Last Saturday, I was walking down the street, MY street, with the five-year-old daughter. We walk past a house where I don’t know the residents, unfortunately a too common occurrence.
In any case, there are about a dozen tween or young teen boys gathered along a stairway near the side of the house, with at least one adult male, when one of the boys yells out “faggot!”
I take a couple steps before I start looking around to see who he’s yelling at.
“Yeah, I’m talking to you!”
At first, I think to to say nothing, but then wheel around and say, “Do you really think that’s appropriate,” and walk away.
LAME response!
Afterwords, I pondered. What was I doing that would make someone that I heretofore had not even noticed refer to me as a bundle of sticks? It probably was my long-sleeve jacket, which I wear even on hot, sunny days like that one lest I get sunburn on my arms. Since the vitiigo, this is a real concern.
I came up with my treppenwitz response: “You are a castrato!” He probably wouldn’t have known what that meant, but to my mind, it was satisfying, in the moment at least, for it would have addressed the fact that he could be “brave” and yell out 30 feet from the street while he was with his pack, knowing my response would be limited while I was with my child. Pretty damn clever of him, too.
So, what would YOU have done? I know it’s a moot point. With the prescription sunglasses I was wearing – good for reading, not distance – I wouldn’t even necessarily recognize him.
If my child weren’t there, maybe my response would have been different.
Or maybe my initial response, to do nothing, was the best?
And I’m peeved more with the adult, who said and did nothing, at least during this brief exchange. ROG
Thom Wade opined about a recent Entertainment Weekly article noting dramas “tanking at the box office…And the big question is: Why? Why can’t potentially great films pull in a bigger audience?”
His conclusion? “Having a hi-def setup has honestly impacted how I see movies. With a wide screen hi-def television, Blu-Ray player and a surround sound system? I suddenly find that I judge seeing a movie based on how much I think it required a giant screen. And you know what? Few dramas (or comedies for that matter) require that big screen experience.”
Actually, I don’t think Thom’s conclusion about how people are deciding is wrong. Rather, I think that they might be coming to the wrong conclusion. In other words, seeing dramas and comedies on the big screen is different from seeing them on the small screen.
To be sure, I have no HDTV or Blu-Ray. But short of having a very large screen in a darkened private room, I think most people treat things they see on television like they treat television. They pause a movie to eat or go to the bathroom or take a nap. The movie experience is just…different.
Long before the new technology, I saw the movie Coming Home, a 1978 drama starring Jane Fonda and Jon Voight, in the movie theater. Then I saw it on HBO and thought it lost something. But then I saw it again on the large screen and it was almost as good as the first time.
I wonder if dramas in America are in trouble. The season finales of House and Grey’s Anatomy both lost viewers compared with last season’s last episodes. All the CSIs were down as well. Meanwhile most comedies are on the rise. Maybe it’s a cyclical thing; it wasn’t THAT long ago when the comedy was considered moribund.
And I need to consider changing audiences, for this reason: some people treat going to the movies like they treat being at home. Anyone who’s been to a movie in recent years – cellphones, talking, etc. – knows what I mean.
Apparently, this audience bad behavior has spread to Broadway. In the June 6 Wall Street Journal, an article called “Are Misbehavin’: No Tonys for These Performances — Theatergoers Act Out With Phones, Bare Feet — and Fried Chicken, Too” catalogs these misdemeanors:
Last month, an audience member at “South Pacific” took off a shoe and, complaining of an injured knee, propped her foot up on a rail in front of the stage. “Other patrons were not amused. ‘The offenders’ toes ‘were practically in their nose…And her feet smelled.’ “
Earlier this year, Patti LuPone broke character in “Gypsy” to scream at an audience member taking pictures.
One night, actor Will Swenson, who plays a hippie named Berger in “Hair”, took a [recording] device from a person in the front row [during the nude scene] and threw it across the stage. “I just couldn’t believe the gall of this woman who was videotaping me in my face,” he says. A crew member deleted the video and returned the camera phone to its owner at intermission, he says.
During a Saturday matinee of the Holocaust drama “Irena’s Vow,” a man walked in late and called up to actress Tovah Feldshuh to halt her monologue until he got settled. “He shouted, ‘Can you please wait a second?’ and then continued on toward his seat.” Ms. Feldshuh says she typically pauses when she’s interrupted. She doesn’t recall the incident, which she says may be evidence of the Zen attitude she’s cultivated onstage.”
So perhaps one needs an “event” movie to warrant going to the theater and put up with fellow humans. ROG
Those of us in what I guess one would call the “liberal theological tradition” are sometimes criticized because we don’t seem to speak out against the religious right.
Well, two points: 1. We do, but maybe we just don’t use a megaphone. 2. It’s just difficult to argue with some people.
The service at my church this past Sunday, on More Light Sunday, featured the Gay Men’s Choir and used Acts 10 as the backdrop. Acts 10 talks about the conversion of the Gentiles but it also gets into a large sheet and permission to eat food that was formerly thought as unclean. I think the pivotal verses are these: {34] Then Peter opened his mouth and said: In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. [35] But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him. This is, to use the political vernacular, a “big tent” God.
Some not particularly religious friend sent me a link to Answers in Genesis for my “amusement and disabusement”. These are the folks who believe that people lived at the same time as the dinosaurs and have -um- created the Creation Museum in Petersburg, KY.
I was interested in the answer to the question Cain’s Wife—Who Was She? Frankly, it was because of the snarky video Arthur at AmeriNZ linked to called Betty Bowers Explains Traditional Marriage. Well, lo and behold, AiG pretty much comes up with the same answer: incest. After chastising William Jennings Bryan, “the prosecutor who stood for the Christian faith”, for failing “to answer the question about Cain’s wife posed by the ACLU lawyer Clarence Darrow” in the 1925 Scopes trial (!), the writer cites “the Jewish historian Josephus” who wrote, ‘The number of Adam’s children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters.'” Non-Biblical information to make a Biblical “proof”.
Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He, as well as his brothers and sisters, would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with. In that situation, brother and sister could have married…without any potential to produce deformed offspring.
Now I can argue with these folks until I’m purple and it’s HIGHLY unlikely to change anything.
In any case, I find them harmless compared to the New York Family Policy Council. One of their members wrote a letter to the editor of the local paper in Albany. A church friend went to the website and found: And he called his ten servants, . . . Occupy* till I come. Luke 19:13 KJV Welcome to the New York Family Policy Council web site. Remember, of His Kingdom there will be no end. *oc cu py vt. [ME occupien; from OFr. ocuper; Lat. occupare, to seize : ob- (intensive) + capere, to take.] 1. To seize possession of and maintain control over by force. In case you’ve missed the point, Ellen Kolb, Executive Director/President makes it clear: Jesus’ command for us to occupy is mind boggling. We are commanded to take over the running of the government and subjugate it to the Laws of God’s Kingdom. We are to infuse the Kingdom into the culture. Our voice is the voice that is to supersede all others in the political arena. To accomplish this we must activate our voice – let it be heard on earth via phone calls, email, letters, letters to the editor, public meetings and in heaven via prayer and declarations. We must activate our prayer lives, spending time each day with the Lord. With prayer as our foundation, we can occupy. If it were not possible, Jesus would not have commanded us to do it. Therefore, let’s awake and become the Church Militant. Let’s put on the full armor of God. Let’s pray as never before. Let’s change the state and national laws so they line up with God’s Word. Let’s restore the Judeo-Christian foundation that our country was founded upon. Let’s not just take up space; let’s OCCUPY.
This is so antithetical to everything I believe, it’s maddening. And possibly treasonous. I suspect these folks are even less likely to accept the notion of an inclusive God, a God of love rather than a God of subjugation, than the AiG people.
And speaking of antithetical: Valley station church to hold gun service
By Peter Smith psmith@courier-journal.com (Louisville, KY) A Valley Station Road church is sponsoring an “Open Carry Church Service” in late June, encouraging people to wear unloaded guns in their holsters, enter a raffle to win a free handgun, hear patriotic music and listen to talks by operators of gun stores and firing ranges. Pastor Ken Pagano of New Bethel Church said the first-time event is “basically trying to think a little bit outside the box” to promote “responsible gun ownership and 2nd Amendment rights.” The event, slated for late Saturday afternoon, June 27, is being promoted with online posters, including one using a red font resembling splattered blood with the words: “Open Carry Church Service.” Full story here
But NOT, apparently, packing heat for the “occupation”. To be fair, one pastor, commenting on this story, said the event “would nauseate Jesus.” Indeed, the linkage of church and state I believe to be not only contrary to the Constitution but, more importantly, to Christianity. I don’t believe it’s the role of the church to promote Second Amendment rights or patriotism. I believe it’s the role of the church to treat people like brothers and sisters; you know, the feed the hungry stuff.
So consider this one Christian voice crying out in the wilderness, for all the good it will do.
I was thinking of the changes that the USCIS has made in the citizenship test to become a U.S. citizen. Just based on this sampling, the new test seem more vague.
TEST before October 1, 2008 – Sample U.S. Citizenship Test Questions: 1. How many stars are there on the US flag? 2. How many states are there in the Union? 3. What color are the stars on our flag? 4. What do the stars on the flag mean? 5. How many stripes are there on the flag? 6. What date is the Day of Independence? 7. The US achieved Independence from whom? 8. What country did we fight during the Revolutionary War? 9. Who was the first President of the United States? 10. What do we call a change of the Constitution? All pretty straightforward, I think. (If you need the answers, e-mail me.)
REDESIGNED TEST – Sample U.S. Citizenship Test Questions: 1. Name one war fought by the United States in the 1900s. OK, pretty easy. Well, unless you get all technical about it. If Congress is supposed to declare war, are the armed conflicts the US has had after WWII actually wars? 2. What did Susan B. Anthony do? Well, I’m sure she DID lots of different things, such as eating breakfast. I know that fighting for women’s suffrage is the answer, but it feels awkwardly phrased. 3. What is one thing Benjamin Franklin is famous for? Would philandering be an acceptable answer? Yeah, they want the almanac, electricity, the stove, eyewear, diplomat to France and that type of thing, but again, pretty open-ended. 4. There were 13 original states. Name three. Pretty easy – just stay on the east coast and don’t pick Maine, Vermont or Florida. 5. What is one responsibility that is only for United States citizens? Huh? Is this a reference to voting? If so, other people vote in their own countries and lots of people here don’t. If it’s serving on juries, lots of people get out that. Non-citizens serve in the military, and most citizens don’t. 6. What does the judicial branch do? I get a lot of right-wing literature, so if someone wrote “make law”, they might very well think they’re right. 7. Name your U.S. Representative. Now, THAT’S a good question. Mine’s Paul Tonko, freshman Democrat. 8. Who makes federal laws? Unless you answer The Supreme Court, easy one. 9. What does the Constitution do? Well it DOES a lot of things, including setting terms of government officials. Another amorphous question. 10. What is the supreme law of the land? Ah, a tough but knowable question. Article VI of the Constitution of the United States contains the “supremacy clause,” which establishes that laws passed by Congress, treaties of the United States with other nations, and the Constitution “shall be the supreme Law of the Land.”
Here’s another sample test; looks rather old school, though. For new test guides, I’d go to the USCIS site.
I recently took one of those Could you pass the U.S. citizenship test? things on Facebook and got 19 out of 20; don’t know what I missed. Being an American, and hearing how some of my fellow citizens interpret things, I’ve long believed that non-Americans might well fare better on the citizenship test than those born in the USA. *** Curious thing: I was riding my bike to church a week and a half ago and, as usual, checked out the license plates. understand that church is only 1.6 miles from my house, according to Mapquest. I saw plates from the states of MA, NJ, and VT; not at all unusual. I also saw plates from PA and FL, not rare. (Folks from Florida often come north for the summer.) But I also saw CA, DE, MD, MI, OH, RI, SC, TX, VA, and WI. It was not a college graduation weekend. Most peculiar.
There’s much more at Social Security’s Popular Baby Names site such as the names of twins born in 2008, by rank: 1 Jacob, Joshua 69 2 Daniel, David 59 3 Jayden, Jordan 56 4 Ethan, Evan 50 5 Taylor, Tyler 43 6 Gabriella, Isabella 42
Interesting stuff. The problem I have with most of the the stories is that it doesn’t tell you the change in the nature of naming children.
For instance, below are percentages of boys, girls born with these names: 1880 1 John 8.1541%, Mary 7.2381% 2 William 8.0511%, Anna 2.6678% 3 James 5.0057%, Emma 2.0521% 4 Charles 4.5167%, Elizabeth 1.9865% 5 George 4.3292%, Minnie 1.7888% 6 Frank 2.7380%, Margaret 1.6167% 7 Joseph 2.2229%, Ida 1.5081% 8 Thomas 2.1401%, Alice 1.4487% 9 Henry 2.0641%, Bertha 1.3523% 10 Robert 2.0404%, Sarah 1.3196%
1930
1 Robert 5.5021%, Mary 5.4969% 2 James 4.7781%, Betty 3.2794% 3 John 4.6417%, Dorothy 2.6064% 4 William 4.1855%, Helen 1.7076% 5 Richard 2.8491%, Margaret 1.5743% 6 Charles 2.8197%, Barbara 1.5683% 7 Donald 2.5723%, Patricia 1.3507% 8 George 2.0155%, Joan 1.3280% 9 Joseph 1.8579%, Doris 1.3250% 10 Edward 1.5346%, Ruth 1.2804%
1980 1 Michael 3.7039%, Jennifer 3.2811% 2 Christopher 2.6531%, Amanda 2.0132% 3 Jason 2.5994%, Jessica 1.9064% 4 David 2.2600%, Melissa 1.7776% 5 James 2.1205%, Sarah 1.4464% 6 Matthew 2.0417%, Heather 1.1223% 7 Joshua 1.9454%, Nicole 1.1189% 8 John 1.9018%, Amy 1.1148% 9 Robert 1.8475%, Elizabeth 1.0972% 10 Joseph 1.6285%, Michelle 1.0743%
2008 1 Jacob 1.0355%, Emma 0.9043% 2 Michael 0.9437%. Isabella 0.8941% 3 Ethan 0.9301%, Emily 0.8377% 4 Joshua 0.8799%, Madison 0.8199% 5 Daniel 0.8702%, Ava 0.8198% 6 Alexander 0.8566%, Olivia 0.8196% 7 Anthony 0.8442%, Sophia 0.7729% 8 William 0.8438%, Abigail 0.7250% 9 Christopher 0.8268%, Elizabeth 0.5748% 10 Matthew 0.8061%, Chloe 0.5692%
In 1880, two boy names were used by almost one-sixth of the population, while Mary was nearly thrice as popular as the next most popular girl’s name. By 2008, the #1 names was considerably less dominant than the #10 names in 1980.
I decided to pick out some boys’ and girls’ names not entirely at random to note their trends.
Male
Roger 1880-349 1930-57 1980-134 2008-463 highest year-22 in 1945 (unsurprisingly)
Darrin not in top 1000 until 1959 1980-505 not in top 1000 since 2004 highest year-102 in 1965
Gordon 1880-233 1930-77 1980-345 2008-946 highest year-70 in 1935
Rex 1880-519 1930-233 1980-488 2008-799 not in top 1000 in 1999-2002 highest year-171 in 1951
Arthur 1880-14 1930-23 1980-147 2008-363 highest year-14 in 1880-1884, 1886-1899, 1901
Norman 1880-133 1930-40 1980-286 not in top 1000 since 2005 highest year-36 in 1931
Leslie 1880-167 1930-139 1980-354 not in top 1000 since 1997 highest year-81 in 1895
Female
Carol 1880-685 1930-54 1980-232 not in top 1000 in 1883 not in top 1000 since 2006 highest year-4 in 1941
Lydia 1880-77 1930-233 1980-287 2008-120 highest year-75 in 1883
Gertrude 1880-25 1930-96 not in top 1000 since 1965 highest year-22 in 1906
Marcia 1880-614 1930-231 1980-414 not in top 1000 in 1992 not in top 1000 since 1994 highest year-74 in 1951
Gladys 1880-370 1930-48 1980-628 not in top 1000 in 1998 not in top 1000 since 1999 highest year-11 in 1901
Karen 1880-not in top 1000 until 1881 1930-687 1980-54 2008-183 not in top 1000 in 1882-1884, 1888, 1891, 1895-1905, 1907-1911, 1913-1917, 1919-1923, 1925, 1925, 1927 highest year-3 in 1965
Leslie 1880-655 1930-601 1980-61 2008-147 highest year-56 in 1981
Note that the specific spelling matters. For instance, on the boys’ side in 2008, Arthur is #363, but, separately, Arturo is #352. Similarly, on the girls’ 2008 list, Leslie is #147 and Lesly, #447; Lesley fell off the chart in 2008.
