My, we’re hostile.

Lately, my song has been Cee Lo’s “F*** You” or its clean remake “Forget You,” which makes up in acceptability to be played in the car loudly what it loses in cathartic power. Although the specifics don’t match up to anything currently going on for me, something in it emotionally does.

I am trying to figure out who it is that I am so completely pissed off at.  There are a whole lot of candidates, starting with the Republican presidential field, all the way down to my children.

No, you’re not on the list.  Probably.  Maybe.

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

Consistency is not a bad thing.

I have been thinking a lot about privacy lately.  I have a very lengthy post on the subject which I periodically return to, spawned in part by the privacy symposium I went to, the changes in Google’s Privacy Policy coming on line March 1, and a couple of incidents lately which make me uncomfortable.

So… I was thinking of my my “Determined, much?” post.  I am collecting information that is really not much use to me, for the purpose of collecting information.  Yes, for the most part it is almost completely anonymous, but still…  There is an element of privacy invasion, even at a very low level. This makes me uncomfortable.

I decided I needed to delete my Sitemeter account.  If you look at the bottom of the sidebar, you will no longer see the small Sitemeter logo.*

I don’t write for an audience.  I know I have one, because I hear from people.  I don’t need to know who they are, unless they choose to reveal themselves.**

*I still have access to Blogger statistics, but those are very general — they do not identify even part IP addresses, for example. They really are just numbers.  And if me having even that low level of data bothers you, I suggest you sign up for the RSS feed or follow using Google Reader.
**That said, it would be nice to get comments, she says wistfully.

Posted in nothing special | 1 Comment

Why couldn’t it have been someone a little more respectable?

The Rocket Scientist is heavily into genealogy.  I actually think this is great; somebody needs to do it, and I have neither the inclination nor the patience.  This week’s tidbit? That he (and by extension, the kids) are distantly related to Jesse James.  (Third cousin four times removed, I think.)

I think it says a lot that the Red-Headed Menace is more excited about this than any other genealogical discovery, even more than that they were very distantly related to Elizabeth I of England. (Second cousin, thirteen times removed.)  As the Rocket Scientist observed, outlaws count for a lot more than queens.

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

Determined, much? Why?

Sitemeter offers various information about the people who visit this site.  Since I refuse to shell out the money to get the Premium Service, the information is very general (i.e., it gives a location of the server you’re using — not your location! — but not individual IP addresses*).  (I don’t want to know individual IP addresses. I would find that creepy.  I even feel vaguely guilty about the location, except that I know other blogs collect this information. And because I confess to being curious about where my readers are.)  And while it is mildly amusing to know that someone from Manchester UK read a post, generally it is not much use, except as a rough approximation of traffic.  (Even then, it does not take into account Google Reader and RSS and Livejournal readers. I have no idea at all how many people read my through those means.)  In light of its limited usefulness, I keep planning to get rid of it altogether, but I haven’t bothered to yet.

One of the few occasionally interesting pieces of data is what search terms people are using to end up here.  That is how I am able to know, for example, that most of the traffic on this blog comes from people Googling “children ardent for some desperate glory.” By far.  So much so that I am the second hit for that phrase. Part of me is disheartened that it is not my writing drawing people here, but more of me is delighted that I can introduce people to Wilfred Owen’s poem “Dulce et Decorum Est.”

Somebody today Googled the words “gay ‘pat greene'”.  The only reason I found this at all intriguing was that I wondered how far down in the search results I would end up.

The fourth page.  Halfway down.  So what I am curious to know — what was this person looking for?  Me? Probably not.  But they were so determined they waded through four pages of Google search — hell, the most I ever look through is three.

Well, I hope you found what you were looking for.  Unless you were looking to do harm to whichever Pat Greene you were seeking, to out them, to damage their reputation, or their relationships with their family, their friends, their church.

In which case, not only do I hope you fail to find it out, you can go to hell.  When you get there, say Pat Greene suggested you drop in.


*There is only one case in which the server will tell me who you are:  if it is a large corporate or educational server, and I only know one person at said institution or corporation.  (For example,  stanford.edu will tell me bupkiss, because I know too many people there, and too many people who find themselves there who use the Stanford wireless as a guest.) This applies to exactly two people I know read me with some regularity, and one who occasionally drops in.  They are all friends who have told me separately that they read my blog. Oh, and the Rocket Scientist occasionally checks in from nasa.gov, but that doesn’t count. Even then, at one point, when I knew more people at the agency, that would not tell me who was reading me.)

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

Oblivion? No, not really.

Remember that empirical test I did about whether a post deleted in Blogger would be deleted in Google Reader?  I decided to take it to the logical conclusion, and see how far back Google Reader went.  After all, at some point things have to drop off, right?

By dint of scrolling for half an hour, I got to the bottom of the posts contained in Google Reader: they went back to the beginning of 2008.  Four years and two months of posts, 564 in all.  At least three of them were significant posts that I deleted from my blog. 

So yes, you can get rid of embarrassing posts.  It only takes four years.

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

You’re just trying to flatter me. Stop it.

The Rocket Scientist is not particularly enthralled with my new music. He really did not like Cee Lo’s “F*** You,”* and was only slightly more interested in the bowdlerized version. He liked Adele okay, but did not seem to be as smitten with her as I am. He liked “Gunpowder and Lead” by Miranda Lambert the first six or so times he heard it, but then wondered aloud rather snarkily if it was becoming an anthem for me, and was I trying to send a message? He thought Mumford & Sons’ “Roll Away Your Stone” was depressing, although he agreedwith me about the banjo.

 “Okay, you might like this one,” I said, playing “Just The Way You Are” by Bruno Mars.He smiled. “That’s great. I know what that’s like.I deal with that all the time.”

Yeah, right. I have to stop rolling my eyes; I don’t want them to stick this way. 

*The man very rarely swears. He is consequently married to me, who swears like…. fill in whatever noun you like here. The sailors I have worked with frown terribly on “swears like a sailor.” In the short time I was an attorney, the blue streaks were all coming from the litigation side of the office, so when the sailor objected, I switched to “swears like a litigator.” The one litigator I told that to seemed distinctly unamused. So, I swear like… whatever. An Australian, maybe.

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

Nonjustifiable violence.

I haven’t been listening to a lot of country songs in the past few years, so have missed a lot of music I might have otherwise enjoyed.  I wrote in the last post about Miranda Lambert’s “Gunpowder and Lead.”  I like this song.  I find songs about strong women very appealing.

It’s not as if there is no precedent.  Martina McBride dealt seriously with the issue of domestic violence in “Independence Day.”  It was a somber song, told from the point of view of the girl orphaned by her mother burning the house down with her and her abusive husband within.  There is no justification, just sadness and understanding. “I’m not saying it’s right or it’s wrong, but maybe it’s the only way,” McBride sings.  There was no outcry from country music listeners — the woman dies in the process of killing her abuser.  Murder-suicide is okay.

And then there was “Goodbye, Earl.”  The Dixie Chicks blew up a tornado of controversy when they released this lighthearted ode to killing a guy who “walked right through that restraining order, and put [his wife] in intensive care.”  Many people were outraged; the song was banned from a lot of stations, and those that did play it often followed it with a PSA and the number of the battered woman’s helpline. (Not that this was necessarily a bad thing.)  You see, in this song, the women killed the abuser and got away with it. They weren’t punished.

“Goodbye, Earl” is a recognition of the way that the system often fails victims of abuse.  And it celebrates women who refuse to take it, who act in their own self-defense.  Because that is what these songs are about, self-defense. (The Rocket Scientist, when he first heard “Gunpowder and Lead,” far from condemning the woman in the song, speculated on whether she was using buckshot or slugs, and which would be more effective.) I would bet that any man sitting in house fending off an attack from someone who has assaulted him before and whom the victim had every expectation would try to hurt him again (as in “Gunpowder and Lead”) wouldn’t even be charged — at least probably not in Texas, which is where Lambert hails from.

I have no problem with these songs.

I do, however, have a big problem with Carrie Underwood’s “Before He Cheats.”

For those of you who have not heard this little gem, it is told from the perspective of a woman who is outraged that her boyfriend is in a honky-tonk, and who believes he is going to cheat on her.  Note: she doesn’t actually know that he is cheating on her:

Right now he’s probably slow dancing
With a bleached-blond tramp
And she’s probably getting frisky
Right now, he’s probably buying
Her some fruity little drink
‘Cause she can’t shoot whiskey

[emphasis added]

So, in the face of his potential infidelity, what does she do?

I dug my key into the side
Of his pretty little souped-up 4 wheel drive
Carved my name into his leather seat
I took a Louisville slugger to both head lights
Slashed a hole in all 4 tires
And maybe next time he’ll think before he cheats

This is not empowerment.  This is violence. Admittedly, it is violence against property not a person, but it still violence intended to send a message.  A chilling message.  While she may simply intend this to be revenge, and she is going to walk away from the relationship, her boyfriend would be quite justified in wondering if the next time she would be taking a Louisville Slugger to his head.

If a man did this, he would be seen as a potential abuser.  No one would find it light-hearted.  Women’s groups would be speaking out, as well they should.  In this case, men’s groups (who often take positions I disagree with) are screaming, as well they should be.

Abuse is abuse.  Violence is violence. The gender of the victim is totally irrelevant.While the statistics on sexual abuse indicate that women are the victim of sexual abuse much more often than men, the stats about domestic violence are much, much more even.* The Resident Shrink says that in her practice victims of domestic violence are evenly split along gender lines.

People make Tiger Woods jokes.  They don’t make Rihanna jokes, for the very reason that domestic abuse is a serious topic, and beating up women is not acceptable.

But it is — or should be — no more acceptable to attack your husband with a nine-iron than it is to slap your girlfriend.  It is no more acceptable for a woman to terrorize a man by destroying his car, than it would be for a man to do likewise. Such abuse should never be celebrated in song, as though it were trivial and worse yet, deserved. Infidelity, real or imagined, should result in breaking up at the most, not violence on one side and terror on the other.

Men deserve to have their pain treated with the seriousness it calls for.  Women deserve being treated like adults, to be called to account for the injuries they do to others.

Pain — and accountability — do not recognize gender.  In this case, neither should we.

*And this is not even to address the problem of women to women domestic violence, or man to man.  Just as domestic violence often knows no gender, neither does it know sexual orientation.

Posted in Social Issues | Leave a comment

QOTD: and you thought those Southern ladies were pushovers.

At a recent concert, Miranda Lambert held up a sign made by a fan which read “Take notes, Chris Brown” just before she launched into “Gunpowder & Lead.” The song is about a woman waiting on her porch with a gun for her abusive boyfriend to show up.

“I’ve been in a world of hurt with Chris Brown fans lately … but see, I just have to speak my mind because where I come from, beating up on a woman is never okay… So that’s why my daddy taught me early on in life how to use a shotgun.”

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

Another new song. Heh.

I have been living in a cave for quite a while:  I just discovered Cee Lo Green’s “F*** You.”  I am in love.

I am sitting in the public library with my head phones, and grinning ear to ear and tapping my foot.  I can’t help it. I am desperately trying to keep my shoulders from dancing.  This thing is great. And it is not like any of us have ever felt this way.  Nope.  Not at all.

For such a bitter lyric, this is really a very cheerful song.  I should probably not play it around the house, though — I am trying to get my kids to stop swearing.  Heh.

Posted in Culture (popular and otherwise), Music | Leave a comment

Music of the soul.


Darkness is a harsh term don’t you think?
And yet it dominates the things I seek

“Roll Away Your Stone,” Mumford and Sons.

So, you buy the new music.  You listen with one ear and half your brain, thinking “that’s really nice” for Bruno Mars “Just the Way You Are,” or “interesting — sort of a country/rap hybrid” for Jason Aldean’s “Dirt Road Anthem.” And you work your way down the “Purchased” playlist, sipping your mocha and procrastinating on emailing the Rick Steve’s people. And then…

A song comes on.  After the first verse, you quickly go to iTunes, and restart it, listening closely. After the song is done, you replay it, and go online to find the lyrics and read along with the music.  And you breathe deeply and marvel at the universality of the human experience, that someone on another continent could write a song that so closely fits into your soul.

I did not write “Roll Away Your Stone.” Marcus Mumford did.  But damn….

I cannot say I would have written it if I were a songwriter.  I don’t think I would have had the emotional honesty to do so. But I am very glad he did.

The great banjo work is mere lagniappe.

Posted in Culture (popular and otherwise), Music | Leave a comment

Curioser and curioser

I have a very small* readership.  Looking at my Blogger stats, most of my posts get, oh, 10-12 hits the week after they are posted.**  If it is an important post they can get a few times that over a month.  But there is one post that has gotten a lot of hits for no reason whatsoever I can think of.

“The reason for the last post” has gotten 86 hits in two weeks.  All that post contains is an explanation of how posts deleted on Blogger still show up on Google Reader. I was testing a statement made by a panelist at a privacy symposium.

I just can’t understand what the interest is.

*but exclusive, intelligent and sophisticated
**There are quite a number of people who have told me that they read WWF on Google Reader, LiveJournal and the RSS Feed.  What  those numbers are I have no real idea. The Blogger stats mainly tell me what posts spark interest, and a very vague idea of how much traffic I am getting.  Adjusting for traffic from spam sites, readership has been slowly growing over the past year., which pleases me.  Not that I am doing much to actually advertise the blog: I only rarely post links from here to Facebook, for example.

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment

Salt for thought.

Today the Starbucks I was at was out of sea salt for the salted caramel mocha.  I was annoyed at this, but mostly because I had paid for a SCM, and was only handed a caramel mocha.  I complained about this, and was told “We didn’t know we were out of salt when you ordered.”  That was it.  No offer to make me anything else, no card for another drink another time. Definitely lacking in the service department.

I thought of going to the Starbucks website and complaining.  But the thought that is keeping from doing so is this: I rarely go to their website to report when I have exceptional service, so is it really fair to go simply to complain?

Yet another coffee conundrum.*


*The primary one being, if you view buying drinks as effectively “renting” space at one of their tables, how frequently should you buy drinks?  My current view is about one every 60-90 minutes, slightly less frequently if you get food. Less frequently as well if the place is not very crowded, or if you are at a trestle table with five other laptop users.

Posted in nothing special | 1 Comment

Clarification…

In my “Beautiful, again” post I identified “obsessive pursuit of given objectives” to be a flaw.  I never meant this to be work or art objectives.  I meant things like… 1000km through Bavaria in a day.  Going from St. Louis to Chicago through Iowa for no other reason than to say we’ve been to Iowa. Visiting all the missions between here and LA (or as many as humanly possible) on one trip….

Wait, that was my idea.*

Nevermind.

*And let’s not forget the Great Barney Hunt of Christmas, 1992, or The Search For Optimus Prime of Christmas, 2006.** Or the “let’s find a laser pointer in Amsterdam” fiasco (they’re illegal in the Netherlands). All of these were my fault.

**The first of these involved calling or going to every toy store in the Metro D.C. area, and being put on numerous waiting lists and finally getting one on December 23 only because someone else failed to get to the toy store at Tyson’s Corner between 11:00 a.m. and noon to pick theirs up.  Because I started late, Optimus Prime required calling toy stores in four counties (Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, and part of Alameda), only to find them the day before Christmas at… the Target a mile from our house. They had got a late shipment in, and because they were trying to unload them, they had them 10% off.  A toy store in San Francisco wanted double the price for the damned thing.  I refused, and kept calling.  I don’t know what became of good old O.P., but we had the Barney for years and years after the kids had outgrown it because I could not bear to part with a toy I had gone to so much trouble for.

Posted in nothing special | 2 Comments

We’re bad, we’re bad, we’re bad

There is nothing like getting up early so your kid can carmelize the sugar on the tops of the creme brulee he is taking in to school for his French class. The hardest part is getting said kid awake enough that you trust him with the blow-torch.

We’re not talking about some cutesy, namby-pamby little kitchen torch here, either.  It is a full-size portable Benzomatic Burnzamatic* propane torch.  The  uses listed on the side include soldering copper, loosening frozen bolts, and putting up lead gutters.  Not a single word about creme brulee.

We’re a tough crew, here.  At least when it comes to custard-based desserts with crunchy sugar on top.

*Seriously.  Thanks to the Rocket Scientist for the clarification.

Posted in nothing special | 2 Comments

The Virginia legislature has once again shown that they have no respect for the dignity of women.

Make no mistake, transvaginal ultrasound is an invasive procedure.  To have it done because there is a suspicion of ovarian, uterine, or cervical cancer is one thing.  To force it to be done for no other reason than to get a  higher resolution picture of a fetus than is otherwise possible, on a woman who does not want this procedure, is … words fail me.*

Add to this the pending “personhood” law, and once again I am glad I do not live in Virginia and (ashamedly) that I do not have daughters. Fortunately, there is an exception for women who have miscarriages. But even if it just means that women (those who are able to) will have to go elsewhere to get reliable contraception,** at its heart this is a simple declaration that women do not count, except as incubators for children.  And that some of those children only count as incubators, too.

Yes, I am pretty sure that if it made it to the Supreme Court, it would be overturned. That makes it no less reprehensible, and those who vote to pass it no less dangerous to women.

*Someone on Facebook commented that if it were done by anyone else, it would be rape by foreign object. That seems about right to me.
**And even then, does this mean that police can search women and confiscate their pills? And what about women who are only visiting the state?

Posted in nothing special | Leave a comment