Battlestar Galactica - Review (probably spoilers)

Amazing. It did not suck. In fact - it was actually good. Quite good.The show moves a little slowly in the first half, IMO but it does nicely set up just what was lost in the Cylon attack - everything. We get snapshots of the colony worlds and, of course, the Cylon activity.I had feared the 'fembots' - the human looking Cylons but the concept was handled surprisingly well. Clearly the creatures obey their directives but are capable of having their own adjenda. They were more than T&A appeal. Clearly the one that was implanted in Gais has some conflicts of interests and it was also clear they had some capacity for feeling. It was odd too, the Cylons seemed to feel some threat from the humans - which seemed to be their motiviation for the attack.I loved seeing the hard choices made by everyone who survived - from abandoning the non-FTL capable ships to the lottery for limited room on Boomer's ship. The desperation from the abandoned colonists wasn't shoved off-screen to avoid the pain and the struggle and grief of the survivors was clear as well. The conflict between the military mindset and the civilian authority was also well handled - and neither side was shown to be 'stupid'.I also have to say I was very impressed with the way they explain the reasons for the various 'retro' technologies in the ships (non-intergrated computers, a lot of manual doors etc) and colonies (fear of Cylon attack and cultural refusal to create anymore AI type computers). Then they showed why all that retro stuff was important. It wasn't just window dressing.I found myself sympathetic towards Gais, even though he's a pretty reprehensible person. I must say I loved the whole relevation of what was going to happen with him and his Cylon lover - how he reacted. And I did like his line 'the last time we saw a Cylon, they looked like walking chrome toasters!'There's been griping about the fact that the show does not slavishly follow the original series and you know - that's not neccesarily a bad thing. The orgianal series was cheesy as hell. Which doesn't mean they abandon all refrents to the orginal. Names remain, certian aspects of the uniform details remain - and the speical effects of the guns was just as the orgianl was. Oooh! And the special effects. They might have had budget constraints but they worked with them and - the battle sequences (in space) were very good.The only thing I disliked was the clear heterosexim of the moive. There is not a *single* referent to a homosexual character in the entire movie and I belive that *every* character with a speaking part is paired up with someone of the opposite gender by the end. My suspicious kink-mind wonders if they didn't change the gender of Starbuck to avoid the original series close same sex freindship between Apollo and Starbuck - and the slash potential it had.Clearly, the intent of this 'mini-series' is to whet our tastes for a series, which I certainly hope gets made.x

Heh - because I've been neglecting my journal

Someday I'll actually write something for my journal again, until them - a quiz!Millionaire playboy by day, dark knight by night.You are the world's greatest detective. You areBatman, and you are feared and respected byboth hero and villian. Which DC Super Hero Are You? brought to you by QuizillaW

Tarot

HERMIT"the meditator, philosopher, sage, wiseman"You can not and will not compromise your values andhave a desire to complete past things beforebegining the new (you value completion,perfection, and introspection highly). You area natural way-shower, sage, and seeker. Youhave an appreciation of the body and the wisdomof the earth and its natural process. You havea deep love for beauty, harmony, and order. which major arcana of the thoth tarot deck are you? short, with pictures and detailed results brought to you by QuizillaDon't usually do these things but I like Tarot stuff.

Bald Idealists (Iconography of Popular Culture 3)

There are some powerful thematic elements in the Marvel X-men universe - discrimination, acceptance, the feeling of being different and what that can mean. Many of the characters in the comics represent various aspects of these themes; lets start with the Bald Guy, Charles Xavier - the dreamer behind the Dream.There's been a lot of comment on the differences between the movies and the comics - everything from clothing styles (or lack thereof) to canon history, behavior and morality. Several people have been much more satisfied with the movie incarnation of Professor X rather than the seemingly blindly naïve professor from the older comics. Marvel too, has observed the change in readership and in Ultimate X-Men and New X-men both, Charles has become much more ambiguous in behavior and motive than his origins suggest. Most people call him more realistic and approve of his willingness to mentally manipulate or control others under the pressure of necessity. I seem to be in the minority in that I quite disagree with that choice.This is because I believe that Professor X has to be the idealistic, determinedly naïve character of the earliest comics. The one who did not allow his students to kill while sending them into life threatening situations, the one who refuses to read people's minds casually or violate their free will.Charles Xavier represents, and voices an ideal. Like all ideals, it's fit in the real world is less than perfect. He also represents the hope that people can be motivated to do good and remain good. The professor is an idealist, just as Magneto accuses, but idealism does not have to mean ignorance of the 'real world'. I do not see the professor as naïve but determined, in the face of harsh choices, to not yield to the temptation of expedience.He has asked himself some excruciatingly difficult questions: If it's wrong to invade someone's mind and bend them to my will, is it ever right?If I chose to manipulate someone's will with my powers in one circumstance, what about the next? And the next?Is it right to manipulate the minds of people, even if it will save lives? How many lives would make it worthwhile?If it's immoral to break into someone's home to gain illicit information or blackmail materiel, is it right for me to use such information I gain accidentally through my powers?I'm one of the most powerful people in the world, what should I do with that power? People manipulate and control each other in all kinds of ways, is using my telepathy any different?Does power corrupt?How will I know when I've gone to far and who could stop me if I did?And he came up with answers, very difficult answers. The professor did not chose the path of expedience, he chose to adhere to his morality, even when that morality cost him friends, followers, lives.It's perfectly true that people chose to harm others all the time and telepathy is - at least - not physically damaging. Is going in and erasing people's memories or altering their personality any worse than imprisonment or drugs? That's a question everyone has a different answer for and I think that the professor has decided that if it is not right to drug someone into compliance it isn't anymore right to screw with their memories or personality either.Professor X isn't portrayed as a stupid man, or an ignorant one and with those assumptions I can't believe that he doesn't recognize that his refusal to take certain kinds of actions makes live harder and more dangerous for everyone. I think he recognizes that his rigid adherence to his morality has costs and chooses to pay them.He's an idealist but not a naïve one.I think this is important because Professor X and Magneto represent two poles on the same issue; what to do when faced with fear, hatred and persecution. Do you become like your persecutors and answer violence with violence? If your attackers are disregarding law, mercy, justice and common humanity do they deserve anything better?Magneto has his answer and he has become like the enemies he despises. The Professor has chosen his answer as well. He believes in mercy, justice, law and fellowship and extends this belief to friends and enemies alike. He will not allow the cruelty of others to make him cruel.By making the professor more realistic, and more in line with 21st century morality (which is more comfortable with killing or manipulating the 'bad' guys than the morality of the 1960's) of the movies and more recent comics, I believe he looses much of his strength as a character. He simply becomes a 'good guy' because he's drawn with the white hat rather than through any of his actions. He's good in comparison to the 'bad guys' but being better is not the same thing as being good.The professor was never intended to be a morally gray character, he was originally defined as a good guy and - as I've mentioned before - the artists chose to portray him with ambiguous imagery as a contrast to his actions. In a world where he is hated and feared because he is a mutant, Professor X was meant to be the last person in the world to be afraid of.Professor X chooses to represent good, in its most idealized form, despite all wisdom to the contrary.

How was your day at work?

## is a commercial saturation diver for Global Divers in Louisiana. He performs underwater repairs on offshore drilling rigs. Below is an e-mail he sent to his sister. She then sent it to radio station in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, which was sponsoring a worst job experience contest. Needless to say, she won. Hi ##, Just another note from your bottom-dwelling brother. Last week I had a bad day at the office. I know you've been feeling down lately at work, so I thought I would share my dilemma with you to make you realize it's not so bad after all. Before I can tell you what happened to me, I first must bore you with a few technicalities of my job. As you know, my office lies at the bottom of the sea. I wear a suit to the office. It's a wetsuit. This time of year the water is quite cool. So what we do to keep warm is this: We have a diesel powered industrial water heater. This $20,000 piece of equipment sucks the water out of the sea It heats it to a delightful temperature. It then pumps it down to the diver through a garden hose, which is taped to the air hose. Now this sounds like a darn good plan, and I've used it several times with no complaints. What I do, when I get to the bottom and start working, is take the hose and stuff it down the back of my wetsuit. This floods my whole suit with warm water. It's like working in a Jacuzzi. Everything was going well until all of a sudden, my butt started to itch. So of course, I scratched it. This only made things worse. Within a few seconds my butt started to burn. I pulled the hose out from my back, but the damage was done. In agony I realized what had happened. The hot water machine had sucked up a jellyfish and pumped it into my suit. Now, since I don't have any hair on my back, the jellyfish couldn't stick to it. However, the crack of my butt was not as fortunate. When I scratched what I thought was an itch, I was actually grinding the jellyfish into the crack of my butt. I informed the dive supervisor of my dilemma over the >communicator. His instructions were unclear due to the fact that he, along with five other divers, were all laughing hysterically. Needless to say, I aborted the dive. I was instructed to make three agonizing in-water decompression stops totaling thirty-five minutes before I could reach the surface to begin my chamber dry decompression. When I arrived at the surface, I was wearing nothing but my brass helmet. As I climbed out of the water, the medic, with tears of laughter running down his face, handed me a tube of cream and told me to rub it on my butt as soon as I got in the chamber. The cream put the fire out, but I couldn't poop for two days because my butt was swollen shut. So, next time you're having a bad day at work, think about how much worse it would be if you had a jellyfish shoved up your butt. Now repeat to yourself, "I love my job, I love my job, I love my job!"

Helpful Spam defenses (Tips)

Information I didn't know and figured I'm not the only stone age mind/21st century toys person out there.Some general spam tips: 1) never, go through a spam mail's 'opt out' process. That's just another way to try to get confirmation that your address is valid.(and I always wondered why I got more spam mail *after* I did that...) 2) never get mad and write them damning messages that demand they leave you alone. Same result-- they know yours is a valid email address that they can sell. 3) either don't accept html messages, or go offline when you view html messages that are from an unknown source. The spammers put images in their html messages that are actually located on their own machines. When you open a message that's in html, and they have an image of theirs in it, they know exactly when you opened that message and that they had a successful delivery. You're permanently on spam lists after that. (bummer - and I thought I was getting some free porn pics with those messages!)4) If you use a service like spamcop.net, don't report yourself. I know, it sounds silly to actually say it, but it's easy to do. When you use a service like that, it often takes URLs that are within the message, because the URLs often reference a web site connected to the spammer. But sometimes, the message contains your own URL, where they scanned to harvest your email address in the first place. Also, check the headers carefully to be sure the spammer didn't try to spoof your domain. When you go submit a spam report, be sure that you don't have any abuse addreses checked that are actually our own network. If you aren't 100% sure, don't submit the report, because it's not worth the hassle of proving you aren't actually the spammer. 5) if you forward your mail from one account to another, then likely you will be unable to report spam, because the headers you submit will be from your own email account and not the spammer. Use spam reporting services with caution! 6) watch out for spam that pretends to be an undeliverable message from a server post office or impersonates services you might use. For example, some spammers use Citibank, Sprint, Paypal and various credit card company logos within their html messsages, but the message is actually from a spammer who stole images to pull off the impersonation. Check headers *carefully* to make sure the email actually came from the company it says it came from. Be wary of following links with instructions to update account information or to opt out of future 'informational emails'. (Isn't this fraud?)7) be careful about putting your email address on stories that you have archived elsewhere, or of anyplace where your email address might be public, such as discussion boards. You don't know what other people are doing (or not doing) to protect content that includes your info.

Not so Funny - Plagarism in fanfiction (opinion)

So, here's the common scenario….Someone writes a piece of fiction that they cannot make a profit on, for the pleasure of writing and sharing their work with others interested in that fandom. Then someone else steals the work and re-publishes the piece under their name, also unable to make a profit on the stolen work and they then publish in the same fandom where they are almost guaranteed to be discovered because most fanfiction groups are small enough that everyone is reading all work available. Why do some people plagiarize fandoms? The reason escapes me. No one can make a profit on fanfiction. Fanfiction readers are voracious - they'll read almost everything in their fandom so a plagiarized work is pretty much guaranteed to be discovered sooner or later. Fanfiction members are also very vocal and getting a reputation of plagiarizing among a group of writers is pretty much guaranteed to get you (this is a generic you, if you please) ostracized.I haven't had a piece plagiarized yet (that I know of) but the concept of plagiarizing an amateur work in a venue that doesn't bring you any profit but can still give you a sour reputation that will last for years (the Internet never forgets) strikes me as so odd that I have to comment.Are people unclear on what plagiarism is? Plagiarism is taking another person's work, written, spoken or drawn/painted and claiming that you are the creator of that work. Plagiarism includes extensive 'quoting' from another person's work and 'forgetting' to footnote or endnote the source. During the long dark years of junior high, learning how to properly footnote work was one of the challenges of my English classes.I wonder sometimes, with the proliferation of Internet term paper mills out there, that students nowadays don't realize what it means when they pay their $20 bucks to a mill then turn the paper in for a grade. That's plagiarism. When I was a student, plagiarism was grounds for failure of the entire class. It was the one thing, of all the crap students pulled in school that was never tolerated.I seem to recall a story (that may be apocryphal) about a teacher who had no less than six students in his class turn in the identical essay bought from a term paper mill. As he'd stated at the beginning of the course, plagiarism was grounds for failure in the class. When he failed the students, the parents pressured the school to reinstate all the kids and remove the failed grade. Perhaps examples like that are the reasons why some people plagiarize. It doesn't seem like the big deal it was when I was a kid.Do plagiarists really think they won't be discovered?Well, like I said - all fandoms are relatively small. Sooner or later someone is going to notice. Is it worth it?This is pure, non-profit entertainment! All any author in fanfiction gets is praise and notoriety. Really, is there enough satisfaction in getting praise for a piece of stolen work to make the risk of discovery and humiliation worthwhile? Is it worth making other authors hesitate before posting their work for fear if it being stolen?Plagiarism in fanfiction strikes me as one of the most ugly of 'harmless' crimes. There's no good for anyone in it. No matter how terrible your own writing is, it's certainly better than being branded a plagiarist.There are relatively few resources out there for fanfiction - you can't hire a lawyer to sue someone who plagiarizes work that is illegal in the first place. There is an overworked group of volunteers:Plagiarism Police Patrol (anime only)AndPlagiarism Police Patrol 2 (non-anime)They will investigate to the best of their ability and publicize their findings - either naming the guilty party or clearing someone who has been wrongfully accused.

Fun with Flying

Something for all of us who just *love* flying....After every flight, pilots fill out a form called a gripe sheet, which conveys to the mechanics problems encountered with the aircraft during the flight that need repair or correction. The mechanics read and correct the problem, and then respond in writing on the lower half of the form what remedial action was taken, and the pilot reviews the gripe sheets before the next flight. Never let it be said that ground crews and engineers lack a sense of humor! Here are some actual logged maintenance complaints and problems as submitted by Qantas pilots and the solution recorded by maintenance engineers (By the way, Qantas is the only major airline that has never had an accident.) (P = The problem logged by the pilot.) (S = The solution and action taken by the engineers.) P: Left inside main tire almost needs replacement. S: Almost replaced left inside main tire. P: Test flight OK, except auto-land very rough. S: Auto-land not installed on this aircraft. P: Something loose in cockpit. S: Something tightened in cockpit. P: Dead bugs on windshield. S: Live bugs on back-order. P: Evidence of leak on right main landing gear. S: Evidence removed. P: DME volume unbelievably loud. (Distance Measuring equipment) S: DME volume set to more believable level. P: Friction locks cause throttle levers to stick. S: That's what they're there for. P: IFF inoperative. S: IFF always inoperative in OFF mode. P: Suspected crack in windshield. S: Suspect you're right. P: Number 3 engine missing. S: Engine found on right wing after brief search. P: Aircraft handles funny. S: Aircraft warned to straighten up, fly right, and be serious. P: Target radar hums. S: Reprogrammed target radar with lyrics. P: Mouse in cockpit. S: Cat installed. P: Noise coming from under instrument panel. Sounds like a midget pounding on something with a hammer.S: Took hammer away from midget.

Cradle of Life (Movie Review)

Well ... unless you have a thing for Angelina Jolie, don't bother.The plot makes even less sense, belive it or not, than the first movie and while Jolie's co-star breast prosthetics are less visible that doesn't make up for the generally flacid film.I know the movie is based off of a video game and there's real limits on what you can expect but even so, I expect a little more. Even the simple production values such as gunfights and explosons simply weren't particularly good.The plot added supernatural elements very late in the movie and in a very jarring fashion. The only way I can make the last quatre of the movie make attempt at logical sense is to assume it's all a drug induced hallucination, which suits the general tenor of the movie better than the (non)explanation presented in the film.As in the last movie, the timing of the action sequences is *off* - just a little too slow - a little to awkward - a little wrong. It wasn't as jarring in the first movie which had less interpersonal violence but in Cradle of life there are several shotouts and the weird, slow timing really sticks out. Angelina may be doing her own stunts which is a noble thing - but she's not a professional stunt person by any stretch of the imagination. The most animated character in the movie was Jolie's sex object and he's shot dead (in a fairly pointless turn of greed) at the end of the movie. Jolie herself spends a great deal of time posing and not much time acting.Oddly, I find the fact that our 'hero' charcter is nothing more than a greedy theif rather off-putting. She's not an adventuring archiologist - she's someone who breaks into a long lost antiquity and the first thing that comes out of her mouth is'mine'. It's not a very heroic ideal and that matters to me.The growling, snarling shark bugged me too. Sharks don't make noises anything like that. All in all, something that I can't reccomend.

Who cares about funky eyebrows anyway (Iconography of Pop Culture 2)

So, if Professor X has evil eyebrows and the morally ambiguous bald head of a mastermind, what difference does it make anyway?Well, Professor X is a comic book character - the use of visual imagery is as, or more, important than the dialogue bubbles slapped on top of the images. Lately, Marvel and other comics, have even been experimenting with completely text free issues and the various successes and failures of those show just how important the art is. Visual stereotypes matter and in a comic venue they matter a lot and there are a lot of interesting visual stereotypes (and violations of visual stereotypes) in the X-men.How conscious were the artists of their visual choices when they created the X-men and their world? I can't say at this point, never having seen an interview about the artists choices that analyzes the cultural assumptions in them. So I have to go with my own interpretation of what I see.But - it means something that the professor is bald, that he has pointy eyebrows and that he's in a wheelchair. Just like - in the much more recent Ultimate X-men, the first image of the professor shows him wearing a pink AIDS ribbon. It's a word free suggestion that he could be gay (combined with the cat, another classic symbol for evil homosexuals in movies and books).So, if the artists gave the professor ambiguous imagery, why did they?Ah, well.Though the X-men storyline has moved somewhat away from it's genesis (except for the new X-Factor, which I highly recommend), the original series of comics focused very heavily on prejudice. The 'world which hates and fears us' was very visible in the comics and not just as the next uber-villan event. There were episodes of daily discrimination, social movements (such as can be found in the comic version of 'God Loves, Man Kills' which was very different than the smash-bang movie version that there's no comparison), and a more detailed view of what moved the humans in the comics to fear mutants so. Some of the storylines focused on younger mutants like Bobby being rejected by their families or fleeing in fear when the manifest. Current 'manifestation' storylines seem to focus more on the personal angst of the mutant going through them - usually with a lot of accidental killing of loved ones.The mutants in the X-men comics aren't just spandex clad superhero's, they were also different and frightening to the majority of the people in that world. They acted funny and they looked funny. Professor Xavier has evil eyebrows because he - and all mutants - were supposed to be frightening. His visual affect is supposed to be in direct conflict with his actual moral stance. Professor X looks evil - has powers than can be easily used for evil - and he's anything but evil.Which will bring us to my ideas on Professor X's morality next ....

Microcosmos (Movie review)

Made by the same filmmaker as 'Bird Migration' but a few years older, Microcosmos is the kind of movie that reminds you that the world is full of miracles.The movie is set in a space no larger than a small field and, for many of the non-professional actors the course of a day is the span of their lives. The entire movie is about bugs.It's much more than a nature documentary - for one thing there is no narrative besides the instrumental music. We're never given the lists of the creatures names, nor their scientific import if any. The movie is about the lives of these creatures that exist in their thousands around us.Through the use of clever camera work, incredible filmography and a stunning music score, we're brought into this tiny world full of determined ants, erotic snails, ominous spiders and the magnificent conflict among beetles.Microcosmos is full of magnificent moments but among them all, I have to mention the love scene between the mating snails. With a lush Italian operatic love song as the mood music, the approach, seduction and culmination of the common garden snails' affair has an eroticism that transcends species barriers.The closing scene, of the adult mosquito hatching from it's nymph stage is like watching the birth of an angel - simply stunning. Which is how I'd describe the entire movie.It's a movie for families in the best meaning possible - it reminds adults of that fascination we all had, at one point or another, for the natural world around us. For children it gives them a 'bug-eyed' view of their own backyard. It's 'educational' in the best sense of the word, rekindling the joy of discovery that so many of us lose in the rush and strain of our daily lives. I can't recommend this movie highly enough for pretty much anyone, it's a joy to watch.By now, the movie is a few years old and likely to be easily available in libraries (probably only on video) as well as more eclectic video stores.

Better living through chemistry (part 2)

My new medication (which isn't quite so new anymore) does more than make me less anxious. Or perhaps the way it makes me less anxious isn't what I expected.I'd assumed that this medication worked in some mysterious molecular fashion to change my emotional state but now I'm not sure that the mechanism is so subtle. There are physical effects and I don’t mean the usual list of side effects (nausea, cramps, the infamous sexual side effects that - so far - I've avoided). As I said earlier - I sleep better and dream more fully. Whether it's the fact that I actually relax when I sleep or something else I'm in less pain than I have been since I was a young child. My partner says my body looks better - though I've lost no weight nor made any particular effort to work out. But my shoulders aren't hunched; my face (he says) is more 'open'. I don't either pull my head down or thrust out my chin like I'm trying to take a blow.I'm more adventurous - willing to try new things, go places I wasn't willing to go before. For my partner, who is much more active than I am, the change has been a huge relief. I've been willing to take more emotional risks as well, able to talk about long term relationship stresses that I wasn't willing to discuss before.All of that made me wonder just what made me so unhappy before. Was it - as I'd assumed - some uncontrollable biochemistry that a little pill can fix? Or - collections of physical problems that resulted in a constant strain that made me feel anxious, unhappy and depressed?Most likely, both.As anyone who suffers from chronic insomnia can tell you, or people with post traumatic stress syndrome - not being able to sleep well does much more than make you tired the next day. Getting through life is hard - the world seems less predicable, any little extra strain seems impossible to bear. Chronic sleep loss makes it hard to want to take risks.The medication affects seritonnin uptake, I'm not quite sure how but one of the side effects seems to be much less physical tension and joint pain. It wasn't until the pain was gone that I realized that I had been in pain, for a long time, and that everyone didn't feel that way. It wasn't 'normal.'And what does the body think about pain? It's a signal that something is wrong. My whole body tenses up to try to deal with it, which has the result of increasing my pain. Pain makes anyone afraid, the body is sure there's some threat out there, it throws you judgement off. If I'm always worried that I might develop a migraine, might become exhausted, how can I go someplace new where the environment is unpredictable - where I can't be sure the environment won't tip me from chronic discomfort to acute misery?My partner had a coworker who had chronic, life threatening asthma and her temperament made it very difficult to work with - she always seemed on the verge of some terrified or furious outburst. My partner just assumed she was the office asshole until he got a respiratory infection that made it very difficult to breathe for about a week. Suddenly, he was always on the edge of terror or rage - a fight or flight situation - the body's reaction to the sense of constant suffocation. He realized that his coworker wasn't just mysteriously an asshole; her body was telling her that she was close to dying - every day of her life.In those situations, it makes perfect sense to withdraw, to resist change, to refuse to add to what is already a burdensome life. With less fear of pain, I have the emotional energy to spend on other things.So, am I really depressed and anxious? Or simply physically uncomfortable to the point that I'm anxious and depressed?It really made me wonder how much of my own mental state is related to my physical one. Am I biochemically predisposed to depression or disposed to problems that increase my pain level - which makes me depressed? If a physical problem reduces your ability to sleep (such as something as common as sleep apnea), does that mean you are genetically pre-disposed to anxiety? Do all those 'female' hormones made women moody and grumpy for a few days a month or is it because the hormonal changes create pain through cramps and muscle spasm that create PMS?I don't believe in genetic mediation of behavior but - genes do affect your physical health so where does behavior modification cease being 'genetic'?Does it matter?I think so. According to studies, a huge number of Americans are on anti-anxiety type medications. Not incidentally, other studies show that Americans are chronically overworked and hugely short of sleep. The average working mother gets something like six hours of sleep a night and the actual human average should be something like nine. People are also increasingly overweight - with all the physical discomfort that causes; strain on muscles and bones, affecting posture, ability to be active and so on. The prepared foods we eat so much of are short of a lot of critical vitamins - things like B's, which affect muscle tension and nerve impulses.Would people be less anxious and depressed if they were sleeping better? Would we be less rigid as a culture if so many of us weren't functioning under an assortment of chronic pains?Would the pharmaceutical companies be making so much money if we got a little more sleep and ate our vegetables?It makes me wonder too if I'm somehow weak. I could be more active; I could do something to manage my pain better. Do I really have to take a pill? On the other hand, I've been trying to make those kinds of changes for years - and I've been too tired and too miserable to do them. And - I also resent the realization that I have been in so much pain for so long, unable to find a way to deal with it myself and because it's not something obvious like a broken leg, having to spend my limited energy on crap like my job.And - over the past week or so the effect I felt the first couple of weeks on my medication is fading. I'm at a very low dose and I'm desperately tempted to increase the medication. Now that I know how I can feel - I want to feel that way. Is the pill a crutch? Should I be spending my hours maintaining my body like it was a troublesome car?Is the medicine a shortcut or a necessity? Am I a coward for using it or taking reasonable care of myself?I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't even know if the effects I felt were nothing more than a placebo effect that faded over time. And I don't know if that matters either.

Defense of (gay) marriage

There's been some discussion lately (again) about same sex marriage, what it is and what should be done to encourage or prevent it. Everyone seems to have an opinion and I certainly do as well.So, what's the issue anyway? Oddly, there seems to be a lot of confusion of just what 'gay marriage' would be - both among the panicky politicians seeking a constitutional amendment, and those who support gay marriage.Gay marriage doesn't mean that a queer couple can walk into a Catholic Church and demand that the priest marry them. It doesn't mean that the National Guard is going to hold a gun to Billy Graham's head and force him to bless two men in eternal union. Those are religious unions and no legislation in the country is going to force them to marry gay couples. There are already plenty of religions that will celebrate or marry queer couples and this has really no effect beyond those individuals sense of faith and public celebration of their love.All those religious conservatives can breathe easy; their God can still condemn same-sex marriage as evil/unhealthy or perverse. No US law has the power to change that. Their protestations that God does not allow for gay marriage should be meaningless in a courtroom or the congressional halls. Religious prohibitions are not going to be affected and, with a constitutional separation of church and state, they should not be the basis of any US law.The other arguments against gay marriage seems to be the old 'natural law' argument, which is simply the same religious argument with a different name. Another is the argument that marriage is really designed to nurture and protect children, which is - in a way true - however, we do not prevent sterile people from getting married, or post-menopausal women, or men who've had their testicles removed through accident or illness. The same people who want to protect marriage as a child-rearing benefit to not champion lesbians with children as being unfairly denied there rights of marriage. Can you imagine a fertility test being the criteria for marriage?There are some groups that feel that there are aspects of gay sex that are unclean or unnatural. I know that the Dali Lama got into some minor flack about that issue because he stated that anal sex is unclean. He was accused of being homophobic. However, what he was saying was that putting your dick up someone's ass is an unclean act - whether it's two men or a man butt-fucking his wife. Buddhists have a variety of cleanliness requirements and the anus is an unclean part while the penis is not (or is less so). It had nothing to do with being gay. I have no idea, for example, what the Dali Lama (as a religious functionary) feels about oral sex. Again, this discrimination, if you want to call it that is based on religious proscriptions. The argument against special rights. Well that one I don't even know how to address, really since its demonstrably untrue. Gay people are simply agitating for the same rights as straight people. My best guess at addressing this issue is that perhaps those who claim gays are seeking special rights might actually mean that gays are seeking a change in the status quo (i.e.: gays are resisting their status as a despised minority). There are many people in the world, of all types, that resist change.What gay rights lobbyists are talking about when they refer to gay marriage is a basic civil right. Married couples receive a variety of state and federal benefits and responsibilities when they are married under a civil contract. This right has nothing to do with love and everything to do with equality.Without the right to a civil, legally recognized union with my partner, there are a huge amount of obstacles we face that heterosexual, married couples do not.I cannot be guaranteed of access to my partner if he's hospitalized, since I am not a 'relative' no matter that we've lived together for 11 years. We've been lucky on that so far but there is no right there.We cannot file federal or state taxes jointly.I cannot be guaranteed a health insurance policy that will cover my 'domestic partner'. When I was looking for a long-term job, one of my major considerations was a domestic partner privilege from the companies I was applying at. Note I said privilege. It's just that. My company can remove the domestic partner benefit at anytime without legal concerns. How many heterosexual married couples have to worry about whether their insurance will allow them to cover their spouse?And - when I pay for my health insurance, I do not get a standard benefit available to married couples. The federal government allows withdrawals from a paycheck before taxes to pay for health insurance of an employee and their family - their married family. The federal tax system does not recognize domestic partner benefits. What that means is that, first I'm taxed on the money I make, then it's taken away to pay for my insurance. Married folks? The money is taken away before taxes are applied, saving them a tax burden.When one of us dies, our legal and heritable rights are much more limited. I will not automatically be given trustee rights over my partner's estate as happens with married couples, nor will my position as his heir be particularly secure - especially since neither of us has a will. These are only a few of the issues that crop up in my mind - not even including the issues surrounding children, such as custody, adoption, visitation rights and such like. At 37, how many of us have to think of these issues? Married couples can just cruise along with the rights above assumed as normal.Finally, there is the growing international issue. Does the US really want to be in step with Turkey, Afghanistan, and a few African despotic countries as refusing to recognize gay marriages or unions from other countries? If we pass a constitutional amendment against gay marriage, we will be legally refusing to recognize the unions of people from Canada and several Northern European countries. The diplomatic issues will be ugly.This is the equality argument, written out, for gay marriage and it is my argument. I do not argue for gay marriage because of love. Love cannot be legislated - either for or against. I love my partner and no law in the world will change that. Nor to I think that a law should be passed on the basis of recognizing someone's love. I don't think emotionally based arguments like that are valid or useful in legislation if nothing else because it's almost impossible to 'prove' love. And - the civil rights of marriage have nothing to do with love. Or God. They are simply a collection of legal conveniences that our country uses to help maintain social order. Since queer people engage in the same complexities as straight people, they should receive the same help as straight people.

The Nature of Evil (Rant)

Two headlines caught my attention recently. 'Nine killed and scores injured as 86-year old driver crashes through crowded farmer's market''Four dogs killed, 15 sickened at local park, poison suspected'Which was the one to raise my anger and my pain?The second. Not because I don't feel for the people who've died and their families. I've shopped at the market they're talking about and it could have easily happened to my friends or family. Not because I feel that there is some inalienable right to drive that makes risks like allowing an elderly man who - evidently - was neither drunk nor drugged but simply too old to drive, acceptable. Not because I hate people and love animals.Probably, like most people who live in the modern US, I'm somewhat inured to human death. The news, the movies, the papers - all report a litany of death and human suffering on a daily basis - the more grotesque or horrific the better. Still...Intentionally poisoning dogs is an evil act. And it's a cowardly one, since the ultimate target isn't the dogs themselves but their owners who suffer the loss and guilt when their animals die. I don't doubt that its intentional poison, though the police don't have a suspect as yet. The park where these poisonings have happened is four blocks away from me; there has been conflict among the people who let their dogs run free in the park (with the inevitable side effects of dog crap and rambunctious animals) and those who want to use the park for other things and the animal deaths and illnesses have happened within a single month.It's the kind of act that I find morally reprehensible. Pets - dogs, cats and horses in particular - are terribly vulnerable to human cruelty. They've been raised, and bred for thousands of years, to live with us, trust us and love us - unconditionally. Domestic animals are dependent on us in ways that wild animals are not. And - they are animals.Not people, no matter how we love them, or dress them up or train them. They are animals and innocent in a way people are not. I don't mean in a religious sense but in the capacities and limits that are natural to animals. They do not, and cannot, understand the why's of human cruelty. A dog cannot understand why they hurt, why their sick, why they're a target because of the actions of the humans around them. They only know they hurt and they look - as they've been trained - to their owners to help them. For four dogs, their owners could not.A dog may attack you, a cat can be destructive. Cats will play with mice or other living things to satisfy their instincts. Animals can get angry, frustrated, lonely, jealous. But they cannot understand maliciousness. As human beings who have bred and trained wild animals to look to us for comfort and shelter, I believe we have a responsibility to our pets that goes beyond simply feeding and caring for them. We should never turn our tendency to cruelty to them, they are not suitable substitutes for our anger. We have created them to love us and to trust us. When we return that love with cruelty, when we betray that trust - we are committing a grievously evil act.›

Don't you love the medical system?

Some states are considering or have already implemented 'legible writing' laws for physicians - requiring them to write clearly on prescriptions and other medical orders.Some examples of actual hospital charts by doctors.1 She has no rigors or shaking chills but her husband states she was very hot in bed last night2 On the second day the knee was better and on the third it disappeared3 The patient is tearful and crying constantly. She also appears to be depressed4 Discharge status: alive but without my permission5 The patient has refused autopsy6 The patient has no previous history of suicides7 Patient has left white blood cells at another hospital8 Patient's medical history has been remarkably insignificant with only a 40lb weight gain in the past three days9 Patient had waffles for breakfast and anorexia for lunch10 She is numb from her toes down11 While in ER she was examined, X-rated and sent home12 Patient was alert and unresponsive13 Rectal examination revealed a normal sized thyroid14 She stated that she was constipated most of her life until she got a divorce15 Both breasts are equal and reactive to light and accommodation16 Examination of genitalia reveals that he is circus sized17 The lab test revealed abnormal lover function18 The patient was to have a bowel resection. However, he took a job as a stockbroker instead19 The pelvic exam will be done later on the floor20 Patient was seen by Dr. Blank who felt we should sit on the abdomen and I agree21 Large brown stool ambulating in the hall22 Patient had two teenage children but no other abnormalities

Hmmm... what infamous crimanal am I??

You are the Marquis Da Sade. Even stripped ofexaggerations, Your real life was as dramaticand as tragic as a cautionary tale. Born to anancient and noble house, you were married(against your wishes) to a middle-class heiressfor money, caused scandals with prostitutes andwith your sister-in-law, thus enraging yourmother-in-law, who had you imprisoned under alettre de cachet for 14 years until theRevolution freed you. Amphibian, protean,charming, you became a Revolutionary,miraculously escaping the guillotine during theTerror, only to be arrested later forpublishing your erotic novels. You spent yourfinal 12 years in the insane asylum atCharenton, where you caused another scandal bydirecting plays using inmates and professionalactors. You died there in 1814, virtually inthe arms of your teenage mistress.You are a revolutionary deviant. I applaud you. Which Imfamous criminal are you? brought to you by QuizillaT

Pirates of the Caribbean (Movie Review)

Of course, I went to see Johnny Depp in eyeshadow but there was actually more to the movie than that. Quite a surprise for a movie based on a Disney ride.It was definitely, a fun, actiony, kid okay movie (but I think adults will find it as or more fun). Really fun. And better than I think people realize. The only part that really has to be ignored is the end where our romantic heroes settle down to raise babies - they should go off to become pirates. I have a suspicion that - with something like five writers - the original screenplay may hav e been just that. But 'family values' won over film integrity and we had our young couple settling down with Daddy's approval. That's a much more appropriate moral lesson for all our young viewers out there.The movie was a nice collection of myths - the 'pirate code' the Aztec gold and its curse, the fun to be had on the high seas. It was also a collection of decently researched details. Most of the ship-to-ship combat was realistically handled (minus much of the gore); the chaos of those sorts of things, the slippery confusion of wet wood, tilting decks, guns, swords and cannons all going off at the same time. There's a particular scene where two fighting ships are sailing in opposite directions and only a few feet from each other - firing their side cannon. That was actually a common strategy back then. Those small cannon have a very short range and low accuracy, you had to get real up close and personal when using them. The 'women are bad luck' is a pretty common belief in early ship life and the minor female pirate character was a nice touch - since there were, historically, a few female pirates.One of my friends brought up the unusual realization that - in a pirate movie - there were no villains. Even Barbarossa is a character with complexities and a real reason to do what he's doing. He's not chewing the scenery for no reason. The upright English commander proves to be a decent person in the end and Jack Sparrow is - well - Johnny Depp. How can you not love him?The characterization of Jack Sparrow was excellent, not just becuase it was Johnny Depp. Though our two romantic leads were clearly upright, honorable folks, Sparrow was a pirate and throughout the moive he remained one. There was no 'reforming' the lovable villan; while it was clear that he liked both Tanner and Elizabeth, I never got the impression that he was going to either sacrifice himself or his goal of getting the ship for the sake of that freindship. It was clear that he'd been a pirate and was going to continue robbing, pillaging and raping his black guts out. In addition, Sparrow was the one to voice some of the most mature moral statements in the movie 'The two important things in a person's live are - what they can do and what they can't.' (not an exact quote). In a movie meant for bouncy summer fun; Sparrow's character had some surprisingly complex moments - from his speech on freedom, to his acceptance of being abandoned by his shipmates 'they had to do what's good for themselves, that's all you can ask of a man'. It wasn't that Sparrow's personaliy or philosophy was somehow noble, or heroic but it was very real, very valid in the kind of world he'd chosen.There was also a remarkable lack of death - detailed death, that is. In the mass combat scenes, you have to assume that there was quite a bit of dying going on but it was pretty bloodless. For all the sword fights, there were perhaps only four or five clear murders in the movie. Howver, the lack of gore didn't look forced; it was unrealistic but not blatantly obvious.The plot held together fairly well, though if Sparrow had been abandoned on that deserted island in a mutiny ten years ago - he must have been a captain by the time he was twelve! As well, we did finally determine that if 'Bootstrap' Tanner had given the gold to his son - then he too was suffering under the curse and when he was tossed overboard (as relayed by one of the dead pirates), he wouldn't have died. From the story, he wasn't chained to the cannon but strapped, so he likely (once he realized he wasn't going to drown) got free and may perhaps be still alive. If not, then he died at the end of the movie when his own son threw the last bit of gold into the box. In keeping with a PG-13 movie, I prefer to think that he survived and had a wonderful reunion with his newly married son.All in all, a movie well worth seeing in a matinee or second run theater. The way movie prices are these days, I don't recommend any movie at full price. However, the trailer for 'Haunted Mansion' (the next in the franchise) did not look nearly as promising.i

Comedia Types (Icons of Euopean Street theatre)

Since I may use these themes or terms (no doubt misspelled), I thought I'd put them up. I'm relaying what my partner learned any errors are my own. This is a very brief overview.Comedia is the old, very old, Euorpean street theatre. It's a theater about status - basically, it's political street theater. Esseintially, Comidia are plays of 'Masters and Servants' and developed in the early Rennisance. It's mask work - all the characters have very spesific styles of mask, dress and voice. The mask features and the carictures of Comedia can be found in Shakespeare, silent movies, books and helps shape modern American and European stereotypes.Vecchi are the old men; they have all the social status. They are the authority figures and create obstacles that must be overcome in the process of the show.The t wo traditonal Vecchi are Pantelone - the rich old man with the moneybag between his legs that he's constantly confusing with his balls. He has money, a beautiful daughter (sometimes a son), he's a miser and cares about nothing in the world as much as money. The merchant of venice is a pantelone. Visual: He's skinny and he holds onto things. He's portrayed with a high, complaining voice. Some Comedia actors apply animal types to characters and his is the chick. He has a quick, head bobbing movement and a restless manner. His mask is The other old man is Il Doctorre. He's fat and round instead of angular, low voiced and talks all the time. All he cares about is food and sex. Il Doctorrre is a very stupid man pretending to be smart and has a huge ego. He's very easy to fool. He's the traditional quack. He also has a child. Visual: L'inamorate are the young, maskless romantic heroes. They exist to fall in love, to b e frustrated by the plans of their parents (Il Doctorre and Pantelonne). They are the typical teen-angst characters. They're not too bright either. Their characters are very soap opera and high melodrama.Often in Commedia, the point of the play is to get the star-struck lovers happily married. However, since they aren't very bright themselves they need help. The traditional complexity is that Pantalone falls in love with Il Doctorre's daughter (or vice versa) and is attempting to get her hand in marrige without paying the dowery, while the two children are in love with each other and the girl is desperate to avoid the fate of marrige to the old miser.They need their servants - these are the real movers and shakers of Commedial plays. Called Zannis. Zanni's have long noses and, generally, the longer the noses the stupider they are. In classic Comedia there is always a first servant and a second servant. The firsts are smart and the seconds are not. The major first servants are Brigella and Scappino, the second servants are Arliquino, from whom Harliquin is descended and Columbine. Arliquino is absolutly incapable of thinking - beyond stupid to an almost different creature from a human being. He can do anything, but can't think. He's equivalent to Monkey or, possibly, Cyote.The female equivalnt of Brigella is the older woman - big brea sted, smart and often foul mouthed. Judy, from Punch and Judy is descended from this chracter.Columbina is the female equivalent of Arliquino but, unlike him, she is very smart. She's the smartest character in Commedia. She dresses just like Arliquino but dosen't wear a mask. She's the problem solver (human problems), she's an acrobat, beautiful, young.There are two characters that are not part of the standard hierarchy of master, upper servant and lower servant.Capitano - the mercenary or soldier who's down on his luck, usually a forigener - traditionally in Commedia he's a forigener from the other country that the audience used to fight. He's a braggart, liar, very dumb and a cowardly bully. He's a tale-teller, telling stories about how brave he was, always incredibly outrageous and very vain. He's an angry Baron Muchousen character or an unsympatheic Cyrano character.Visually: Long nosed masks (often shaped like a penis - the shorter his nose is the angrier he is). He wears expensive, ragged clothes. Swaggers and cowers.Pulcinella - (means a one day old chick in dialect Italian). Punch is descended from this character. He's usually either the least sympathetic charcter or the most - occasionally both. He's a sacred fool - he can say the things that no one will say, he can make fun of the people no one dares make fun of and he's the one character that will 'break the fourth wall' and address the audience directly. Pulcinella can take the part of any charcter in Commedia except the lov ers because he cannot be beautiful and he's always married - if his wife is present in the show, its the female brigella character. He talks a lot, can't keep secrets, is very cynical and is either very smart pretending to be dumb or stupid. Visually: He has a hook nosed mask, extremely ugly and physically deformed - either a limp or a hunchback. The single consistent thing about Pulcinella is that he must be grotesque.Pulcine lla is unique in that he exists in other forms of early theater outside of Commedia. There is a turkish character of the same type. And there is a similar image of a hunched back, club-footed character in Roman imagry.While there are clear connections between Punch and Judy shows and Comedia, no one is positive which came first - the Punch and Judy shows or Comedia.

'Superheros Unmasked' on the History Channel

I went to my friends for dinner last night and they have cable - slaves to the technocrocy that they are.There was a great show on last night - Superheros Unmasked, which was a brief history of comic books. It wasn't solely a 'name and date' list of events but did also talk a bit about the concepts, ideas and issues of the various eras that made the comic characters what they were in that time.I loved the pre-comic's code stuff - especially the early Wonder Woman comics. Wonder Woman was the first comic to be designed by a professional writer who moved into comics and he was a psycologist (or psychiatrist) as well. And of course, the stuff was jaw dropping in its revelation of his personal issues. As well as the wild and wolly days before US censorship. One of the early 'weaknesses' of Wonder Woman back then was - she lost all her powers (strength etc) if her magic bracelets were 'bound together'. Her comics were full of Betty Page-like bondage scenes; bit gags, hobbles, chains, the rack, hoods and so on. There was spanking and catfights; it was just amazing. The images were classic early het soft core bondage. I really have to see if there's an 'Essential Wonder Woman' that has those very early comics.I also discovered that Superman was really the *first* superhero and he, Wonder Woman and Batman were for many yearst the only survivors of the first generation of comics; they've all been in existance since before WW2.The war era was, according to the show anyway, really the era of superheros. A huge number of superhero's were generated and went off to fight Nazi's, the Japs and so on. Pre-comic's code they were full of really graphic violence and absoloutely facinating and terrible racial stereo-types. I belive it was a Captian America comic cover that had him punching a (fanged and squint-eyed) 'Jap' in the arm and the man's flesh was just exploding off his arm to reveal the bones beneath. It was odd to see such graphic images in superhero comcis because nowadays in the mainline hero comics the violence is still mysteriously non-graphic.The show went through the 50's and the introduction of the Comics Code that destroyed all of the early horror comics and badly baudlerized all of the survivors (many comics died in the 50's). The 60's and the attempts to re-vamp various characters to the era - with varying levels of success. The 60's 'Green Lantern/Green Arrow' looked really facinating and I think the current incarnation of 'Thor- God of Thunder' is really the descendent of Green Arrow.One of the more interesting things was the return of Captian America to the comic world and the choice the writers made to have him be the *original* Captian America. I may have to start following that line - as a man who lived through WW2 and it's simpiler moral issues (as reflected in the original comics), he's also facing the fact that thing are *not* that simple and what does he do now?Anyway, as you can see from my endless rambling, I found the show really interesting and if anyone gets a chance to see it they really should.g

What threat am I?

Threat rating: extremely low. You may think you cansubvert the government, but if you should tryyou will be smited mightily because God likesus best. What threat to the Bush administration are you? brought to you by Quizilla

Why is Prof. Xavier bald? (Iconography of pop culture 1)

This is something I've been thinking (and discussing) for some time. My partner is in theatre work and is involved in Comedia (old style European street theatre) and *types* are very important in Comedia. And its not only in old fashioned work that you find types, or icons, or sterotypes. They're everywhere, of course, part of culture and history.I find icons, myths and cultural types facinating and spend a ridiculous amount of time puzzling them out.Types are important because the communicate so much information - almost instantly (to the culture familiar with the type). In places like comics, they're so important because of the text limitations on the format. Types also have years - often centuries of 'baggage' with them that can add layers of richness to a character.I explore them in comics, mostly. Professor Xavier is a really interesting place to start - not because he's the easiest to pick apart but because he's so oddly contradictory. For me, he's also a character I don't know particularly well but I thought I'd start at the top anyway.The professor, often heralded as the most moral and 'good' person in the X-men universe is based partly on the old 'Mastermind' villans. In theatre, baldness, represents age but it also represents intelligence. All sensible but do you remember his weird eyebrows from the early comics - upswept, pointy? Straight from Ming the Merciless. Upswept, pointy eyebrows in theatrical make-up usually represent sinister intelligence.In general, says my partner, sharp angles of any sort in make-up indicate sinister or evil intent while round features and shapes lean towards good, also honesty, openess. He also thinks that the angled eyebrows (found in early depcitions of the professor, modified for Magneto, also found on Spock - the inhuman, logical and inscrutable alien) may come from European depections of Satan.The professor's baldness also indicates that his 'power' is the mind, intelligence and his famous psychic powers. One of my friends also thinks that he's supposed to look a bit like the alien 'grays' - then again, they themselves are an icon of alien, sometimes sinister intelligence.Wealth is also an often ambigous symbol - especially in the US and the fact that he is 'old money' isn't entirely positive either. American culture favors the 'rags to richess' sort of wealth over the 'parasites' who've inherited their money with out working or (its often implied) deserving it. The wheelchair, of course, has spesific and fairly obvious symbology. Crippled in body but powerful in mind. My partner thinks its also an indicator that Xavier is a manipulator of people - because, after all, someone who's in a wheelchair must learn as a survival skill how to get others to do what they need to help them. If Xavier wants to get something from a tall shelf, he has to get someone *else* to do it. He can ask, he can command, he can wheedle, whine, bribe, mentally control. But he must act through another. And - of course, the wheelchair as an indicator of physical incapacity has to go whenever Xavier is having a romance. As I understand it, he regularly gets new bodies, miraculously cured or etc when the writers schedule him for a romance. After all, if his legs aren't working, what else might be on the fritz??Caveats on this post (and it's sequels):This is an exploration, not an attempt to prove that these characters are one thing or another. I'm certianly not attempting to tell anyone else how to portray these characters.This is based on European/American iconography and sterotypes. There is a world of types, myths and icons out there but I'm most familar with US, European stuff. I'd be really interested to see what other cultures take on these mostly European descended icons is.I'm dyslexic so I can't spell very well and the on-line spellchecker freezes my computer. When I compose on-line like this, expect errors.a

Better living through chemistry

A few months ago I finally, after much procrastination, started to see a therapist. Which resulted in a prescription for anti-anxiety/anti-depressant medication and - after a few more weeks of procrastination - I filled the prescription and started taking my pink pills.The doctor nearly laughed at the level I wanted to start, half the smallest possible dose. The level he prescribes for 'little old ladies'. However, I'm oddly sensitive to medications. Still - after two weeks, even at this tiny dose, the change is … startling.I've never taken mood modifying chemicals before, legal or otherwise, can't drink alcohol, don't even smoke. My fear was that these pills would make me 'different' somehow. Make me a 'new person' which I don't find appealing as a concept. I may not like myself at times - even often - but I've worked hard to be the person I am and I don't want a handful of psychoactive molecules to undo all my work. But now I wonder if I'll become one of those people who are terrified of th e thought of losing their pills. I'm not suddenly joyous but - I'm not afraid all the time. I actually relax when I sleep - and dream. The few dreams I had in my adult life were usually grueling nightmares. Lately, my dreams have been fun, or interest ing, fodder for stories - and not just horror. You wouldn't believe how much a difference it makes to not be afraid of your dreams. Or to no longer be afraid of sunset and the inevitable arrival of disturbing thoughts - was my partner hit by a car and k illed today and no one told me? Did my cat eat something poisonous and will he be dying when I come home? Do I have cancer? Am I going to lose my job? Is my ex-boyfriend (of 11 years ago, no less) still stalking me?I've always know those thoughts wer e unrealistic, unlikely in the extreme and I learned a long time ago not to reinforce them by talking about them. But nothing I could do would guarantee that they would not happen. I also know that my problems were relatively minor. I hold down a deman ding job, I write professionally, I have some friends, I've been with my partner for over 11 years. I managed (at 35) to get my Bachelor's, despite the fact that my high school councilor told me I was too stupid to go to college. There are people who ha ve suicidal impulses, how do self-harm, who can't simply ignore their darker fears and needs. So, I was embarrassed to ask for pills, as if I was exaggerating my problems somehow.But still… It's nice not be afraid all the time.›

Why am I here?

Well, I'm not going to keep an online diary. My life isn't that exiting. Mostly, I'm here to access other journals. Partly, its a place to work out some ideas I have. Which likely means I'll be rambling on about various things - my writing and why I do it. Sex. Love. Why I don't belive that genetics will solve all our problems. Politcs - maybe. That sort of stuff, interesting mostly to myself but availible for everyone to chew on.Not exactly the stuff of fame.s

First Post

My first post and what will I do with it??Complain? Rant?Test the system?Go to bed.