the movement is fragmented and diversified… if you really are trying to represent 99% of 307 million people, you’re probably going to have a couple of issues to address.

Maybe what the movement needs is a good CEO. Many startups begin a little ambiguous, with a grand idea and no idea how to close the deal on it. Most of those young companies bring in big time, experienced leadership to help when they start to really grow (and seek money, for example)… maybe that’s the next step for Occupy.

But, until they figure out where, how and when they are going – compelling or not – I just don’t think I could hang my hat on their coat rack…

When I was a young angst ridden youth (early 20′s to be specific) I sat down for a heart to heart intervention with one of my most beloved relatives (the names have been omitted to protect the innocent… in this case… the remarkably innocent). This was the first step in my grand plan for impacting/changing/saving the world (after all when you are ~23, nothing is more clear than that “fact” that the world is just one “you” away from being saved).

We were talking because I had heard the term “mighty white of you” for the one-too-many’ith time and something needed to be done about it. I was strong in my convictions, on point with my arguments, and relentless in my assault on his (presumably) hardened positions; pointing out that being white does not by default make you better, therefore “mighty white of you” does not mean what you think it means – in fact, it pretty much means the opposite of that… at least where the speaker is concerned.

I hammered my point home and went in for the kill… “does this make sense, what I’m saying… do you see why it is wrong… do you see why you need to stop!!!”

Only then did I notice the crestfallen look upon his face. Only then did I realize I had him at “have you thought about what you are implying, or would be implying to a person that was not white, if you said that around them” (which was my first sentence).

The simple fact is that he had never thought about it, it is how he had grown up. Further he was mortified about the message he was projecting, and I’m happy to report I have never heard those words from his mouth again. To him, it was a common phrase, genuinely no different than “nice work,” “good job,” or “that was thoughtful.” It had no basis in bigotry or race, it was “just a phrase.”

Which, of course, is the real and true evil of such phrases. They become part of the fabric of our society and bigotry is propagated by the unknowing. As such, generation after generation continues the subconscious (and in some cases conscious, deliberate, and malicious) process of stereotyping.

I don’t have enough fingers on both of my hands to count the number of people I personally know who grew up listening to Brazil Nuts being referred to as “Nigger Toes.” As part of Operation All-The-World-Needs-is-Soren (TM) I have spoken to every one of them about this at one point or another.

I have one nose more than is required to count the number of people who thought it was a racist remark, or harbor any dislike toward people of (any) color. All of them, when confronted, said that, again, it was “just a phrase” to those saying it… that they had no idea how it might be perceived (that may or may not be true in all cases… but that argument was made universally, and for the purposes of today’s conversation that is more than good enough for me… on another day probably not… but today, yep).

Which brings me to this gem making its way around the internet (etc.).

As I scan that “checklist”, I realize that I know many people (including myself) that use (or have used) many of those phrases to refer to “weak” or “inferior” people.

Dear World (including myself):

Have you ever stopped to think how that phrase might make a woman (or homosexual) feel?

Best regards – your self-appointed savior (and guilty partner),
Soren

Options two through five on that list are easily and patently offensive, one and six are bad in their own right but perhaps passable, eight implies things that I’d rather not get into (cough Sandusky cough)… but… lets just say anyone who uses that phrase with understanding and intent has some serious issues. I’m also not so sure why turning to ones mother (or anyone else for that matter) for support is such a bad idea???

But I digress…

Items two through five are my focus right now. These phrases are part of our lexicon (along with “that is so gay” and “you are such a fag” and “awww… did you get some sand in you v@%$#&.” This is how we talk to each other and convey messages of disapproval. In other words it is part of our cultural norm – with or without intent – to vilify and disrespect over half of our population, and most of us probably aren’t even aware (at a consistently conscious level anyway) that we are doing it.

“Nigger Toes” doesn’t fly as a term anymore (at least not in any of the circles I hang around in). If you were to say it, you would, at the very least, have to endure a mini-sermon from the newest/nearest defender of the universe. In other circles, you’d probably just get your butt kicked. “Mighty White,” I feel safe in saying has met a similar fate, along with the majority of its (covertly?) bigoted brethren.

It is 2012, I’d like to think it was about time for the terms on the above checklist (and any others like them) to meet the same fate.

With all due respect to mammals, insects and fish (et. al.) … I think that’d be might human of us…

PS… for the record, I didn’t mention it above because I was on another tilt…but… the implication that somehow some way “real-men” are superior to women – especially as differentiated by having successfully hurt someone else – is wrong in so many ways I don’t have enough blog space (which is, of course, pretty close to infinite) to begin to cover it. Suffice it to say… its just stupid.

Note – “Occupy Us” is a (potential) series focusing on what I think is the first thing that needs to be changed in our country (the world?) in order to make any lasting substantive improvements… specifically – ourselves.

By now most of you have probably seen the video. Allegedly a Texas Judge beating his then 16 year old daughter with a belt. It is not a friendly “spanking” so you might not want to, but if you haven’t seen it… here it is.

Much like yesterday I’m going to skip the formalities of talking about how obviously offensive and unfortunate this incident is. I’m quite sure there is nothing I can say that will add any value, understanding, or positive influence to any of the parties directly involved; and if I can’t help ‘em… I probably should leave ‘em alone to work it out (along with the help of the fine Texas justice system).

However, what I am feeling inclined to talk about is this. I have heard, over and over again today, how he deserves to get beaten down himself, how he should be taken out behind the woodshed, and how he should receive a blanket party. Further, I have heard he should be put to death (legally or illegally if necessary).

I have a serious problem with this. That type of thinking, responding to bad behavior with violence is exactly what he was doing that has all of us so upset… to coin the old phrase… an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

The scale is clearly different, and the victim far less vulnerable, but the action is essentially the same. As such, I cannot condone any retribution against him without, in doing so, condone his actions in the first place… which is not something I am ever going to do.

Don’t get it twisted, I’m not saying he is, was, or ever should be justified or vindicated for his actions. However vigilante justice went away for a reason and there is absolutely no reason to stage a come back now, over this.

We have a criminal system to handle this, a system that, as its stewards, we need to either trust or change. What we are not entitled to do is attempt to supplant it with our own individual notions of what should be done. they have a word for that… anarchy.

More importantly though, if we take this approach – advocating violence as a result of this (or any other) transgression, even by just talking about it… we are modeling the same behavior that we are sickened by in this video. There’s a word for that also… hypocrisy.

I prefer “Hillary’s” twitter position on the matter, pleading for help and justice for him and repentance from him… but no revenge toward him (other than the re-election barb… which, I think probably is a logical outcome from all of this). It’s nice to think that someone who grew up in such an apparently troubled environment might have overcome that and that they at least appear to have a constructive, balanced, and healthy view on the big picture.

We create and recreate the culture that we live in by our words and actions… a call for non-violent justice seems like as good a place as any to effect change.

Fair warning: If you read this blog with any regularity (well, if you did when I wrote with any regularity, that is), and are here because you like what you read when you visit… this post may not be for you…

Having said that, what I know about my readers, in general, is that they are a thoughtful, reflective, open-minded bunch. As I begin, I am counting on those qualities to stay alive (or at least keep my car and home free from eggs).

Having said THAT… I shall begin.

This morning I saw the following picture/satire/cartoon/whatever making its way around Facebook. It instantly resonated with me on many levels… I’m sure it will with you as well:

~insert outrage here~

(actually, no, insert the outrage in the comments area below… it sparks conversation and exposes more people to the thought process… in short… its good to do!)

Did you get enough off your chest… do you feel better yet? Probably not…

~insert more outrage – with a side order or anger and/or despair ~

I agree with most of what just went through your collective minds… 110%.

HOWEVER…

I also have other thoughts. Since I think we can all agree on the reprehensible (or at least objectionable) ones… I’m going to skip over those and move on to the more potentially esoteric or fringe thoughts.

First of all, I’m not at all sure that beauty is any more or less relevant or valid of a judgment criteria, assuming you are going to judge someone in the first place. Secondly, I think if you were to assemble all of the Disney princes, you’d find the same criteria applies. The difference would be that instead of saying “if you are beautiful, you will be approved of and courted” it would say something closer to “if you are handsome you can get away with pretty much any aberrant or otherwise poor behavior and you will still be thought of as desirable and pined over.”

In fact, inspired by this train of thought, I have found just such a picture:

See what I mean? But lets get back to beauty as a criteria…

I’m not sure I can go along with the mass think that using someones attractiveness (as it effects you) is somehow a lesser criteria than something else. Using it to the exclusion of all others, is probably going to get you into some trouble, sure, but to discount it as shallow and base I think is wrong. The proverbial baby is getting thrown out with the bath water.

Different people certainly have different strengths; some are more conventionally attractive, some more intelligent, some more humorous… others may be all of these things. However, I don’t think that being more intelligent trumps being more attractive or being funnier, in a general sense. At its base, human life is about survival (some would add “of the fittest” to that statement) and beauty has its place in the area of survival, just like any other attribute (if you don’t believe me, interview a flower someday).

Clearly, society today has placed far to great an emphasis on appearance… and within that, to great an emphasis on micro-waistlines. Even more than the the Disney gals, the Disney guys picture demonstrate this to be true. But again, just because someone does too much of- or with – a good thing… that does not make it a bad thing (it’s kind of like a top 40 song ).

I short, Disney’s deficiency, in my opinion, is not in makeing the women (or men) attractive, but rather in rendering them lacking in other attributes, or convictions. And, I’m not even really sure that argument stands, really. We all learned in school that hero’s (good, interesting ones anyway) are burdened by a tragic flaw (aside: it constantly amazes me how I am not a super-hero… as I am resplendent in tragic – and not as tragic – flaws). They must work through this burden in order to be the transformative beings we want them to become by the end of the story.

In the Disney version of The Little Mermaid… written for kids… there are some very clear (and crushing to those who know the original story) plot deviations made for its audience. What kids do not want to see, is the person they have spent the last 90 minutes bonding with turn into the (highly suspect, and kind of icky) bubble bath like stuff that gets on your ankles at the beach in an act of Shakespearean level love and devotion. Lacking an appropriate ending, Disney did what all good capitalists do, and took the path of least resistance. Unfortunate, but who am I (or you) to decide that giving up your identity and becoming human is more tragic or wrong than giving up your life and becoming sea foam? In the end, in both stories, she makes a sacrifice for love… and I’m not sure that is the worst thing for which glorious sacrifices have ever been made.

Just like (most of) you, I have issues with reducing women into eye candy and elevating men into risk-taking-result-creating-world-saving machines, I really do. However, much like I believe subjugating the (traditionally attributed) feminine quality of intuition in favor of the (regularly assigned) masculine mode of applying logic to a situation when seeking solutions is a mistake; I, likewise, question the wisdom of reducing the role or importance of beauty.

What I am more inclined to take to task is the overly simplistic black and white thinking that permeates our modern discourse. We are, by and large, a laze society that no longer even takes the full cover into consideration when judging a book, let alone its internal contents. When we aren’t being lazy we are moving too fast to recognize the attributes in others that distinguish one biped from another. Is she funny? How could i begin to know… who has the time to chit chat, unless there is some other visible ROI for doing so.

Can we seriously blame Disney for “dumbing down” classic stories when we as a society in general are unwilling to palate them as originally written?

Disney is a business, existing to entertain people. They are not here to establish social norms, rather they are tasked to work within what is established by you and I… the actual members of our society. By contrast John and Jane Doe (AKA you and I) and our daily activities do define social norms, cultural values and acceptable behaviors. If there is a scantily clad co-ed selling us beer, an ruggedly handsome man selling us after shave, or a Disney princess extolling the virtues of caking on makeup to catch a man… its because we as a society have instructed the creators of this drivel to do so. Those comercials and movies are not made because someone thinks they are cool and wants to dump that thought process on us, they are created from hours of extensive market research, customer surveys and – more than anything else – retail response to the previous campaigns that paved the way for what we are watching today.

As I have said time and time again about things like sports (or entertainer, or CEO, or teacher, etc. etc. etc.) salaries if you don’t like what you are being served… change your order. If there is one thing I know about business – all business – they are going to produce that which is going to be purchased. Businesses don’t care what they sell, only that they sell. All we have to do, as a society, is send a clear message that we want something different, something other than heaving breasts and massive biceps, something different than cookie cuter barbie’s and chiseled Ken doll/GI Joes types.

Assuming, of course, that we really do want something different. We all do want something different… right???

Sir Charles had it right…

Mind you, I’m not crazy about anyone using that mantra as an excuse to be a beacon of how not to behave; however, the fact of the matter is that neither he, nor any other professional athlete should be considered a role model. We do not follow, cheer for, idolize (whatever) athletes for the quality of their character, we pay attention to them because either they win, or the try to win games (preferably but not exclusively for our favorite teams).

We don’t really know anything about these guys and yet we want to be “like Mike” (that’s a nod to my generation… today’s kids want to be King James or – shudder – Brock Lesnar etc.). I get wanting to have their abilities… especially in that rub-the-lamp-and-get-it-without-working sort of way… but actually looking up to them and wanting to be them?

Again, Barkley (and Nike) had it right. Nike has come up with several of the better endorsement themes over the years, and by better, I mean somewhat responsible. This one comes to mind as well:

But… if it is a role model you are looking for, I’d suggest you look elsewhere. Notice the young man/ladie holding the door for others at the movie theater and acknowledge the role model before you. Take the time to tip your hat to a volunteer at a nearby hospital or shelter, recognizing their admirable behavior. Next time you see a parent making it all work and putting their kids first, understand that this is an actual act of character, worthy of impersonation.

Being a real role model takes consistent character and conviction; its about the litany of little things done over and over again despite lack of thanks or recognition. I’t not about the glam shot… and its anything but a slam dunk.

First of all… this is not a breaking story. It’s not a bent story, its not even a slightly askew story… instead its a straight as an arrow and old as dirt story.

(that’s funny cause… ya know… “bend don’t break…” or at least it would be if I were funnier and cleverer than I actually am… but now you know the kind of goofy joke that goes through my mind as I write ).

“Old” being a relative term in the movie industry, the story is from last fall/winter, when the movie Blue Valentine was purchased and its NC17 rating was disputed (successfully… but that’s unimportant for the purposes of this conversation) drawing attention to the scene in the movie that was the primary cause of the rating. Specifically, oral sex performed upon a women by her husband.

This is not about the MPAA and its rating system, I was actually pretty chill with the original NC17 rating, and am also just fine with the revised R rating as well (although I think I prefer the NC17 for that movie as well as… say… the Hangover; elevator scene during the credits, I’m looking at you! Except… I’m not… cause… ewwwww).

But again… I digress…

Here’s my question*, why would you give an NC17 rating (read: additional “protection” for our kids) to this movie – and that action – while routinely giving R ratings to movies with violent, often graphic, rape scenes? How is an intimate encounter between to consenting (and married) adults conceivably worse than a physically abusive intrusion upon a persons… well.. person?

I guess can hear one argument forming, something to the effect of:

In movies where a rape is depicted, it is always clearly indicated that it is wrong, the person committing the act is properly villianized and in the vast majority of the cases, is punished (usually in the form of a grisly death). In other words, the lesson is that if you do bad things, you will be recognized as doing so and treated accordingly. In short it is a little dash of “don’t do it.” Whereas, for those who find oral sex (or at least the depicting of it) morally objectionable, the scene in question does no such thing. In fact, if anything it is an endorsement of the behavior and perhaps a “gateway scene” to more pornographic dalliances in our movies. Children watching a movie with a rape scene will be admonished by the consequences to not do such a thing, children watching this movie could very well be encouraged to go out and have oral sex. Etc…

Having carefully considered this position… I have come up with the following prepared response:

Bull shit.

(No rights reserved… you may quote me on that if you like… no charge.)

That is a lovely way of excusing and empowering the grist mill of crap that the general public eats up (and even demands) as part of their cinematic experience today; but really… what is the value in seeing the 4th rape scene in the last 8 action movies you have watched?

Researching this topic I found this list today. Let me tell you a little story about the first movie on that list (thereby skipping the obvious point about there even being such a list). When I was (a freshman or sophomore) in college, for some reason completely foreign to me now, I rented that movie. I sat down to watch it with my poor unsuspecting uncle… he made it about 5 minutes; I, possibly 10. It was horrible, violent, and lacking an any discernible value. Every person I have ever met who has seen it has the same thing to say about it – “worst, most disgusting, movie I ever saw.”

Scan down the list to number 14 (scan quickly… you are not going to miss anything of particular value)… same movie, 2010 remake. Seriously… this movie needed to be remade? (as an aside… several of the ’70′s genre movies were remade in ’09 and ’10… really? really???) The 2010 version of the movie’s MPAA rating – R (same rating it got in 1978). “An aspiring writer is repeatedly gang-raped, humiliated, and left for dead by four men” is okay for an R rating, but the scene in Blue Valentine required an appeal to get its rating reduced from NC17?

Maybe I am missing something, maybe there is some logical path to this rating and the society that seems to silently accept it. Any ideas? Please… I need someone to help me understand how this makes sense and how as a society we can find this acceptable…

Because if not, perhaps our society and its “norms” and levels of acceptability is really what should be getting the NC17 rating… I don’t really want my kids watching and learning from a society that is okay with that kind of moral disparity… do you?

* note – this is not actually my question, it was actually brought up to me in conversation… and resonated enough for all of this blather to happen!

Last night I had a meeting. It was a school fundraising meeting which means that, like most school related meetings I go to, it was one part Soren (man) and several parts woman.

Women work differently than I do, and different than groups of men that I work with do. Not just the group last night, but almost all of the groups I work with that are mostly women. It’s pretty remarkable to watch, actually. This was especially true last night as this particular group was a bit more focused, motivated and driven than some groups I have worked with before.

So many times throughout the night I wanted to pull my hair out, I had to bite my tongue because I wanted to scream… “We aren’t doing anything here, we are talking around and around and around the issues but not coming up with any plan, any todo’s… any-THING!!!” They bandied far flung (and practical… and everything in between) ideas around; laughed about them, weighed their merits talked about how cousin Betsys daughter would love that one in particular etc. etc. etc. However, whenever it came time to nail down the idea, concept, plan, whatever… the topic just switched to something else… and we (read: they – both my mouth and mind are far too slow to keep up with a fully charged estrogen enriched brain storming session) chatted up the next concept, and so on… I seriously thought I was going to explode…

But then, at the end, as I have learned it always does… the magic happened.

“Okay, so…” (which I think is some sort of secret girl code for “abra cadabra”, “shazam” or “expecto something-or-another”) is the queue, and is followed by “I’m going to do X, Heidi you will handle Y, right? Melissa, you’ve got the “Z” and Mandy can you fit “B” into your schedule this week”… “yep” “got it” and “planning on it” come right after that… notebooks are closed, bills are paid, tables are pre-bused and hugs are in progress. I… as usual… am trying to figure out what just happened.

How were they all on the same page? How did they all know what each of them were going to do; how the work was going to be divided etc.??? I’ve been doing this for years, it is still a mystery to me.

I’m not saying women are better at planning than men (I’m not saying they aren’t either)… but it is nonetheless amazing to watch how it comes together; and I’m pretty sure, based on my experiences over the past several years that no valid case can be made for women being at least equally capable of pulling off big projects, making the big decisions, or any of the other half-baked ideas that created a glass ceiling for them for so many years (centuries?).

My guess is those ideas came from some guy who attended a pre-historic PTA meeting… but got overwhelmed, didn’t stay for the end and missed the magic. Too bad for him… it really is pretty impressive.

Last night, while browsing my facebook feed before bed I saw the following post from a friend that cracked me up:

Arugula is the Muhammad Ali of lettuce.

Everything was good until I saw the following response:

does that mean it wont fight for its country but it will for money?

To which I quickly retorted:

Interesting interpretnation of “its country” I don’t recall Muhammad Ali’s country being attacked…guess I better bone up on my history…

I’m not going to address the response to that for several reasons, the most significant of which is this: his reply would not have existed had I followed one of the foundational tenets of the value system I have tried to instill in my children since they were born, in three words: “Think. Then speak.”

Had I taken responsibility for my actions before running my mouth (fingers?), I would not have elicited a response laden with personal attacks and non-veiled (but somewhat amusing) threats. The fact of the matter is, I would not have elicited a response at all.

Now, before I go to far down this road, and as an aside, I stand by the intent of my comment. I do not believe it is okay to run someone down behind their back (especially years after the fact, with a false accusation on the side). Further, if you are willing to make fun of someone behind their back, you really shouldn’t be all bent if someone makes fun of you to your face. What that commentor posted, was, in my opinion, wrong on numerous fronts and standing by idly letting it go is tantamount to endorsing it, in my opinion, and not something that would be easy for me to do under any circumstances.

However, my sarcasm wasn’t necessary, and picking a fight on a friends wall is certainly inappropriate under any circumstances. I know these things, but, in failing to think before I spoke; the filter, intrinsic within that knowledge, never had a chance to vet my words. As a result… in short… I was an ass.

It’s such a simple rule, really, “Think. Then speak.” But sometimes, being human, it is hard to do.

I have apologized to my friend (publicly on his wall), and extend the same apology here in case he is reading. The remaining task is to decide if there is a family values learning experience here for the boys or if this story of a parental slip-up is best left untold…

With regard to my opinion of his singing ability, nothing has changed… I don’t think there is a chance in the world that Michael Buble could win on The Voice, American Idol, or even Americas Got Talent. He can sing, and, given how immensely clear it is that every word of every song that he sings is coming directly from his mouth (without even the benefit of a back track) that is something; but, he’s not that great at it (not bad, just not great).

However, if I knew he was coming back in three months, I would purchase tickets for the show today. Yep, I said it… I’d go again.

Why? Because the guy is an entertainer, and a good one at that. Granted I went to a concert and most of the entertainment I got was from a comedian (him), but I really don’t care about that. The guy was hilarious, filled the stage and the room completely and made good on his opening promise of “whatever you guys give me, I’ll give back to you 10 fold” (he might have given the sometimes slightly stoic Boise audience more than 10 fold, actually). He swears, offends, and even had cause to call him self “such an asshole” for one of his antics… it was fantastic.

Picture the class clown from high school (with a bit of an edge), who also was a soloist in the school singers (I think they call it Glee on tv); combine the best of these two personas and throw them on stage with a very capable band… ladies and gentlemen… Michael Buble.

PS… If his stage presence is anything like his real life personality, I’d hang with this guy in a New York minute.

No big intro here… I’m going to jump right in… I find myself wondering if the concept of time zones has run its course and the world wouldn’t be better served by using one universal time.

As I ponder this I can see many reasons to having the same time everywhere, and very few (non-babysitting, or habitual) reasons for having time zones.  Sure, there is some familiarity (and associated comfort) with the idea of having the sun high over head around “noon,” but, does that really add any practical value to our lives?

In 1884, when time zones (as we currently know them) were first implemented the world was a very different place.  In a word, it was huge.  Traveling distances that would require crossing time zones (especially multiple time zones in a short period of time) was rare; and since the telephone was essentially still being invented (AT&T was created the year after our existing time zone system was implemented, and the first coast to coast long distance call was not completed for another 31 years) rapid communications across time zones was not common either.

127 years later, things are a bit different.

People jump from time zone to time zone daily, even hourly.  When I travel to the East Coast I have to reset all of my time pieces (admittedly, many of them change themselves) and the reset them when I return.  If I land in Chicago on the way I need to figure out not only what time it is there, but how that relates to both where I came from and where I am going.  In New York (or wherever I might be going back East) I need to re-calibrate again.

We telephone people across the country and the world from devices we carry around in our pockets or on our belts.  When someone in Atlanta wants to set up a teleconference with me, the first question is “what time” and the second question is always “my time or yours.”  Frequently that second question is forgotten, and more often than I’d like to admit, meetings have been missed because of a misunderstanding (read: lack of communication) based on who’s time the meeting was supposed to occur.

The largest casualty of this change, in my opinion would be New Years Eve… whoever gets “midnight” at 11am is gonna kinda be bummed, and I get that.  However, I’m not sure I dislike that more than I like watching a ball drop in New York that actually happened two hours ago… I’m not really that into living the lie, ya know?

One global time zone would mean that when my cousins in Denmark said “call me at 3pm” we’d both know exactly when that call was going to happen… without wondering who owned the 3pm in question.

One global time zone would mean that my flight itin wouldn’t imply it takes 15 minutes to fly from Boise to San Francisco, and 2 hours and 15 minutes to fly back.

One global time zone would mean that when I traveled, all of my time pieces would always have the right time… even if there was no network to connect to for some reason.

One global time zone would mean that it was the same day everywhere on earth.

I am of the mind that time zones are an antiquated idea who’s time has come… and gone.  My fiancee disagrees with me on this one… how about you?

As I drove to work this morning, listening to the coverage of the eroding case against Dominique Strauss-Kahn (GSK), I could not help but think that nothing good can come of this.

Let me begin by saying that my concerns are not for GSK himself. He is a married man who, by his own admission – and this admission is supported by his highly structured legal defense, had consensual (at least on his part… her part remains somewhat in question) intimate relations with someone other than his wife. I do not offer, nor do I encourage, any sympathy for where that action leads him. I have wandered off the path of appropriateness in my past, I didn’t expect anyone to excuse my actions then and I don’t expect any greater grace for him now. He made his bed… now he gets to lie in it.

However, there are other sides to this coin and they are deeply lamentable.

If the alleged victim is telling the truth, then the events of today are yet another example of the purchasing power of influence, affluence and propaganda. In this case another powerful man will have skated off to innocence on a smear campaign… strategically excusing his horrendous actions by bringing the public perception of his victim down to his own heinous level and excusing himself in the process.

Villainizing a victim to excuse the actual perpetrator is not new, but at some point we, as a society, need to put an end to it. The continued process of excusing our own actions because someone else is just as bad or worse can only lead to a gradual – yet complete – degradation of our society. It is the fuel that allows the next rich powerful person to muck rake in an effort to excuse their actions… and the cycle continues, further empowered every time a GSK, or Kobe Bryant (et. al.) goes down this road.

If she is lying, and – increasingly – it is looking like this might be the case, the scenario is arguably just as bad. If she has, for example, colluded among others with the nefarious intent of bring down Mr. Straus-Kahn what she is really assailing is victim and women’s rights, protections, and credibility. Every victim in the world will have been metaphorically kicked in the shins by this woman. She herself will be empowering the same cycle discussed above, just from the other side of the proverbial “tracks.” Her actions will strike at the veracity of every sexual assault claim that comes after it; by fabricating an assault, she compromises the credibility of victims of real attacks, leaving them vulnerable to unwarranted assailing of their character.

Whether “the system” is being “supported” from upper (DSK) or lower (by the maid) end of the socio-ecomonic strata is of no consequence… the net result is the same.

At this point, no matter how this shakes out… the bottom line is that the only “thing” that benefits is the cycle of compromised integrity. The only tangible results that can be reasonably expected are more attorneys and detectives specializing in the deconstruction a person’s life, more wealthy/powerful people expecting to be able to get through situations of their own creation without any accountability and… most tragically… more victims having their rights, credibility, and even humanity stripped away in order to facilitate all of the above.

Bull shit.

There, I said it.

Right now, it is very popular to jump on the “LeBron is shrinking” bandwagon. Well, sorry journalistic world, you’re gonna have to sell that shit somewhere else, I ain’t buy’n it.

Several year ago, when LeBron was a high school senior and they were (in unprecedented fashion) televising his games on national tv, I watched a couple of them. While everyone else was talking about him being the next coming of MJ or Kobe, I had a different take… still do.

What I saw was a guy moving the ball around, getting teammates involved, hitting the open guy **everytime** over and over again. I saw a ridiculously tall, muscular guy handling the ball and whipping it around like a 6’2″ point guard. I saw a young Magic Johnson…

If LeBron was playing the point for Miami; doing what – I believe – LeBron does best, facilitating, those are the comparisons people would be making… and I don’t believe he would be suffering by comparison.

His passing and court awareness are comparable (although I wouldn’t go as far as to say equal), as is his rebounding. His ability to score is probably a bit better as is his athleticism and defense, although I do not believe LeBron should be focused on scoring at all. Don’t worry, the points will come… but I think 17 (like he had last night) to 25 is a great range for him. It woulf be a lot easier – and better for his team – for him to come up with another 10-15 points by passing to wide open teammates than by forcing the action himself.

LeBron’s not my favorite guy (I’ve never met him – if I did that might change…my opinion is based entirely on impressions and nothing factual), he’s not my favorite player (although, if he played the point that might change… I actually think his natural disposition on the court is very much my style of play… I’m about play-makers), and in my opinion ha has a **long** way to go before he deserves to be mentioned as one of the all time best player (although, this has more to do with time than it does deficiencies in his game). However, having said all of that… LeBron is an absolutely dominant force and (this is the news flash) continues to be one in this series.

I think he is being misused a bit… I’d like to see him initiating the Heat offense more often and looking to create his own shot a little less (note: I’m not saying scoring less, I’m saying creating his own shot less… there is a big difference… if you don’t know… you better ask somebody). But… he is not failing.

Watch his passes, watch his defense, watch his pursuit of rebounds, look (closely) at his stat lines for the series ( – removing the one very poor shooting game (game 3 – and poor shooting happens to everyone sooner or later) – and tell me you wouldn’t want that guy (17.2ppg/6.4ast/7.8reb – and those assist numbers are without the benefit of being the primary ball handler and initiator of the heats offense) running the point for your team.

If not…I’ve got some ocean front property in Montana I’d like to sell you…

Guest bloggers/writers? Interested in joining me on a topic specific thread on my blog? If so, let me know, I am going to do a series on infidelity. Trying to capture some of the basics as well as some less covered topics, and, with any luck… some new or different ideas.

I’ll be looking for pieces that are thought provoking, informative and/or controversial… the idea is to get people thinking and break out of the “before he cheats” (etc.) mentality and address a real (and growing) issue in our society (global and domestic). I’ll be looking for pieces that are “experience” pieces (people who have cheated or been cheated upon)… but not gripe or poor little me sessions. I’m also very interested in investigative or research based pieces that are less (if at all) personal but take on a side/prespective/etc. on the topic.

Whats in it for you?

1. Perhaps together we can have some sort of effect on all of this…
2. Exposure for your blog/website/whatever (each piece will have a bio and links – I get about 450 page views a day and about 140 unique visitors)
3. (and certainly most valuable) My eternal gratitude

These will be reviewed before publication, and not everything that I receive will necessarily make it to “print.”  At some point I will be wanting to bundle these entries up and have them become a meaningful collection of informative and actionable items, packaged and useful to anyone experiencing, pondering, or recovering from infidelity.

If you are interested let me know, here, on facebook, twitter, via email… whatever works for you. I will respond to all contacts I receive.  So, if you initiate contact and I don’t respond, I missed it. please remind me.   Finally… if you know someone I don’t know that should be contributing, please forward on my invitation. I am interested in anyone who can add value.

ps… I will have prompts if you want them (probably by early next week) or you can submit your own thoughts and ideas.

Note – Currently I have no intention of selling this package at any point.  Should that change, any contributors would have first the options to pull their contribution and second- should they elect not too – the rights to a share of any revenue generated (amount of revenue share to be determined by me – it will be presented to you before you have to choose to be part of the final product or not).  Again, this is not overly likely to happen as it is not my intent to sell this… but… I’m also not silly enough to close any doors.  The important thing is that if this gets bundled and sold…no ones work will be included unless they want it to be.

It’s not because Barry Bonds hit seven hundred some odd home runs that I’m inspired; I don’t hate him for that like some do…but it doesn’t impress me much (all things considered).

It’s not because, for the first several years of his career (mostly, but not exclusively, in Pittsburgh) he was the epitome of an all around player.

It’s not even because (although this gets toward the heart of this piece) of visiting or offering to pay the college fees of the children of a Giants fan who was beat severely at a game in Los Angeles. (See complete story here).

Nope, its not those things… its this (from same story):

One of the coolest parts about this donation is that Bonds made it over a month ago when he visited Stow in a Southern California hospital on April 22. No mention was made to the media then and it looks like it would have still been a secret had Girardi not revealed it to the media.

Girardi, by the way, represents the man who was beaten, not Bonds.

This was, by all appearances, a completely selfless act.  Mr Bonds is a guy in dire need of some good press right now, and this would have been so easy to capitalize upon… but he didn’t.  He quietly visited the man, pledged his assistance, and went on about his life as if nothing happened. There was no chance for praise, no reason to expect anything in return… just giving… just because.

I am frequently conflicted about announced v. anonymous gifts.  On one hand – as is the case here – there is something awe inspiring about a truly selfless gift.  However, if a tree falls in the woods… blah blah blah.  I believe there is absolutely a case to be made for leading by example and inspiring others to do the same.

On April 22nd the proverbial tree toppled and none of us heard it (until Girardi decided to shout out a posthumous ”timber!” in honor of the languished lumber); and today it matters…

It matters because this is the perfect storm, a rare scenario in which we can enjoy the confluence of selflessness and inspiration; without the burden of self-aggrandizement (or however you spell it).

Not because Barry did something nice, and not because he was silent about it; not because a couple kids will get a good education, and not because their parents won’t have to worry about how to make that happen; not because Girardi spoke out about it, and not because people like Kevin Kaduk continue to do so.

It’s not because of any single thing that this matters… it’s because of them all.