The Death of Christmas

This is what Christmas was when I was young:

I am no longer young. As I aged, Christmas, or as I will type it from now on, Xmas, slowly lost it's luster. I used to like buying things for people, and would plan out everything in advance, but grownups don't have the same time (or frankly the enthusiasm) as younger people. Eventually I felt like I was buying things for people not because I wanted to give them something but because I felt obligated to do so. If you know me at all, I don't do things just because I'm supposed to. I challenge all traditions and I've realized that if I feel like buying something for someone, I just do it. I don't need or want to wait for a specific holiday to give that person said gift. I just give them the gift because I care about the person, not the holiday.

So where does this leave me? Xmas, like all religious holidays, has become an irritating family obligation.Why the hell can't we just get together whenever? Why do families only feel the need to tolerate one another on holidays but no other time during the year? The cool holidays, like Halloween and New Years are for friends to drink (St. Patrick's day is almost non religious at this point as well), and Thanksgiving is for families to gorge themselves on food they really shouldn't. So wtf Xmas and Easter?

Religious holidays are becoming more and more pointless. For those few people who still believe that Xmas is about Christ, this time of the year must be a depressing cavalcade of consumerism and greed that has totally gone off message. Now that everyone's saying "Happy Holidays" to be polite to the Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists, etc, and basically just going on present fueled binges, does Christ even cross the minds of the average person anymore? I know some Christians are screaming about the "War on Christmas" but, let's face it, it's a secular holiday now, and kind of a disgustingly materialistic one.

So that's me, Xmas Debbie Downer. What's the male equivalent of that? Bobbie Bummer? Anyway, yeah, Xmas lost it's appeal to me. I get a day off work and I get to see my family, but honestly I'd rather skip the holiday and go see my family because I want to see them, not because I'm obligated by some holiday that no one really understands anymore.

Vaccine Awareness Month

Has it already been a year since the last Vaccine Awareness Month? A whole year has passed and people still are on their crusade to declare vaccines to be the greatest threat to human heath in like forever. Of course, they declare this in the face of the fact that general human health has vastly increased since the advent of vaccines. They scream about evil vaccines, apparently forgetting that smallpox is gone, polio is being wiped out, most people haven't even heard of whooping cough other than the outbreak last year, and that vaccine preventable diseases are slowly being diminished if not eradicated throughout the year.

To deny that vaccines work is attributable to only two things: gross and negligent ignorance of reality or a willing and somewhat impressive if frightening ability to lie to oneself. Well, technically there's the third option of sociopaths who are doing this because it's fun for them, but that's just scary. Simply put, there is no way to be anti-vaccine and be a rational person. "Too many too soon" is irrational fear not based in reality. "Vaccine preventable diseases aren't that bad" is cruel, evil, and obviously untrue. "I just want to make vaccines safe" is a lie, not even wrong, and makes me want to punch their infant children.

In short, as I don't need to be a windbag about this one, vaccines are very safe, they do what they're supposed to do quite well, and ever time you hear some asshole yelling about how dangerous vaccines are, you can now safely remember that that person is dead wrong. And if you want actual proof/citations of what I've said:

Immunize for Good.

'Nuff said.

My first Capoeira test

I've been taking Capoeira for over two years now, but until last night, I had never been tested. I'd never been tested simply because my first instructor never had tests because it was a UD club and not a formal class and my second and current instructor really could give less of a shit about structure like that. I was sort of vaguely tangentially involved with an actual school, but as I studied with those guys all of never, getting tested or going to a Batizado never happened. My current instructor got involved with another school and I got a third instructor who is actually a mestre, a master, and as I started taking classes up through the UD group I'm still involved with, I was invited with the UD group to participate in their Batizado.

What the hell is a Batizado? Well, according to Wikipedia it's a yearly event thing where students are baptized and officially recognized as students of a school. It's also, according to hearsay and my other research on the Internet, basically a Capoeira party. Also, someone is probably going to knock me down and baptize me with the floor. A, that's really entertaining and, B, after my test last night my mestre basically threw me at the floor, so at least I have experience with being baptized by the floor.

However, as I found out last week, the test isn't the Batizado. No, the test is done before the Batizado, usually with little warning. That may just be my luck, it may be a thing, I don't really know, all I know is I had been training my ass off for this test expecting it to be a lot later than it actually ended up being. So though I was fairly prepared, I could have been more prepared. Moving on.

Given that Capoeira is generally very laid back, the testing itself is actually laid back as well. I've been to many other tests in several other schools, and none were close to as laid back as this. However, don't even begin to imagine that it was easy. Crotch no.

Here's how it went down. I showed up, I was told I was testing, I warmed up a little, then me and the guy running the test went to a corner of the classroom and I got my test on. My tester said do ginga. I started to ginga. I didn't stop my ginga, other than for a few seconds at a time, for the rest of the test. I couldn't say exactly how long the test was, but try doing a ginga for five minutes and your legs will burn. The test was at least forty five minutes long, and the ginga was the easiest part.

To prep for this test, I had been given a sheet for the beginner, level one, and level two tests and as I was going to level two, yellow cord, I had been studying that sheet and was fairly confident with most of it. Unfortunately, as this was my first test, I had to do everything on all three sheets once on my left side and once on my right side. No pressure.

So the test was basically kicks, acrobatics, movements (called floreios), and combinations. Ok, there was also singing and playing music, but that was the cake walk. So for kicks I had to do all the kicks I'd learned, around fifteen of them, but not just the simple kick! No no, I had to do multiple variations of each kick. Acrobatics? A cartwheel is the main one, except that I know at least a dozen different varations. Of course the various cartwheels can be worked into the florieos of which can easily be combined into dozens, if not hundreds, of different movements. That wasn't even including the combinations! There were fortunately only like ten combos to do, but they could include all of the shit I was being tested on, so they got a little nuts. And all of this was done between ginga steps.

In terms of difficulty, I sweat so much that I had to wipe down the floor three times, and eventually, after nearly killing myself by slipping, my tester took pity on me and we found a carpeted area for the flying, spinning, jumping, flipping end of my test. I say in jest that I sweat out a gallon, but I'm not sure how much of a jest that is because my shirt was disgusting by the end of the test. Also, though I had prepared greatly, I still didn't know like five moves, so I had to figure them out during the test. No pressure.

All told, though, the test was within my bounds. It was intimidating as hell, but I stared it in the face and did my best and I passed. All that's left is the Batizado. So I go to a party and get my belt? Oh, yes, it's so easy. Except for that little minor detail thing where the Batizado is actually spread over many days, with lots of other workshops, music, and dance lessons.

I love Capoeira... but sometimes it loves me back a little too much.

I hate nutrition more today

So as I may have mentioned I take a drug that helps me sleep called Seroquel. It's hardcore, to quote Wikipedia, "an atypical antipsychotic approved for the treatment of schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder." No, I'm not psychotic or schizo, I just don't sleep well and one of the off label uses for Seroquel is sleep aid, and it's unmatched in being able to help people who can't sleep otherwise. Since being on this drug I have been able to sleep better than ever before, but it does have a downside: weight gain. Ever had a full meal and then been just as hungry after that meal as when you started and have a desperate compulsion to continue eating? Yeah, that's Seroquel. I'm hovering around 205 lbs lately, which is really bad on the BMI scale, though not actually that bad in reality. Still, I'm bigger than I want to be.

I have fought tooth and nail to bring my weight back down. I eat much less food that I really enjoy (read high flavor high calorie) and much more reasonable stuff (fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, etc). I have slowly been cutting calorie sources out of my diet, losing sugar where I can, eating healthier breads, not eating those chips with my lunch, limiting my happiest food (desert) to one small serving a day. However, I never saw much of a difference in my weight.

A couple of weeks ago recently, I decided I needed some downtime from my very restricted diet and just ate whatever the hell I felt like for two weeks. It was glorious and delicious. So much bad food. And you know what? I didn't see a difference in my weight either up or down.

After that came my return to the UD Capoeira classes, where I decided to increase my workout schedule to a ludicrous 5 days a week. Granted I've only managed four days a week so far, but that's still doubling my already challenging workout schedule. I've been at this for weeks. Net result on my weight without increasing the amount or badness of the food I eat? No change.

I was starting to think I'd gone insane. Maybe I was sleep eating? Maybe I was unconsciously eating an additional 1000 calories a day somehow? Maybe my 15 minute walk that I've been forced to skip more often due to the new job was actually burning more calories than I thought? Then I turned to the Internet.

As it turns out, people on Seroquel who have a problem with weight gain have noticed a weird phenomenon: they gain weight to a point they hate and then that weight remains constant no matter what changes to diet or exercise are made. The only people who saw any weight loss were the ones who cut back on Seroquel or transitioned to different drugs.

Apparently if I ever want to not be 205 pounds I have to cut back on my only hope of sleeping at night. I don't have to work out or eat differently, I just have to stop sleeping. This is a really, really big problem for me, as I'm not willing to go back to the land of sleep deprivation, but I really want to get some weight off. I'm doing well in Capoeira, but if I lost even ten pounds I could be doing so much better, not to mention I'd look better.

For now, at least, I'm going to stick to the status quo. I may not be happy with my weight, but at least it is stable and not disgusting. We'll see if continued increased activity over months has some long term gains or not and, come my next doctor's apt, see if there aren't any new viable sleep aid choices.

I hate nutrition

I may have bitched about this before, but one of the side effects of one of the drugs I'm on is weight gain. I work out and do my best to eat right, but it's ever a problem for me feeling like I'm carrying more weight than I should. Because of this, I'm careful to try to eat better most of the time. Recently I started eating at Moe's and became a big fan of their burritos. I didn't want to look up the caloric info on it, mostly because I was sure it was going to be bad and I was going to have to eat them less. However, when I finally looked it up, even when I included every single ingredient, the burrito was less than 450 calories. I was pleasantly surprised. Then, just because I was there, I glanced at how much the 2 ounces of queso I had was, expecting bad things. 150 calories. Really, not that bad. So overall, 600 calories, not bad. Then I looked at the tortilla chips.

600 calories? Six the fuck hundred calories? For a few chips? The burrito and the freaking cheese sauce combined equals some chips? God dammit. So now I guess I just get a burrito. I hate nutrition.

Sexist, racist, homophobic thinking…

Despite being a privileged white male, I am not sexist, racist, or homophobic. I was raised in a color blind, gender blind, sexual preference blind house. When I was a child I made friends with white and black children without preference because I didn’t know there was supposed to be a difference. I was about as competent with girls as a child as I am with women as an adult, but I never thought of them as anything less than my equals. As a child I was brought up in a church with active and out gay members and talked to them like all the other adults because they were all just adults to me.

I never knew I was supposed to care.

As a result I grew up with the attitude of “I don’t care if you’re not white/a woman/gay” because I didn’t know that wasn’t a good thing. I thought it was. However, as learning is one of those things I just won’t stop doing, I’m coming to realize that my attitude isn’t the best one. It’s not that I don’t care that you’re different from me, it’s that it doesn’t bother me that you’re different from me.

As the best example I can think of off the top of my head, my Capoeira instructor Rasai is a dreadlocked Jamaican man with huge muscles and a larger than life personality. He was raised on a farm, really finds our concept of holidays annoying, and is a very dirty old man. None of this got in the way of me being his student or becoming his friend. Sure we bicker about how he should chill out about having his picture taken or maybe consider getting a goddamn cell phone, but we’re still friends. Do I not care that he’s black? Am I ignoring his heritage?

What I think I’m doing is outright accepting that he’s different in many ways and not letting those differences make me think less of him. I take these different experiences he’s had as just a fact of life because everyone is different. This is autopilot for me. Rather than being a point of contention, I find his very different outlook on life refreshing and interesting.

So from now on it's not, "I don't care if you're X." I don't have a simple one-liner to replace it, but maybe that's the point.

The Internet/atheist/skepticism/sexism shitstorm you probably don't know about

I was going to ignore this issue, mostly because it's aggravating to watch this much fail, but after reading Greta Christina's post, I came to the conclusion that talking is better, so here's a post about sexism in the skepticism / atheism world.

Here's where it started: Rebecca Watson went to some atheist shindig in Ireland, gave a speech about sexism, and later went drinking with friends. At 4 AM she headed for bed. A guy joined her in the elevator and chose that moment to say that he was impressed by her and invite her to his room for coffee. She declined and in a blog post mentioned this and said that it made her feel uncomfortable and suggested, "Guys, don't do that." That like two minutes out of the video here.

Here's where it went wrong: though some people agreed with Rebecca that the dude in the elevator (later dubbed Elevator Guy), some people, both men and women, disagreed with Rebecca. Those who disagreed were often men aggressively insisting that Rebecca was wrong, she shouldn't have been creeped out, that she was a man-hater, and other very sexist things that went all the way from slightly misogynistic to OMG WTF misogyny.

Here's where it went explode: Richard Dawkins, Dark Lord of the Atheists, posted on PZ Myers' blog some very sarcastic and dismissive comments that enraged the pro Rebecca side and fueled the fires of the misogynistic idiots. It's been an ongoing shitstorm of idiocy ever since. From "guys, don't be creepy" to massive Internet flame war spanning dozens of sites in just under a week.

Now, I think that Rebecca's comment was reasonable and, even if Elevator Guy's intentions were the purest of gold, the dude did something creepy possibly inadvertently. That's where it should have ended. Maybe some people could say, "Poor socially awkward guy." Instead, people, admittedly including women, but mostly men, made complete asses of themselves by letting both privilege and disgusting sexism flare up and out of control. And they're still going. Calmer heads have tried to calm shit down, but Mansplaining abounds.

The bad thing is a lot of guys are sexist idiots. The good thing is that as this gets SO MUCH attention, at least some guys are finally starting to actually hear what women are saying: context matters. Yes, technically guys can hit on women anytime, anywhere, under any circumstances, but sometimes that's going to be inappropriate or creepy. Picking the correct moment to hit on a woman makes a world of difference.

As an aside, my favorite part of this situation is that Richard Dawkins is a dick. Back in the "Don't be a dick" conversation Phil Plait started, Dawkins came out against not being a dick, as did a lot of other assholes. Very recently Dawkins spoke out against Phil's position again, pointing out that being a dick could be useful. Back when the conversation started I commented, "The dicks also clearly don’t care who their target is..." Well, now Dawkins has proved my point. Despite the fact that Rebecca Watson is popular, and very intelligent, and a great help to both the atheist and skeptic movements, and was in theory actually a friend to Dawkins, he chose to be a douchebag over being polite and did so publicly no less. Many of the people who advocate that being dicks is useful don't give a crap who their target is. They're too interested in getting their petty digs in to worry about offending someone, even if that person is a friend or an ally.

Before my whole figuring out out I was an atheist thing, I'd thought poorly of Dawkins, thinking him an asshole. As I was reading up on atheism, he was referred to and said some nice things enough so that I was grudgingly changing my opinion of him. Now, however, he's proved what I always thought about him: he's an asshole. He may be smart, and he may write good books, and he may even say useful and helpful things, but above all he's an asshole. I choose to listen to atheists and skeptics who understand that, yes, context matters. I have friends who are religious, and while I may completely disagree with their religious views, I'd rather have them as my friends than get in some petty digs about religion.

Priorities. I has them.

Sort of a retraction...

So this is sort of embarrassing, but as it turns out I am an atheist, I just didn't know it. Yeah, really. In fact I have been an atheist for a very long time, I just wasn't aware of it. How is this possible? Allow me to quote YouTube user AronRa: "Atheist does not mean that you reject the possibility of a god," and "The only thing that defines an atheist is that you are not convinced that there must be a god." I am not convinced.

What's more amusing to me is that I wrote AronRa an email to thank him for helping me figure this out and he actually responded that it was his intention to share this story at future atheist meetings and conventions. That is, I think, freaking hilarious.

In further researching this it turns out that Greta Christina had something similar to say about atheism. "For me, and for the overwhelming majority of atheists I know, our atheism is a provisional conclusion, based on careful reasoning and on the best available evidence we have. Our atheism is the conclusion that the God hypothesis is unsupported by any good evidence, and that unless we see better evidence, we're going to assume that God does not exist. If we see better evidence, we'll change our minds."

Seems that what I though atheism was isn't what atheism is. I thought that atheism is the belief that there is no god, and that is apparently the general belief. Instead atheism is the lack of a belief in god. A bit of a quibble, but it shoots the "is atheism a belief?" question right in the face. I don't believe there is no god, I lack the belief that there is a god. If you could give me indisputable evidence that god existed tomorrow, I'd change my mind. Even Richard Dawkins, Dark Lord of the Atheists, said that on a scale of 1 being an absolute certainty that there is a god and 7 being absolute certainty that there is not a god that he was at a 6.

Granted, if you did give me that evidence, you'd still have to work to make me care much, so even though my atheism might change, my apatheism probably wouldn't. And, yes, it's possible to be both. It's possible to be an agnostic and an atheist at the same time as well apparently.

So what does this change? In many ways, not much. I think the same things I thought before this revelation. But in some ways, huge changes. I used to be pissed off because the Pledge of Allegiance (yes I will not shut up about this) was an insult to a group I cared about but didn't consider myself to be a part of; now the Pledge is an insult to me. Every time I see "In God we trust" on a coin or dolla bill, it's me that's devalued. I'm as patriotic as the next guy. I'm more patriotic than the next guy. But because I lack a belief that some people have I'm looked down on, considered unelectable, and untrustworthy?

In some ways I'm the same guy. In others I now burn with an anger I didn't feel before. I may be the same shouty, opinionated, arrogant, patriotic, pro underdog guy as before, but it's different now... Now I am the underdog.

Should you be afraid of high fructose corn syrup?

No. No you shouldn't.

...

Yeah, I know, you've heard that HFC causes all kinds of things from obesity, diabeetus, and high blood pressure to heart attacks and cancer! Everyone's heard about how bad HFC is for us. Well, the truth is, HFC is not dangerous and it isn't the cause of modern American obesity.

HFC is a sugar and, chemically speaking, a sugar is a sugar is a sugar. There are lots of sugars: glucose, fructose, sucrose, lactose, and many others. Your body, assuming you aren't a diabetic or lactose intolerant, treats them all generally the same way, that is as a sugar. That means that your table sugar and that "healthier" raw sugar, are just different combinations of the same simple sugars. The flavor may be different, but your body breaks them down easily with no regard to flavor.

So why have you hear SO MUCH BS about HFC? Because somewhere someone reported that ingesting large amounts of HFC can cause cause obesity, which can lead to diabeetus (and then idiots on the Internet lay on the cancer BS). What everyone neglects to mention immediately following that is that EVERY SUGAR CAN DO THAT. If you eat two pounds of table sugar a day, you gonna get fat and are increasing your chances of getting diabeetus. Remember how eating anything to excess is bad for you? That's true here. A diet with HFC in it is not automatically worse than a diet high in honey, which is largely fructose as well.

As our country becomes more and more health obsessed, people continue to look for single bullet causes for obesity. There isn't one. Still, HFC is popular because it is cheap and readily available, so people will try to blame it. But the problem lies not with HFC, but with stupid people who drink the equivalent of two pounds of sugar in soda a day, or have a high calorie diet with a lot of HFC in it in some other form.

So don't avoid HFC as a sweetener. It won't cause cancer, it won't give you diabeetus, and it certainly won't make you fat. Eating like a fatass and not exercising will make you fat.

Skepticism

Once upon a time I believed in the possibility of all sorts of things: gods, ghosts, demons, angels, aliens, yeti, energy flows, ley lines, acupuncture, traditional Chinese medicine, folk remedies, and so on. Over time I became more skeptical and started questioning things I previously believed. Why is it that photos of alien craft have deceased as the prevalence of camera phones has increased? Why do ghost hunters present laughable evidence and get taken seriously? Why does acupuncture perform no better than a placebo when tested outside of China? Why do soft-style chi masters get massacred by MMA fighters?

Now I consider myself a hard line skeptic. All that shit I mentioned above? Either intensely unlikely (99% probability) or complete bullshit (like homeopathy). Every new claim I see (e.g. "1 tip to a flat belly" ads) is viewed with great distrust. Nothing is free of the question, "How does that work?"

One issue I have run into, as have many skeptics, is that skepticism is viewed pejoratively, that we skeptics are Debbie Downers, the people out to ruin the party. I have run into this with both family and friends and have had arguments over many things. In my experience, people seem less mad about hte topic and more angry that I am objecting at all.

I don't understand this. I think that the general perception is that I am only being skeptical to be annoying, or a know-it-all, or even just to alienate people. I fail to see how going through life credulously believing every stupid idea thrown at me is a bad thing. Despite this, I'm the jerk for pointing out that homeopathy is complete BS.

The reason I am a skeptic is, despite what some seem to believe, is because I value knowledge. I want people to do what works, not fall for an anecdote strong but evidence weak fad. I don't want friends or family wasting money on scams or wasting hope on anything that won't ever work better than a placebo.

So what is a skeptic to do? I'd rather not be seen as a jerk by family and friends, but I'm not going to back down about any quackery or other BS that can hurt people or waste their money. I try to keep an open mind about new ideas, but considering the cavalcade of nonsense I see every day, it's hard to not just assume that everything is a scam, a lie, or worse. Suggestions?

Interesting...

Yesterday my boss sent out an email saying that another team in the company had an opening and was anybody interested. The way the email was framed, it was pretty clearly just an "I sent this email out because someone asked me to, but no one will actually say yes, so there's no danger of losing any people here" email. I thought about it for a few minutes, then responded that I was interested and found a person on that team and talked to her about it just so I was sure they knew I was interested.

This new job would be much more like an actual job in that I would have stuff to do constantly, would actually involve more writing and less actual technology (something I've been interested in for a while now), and would be with a team full of people I generally enjoy, so there aren't many downsides (though there are some big ones, like many more meetings). I have my reservations, but this sounds like a good move for me, so I'm moving forward to see what happens.

I haven't heard anything interesting today and have had some free time to fret about it, but with any luck, I'll have information soon. Maybe I'll be able to move out of my boring stressful and into a busy stressful job! If that sounds dumb to you, I can say with great confidence that I would rather be busy and stressed then bored and stressed. More news as it appears...

An eloquent defense

I don't know who this Stephanie Z chick is but her comment is a very clear and calm explanation why atheists can seem aggressive.

It’s worth remembering where this debate came from. Atheists, only recently starting to stand up and be counted in any number, are seeing the people who have been saying the same things that atheists have been saying for centuries (as noted in comment 5, then largely ignored) being told to hush up because they’re being noticed for once and that’s making trouble. These are frequently also the people who gave your rank-and-file atheist the courage to come out and who provide sympathy when coming out results in the crap it always results in. But hush, because what these other people are doing is really important.

Of course, it is important. But so is being supported and encouraged as an out atheist. So is being able to tell people how religion hurt you or those you love without having to put bows on it. So is being able to tell other people that they have a real choice to get out of abusive religions. So is being able to run for public office. So is being able to keep your job. So is being able to keep your kids.

But hush. And be really nice to the people who are telling you to hush. Be nice to the people who are telling you that you matter less than what they’re doing. Be nice to the people who are doing good work but only talk about why people like you are bad. Be nice to the people who might, someday let you eat at the grown-up table if you stay quiet enough at the children’s table first (and when there are no more grown-up problems you might interfere with). Hush and trust them, despite the fact that they’re calling you the problem.

Yeah, no. Atheists are being aggressive, in part, because they’re being told to go back to being passive. They’re being argumentative because there’s a constant onslaught of messages leveled at them and everyone they have to deal with that becomes the unquestioned social background if they don’t. They’re being rude because everybody is rude sometimes, and they’re not going to be left out if you’re not. They’re being condescending because you’ve been told this before in some form, but you can’t seem to move past the fact that someone insulted you in order to hear it.

Damn straight.

Oh, the sprain!

So my instructor sprained my ankle two weeks ago today. What, I didn't do it? No, it's legitimately his fault. I was doing a leg kick, he caught my leg with both of his legs and twisted, and with a resounding pop my ankle was sprained. Now, I've had sprains before, and they've been usually painful and annoying but short lived. This situation was quite different as there was no pain. That's right, sprained ankle, no pain whatsoever. It led me to wonder if it was actually sprained, but as it swelled up like a wee balloon, yes I'm now sure it was sprained. However, the lack of pain really confused me. Anyway, the usual response to a sprain is RICE:

Rest
Ice
Compression
Elevation

So did I rest it? No. It didn't hurt, so I kept working out on it, not just immediately following but in the past two weeks as well. Did I ice it? Not initially, but when the swelling didn't go down I iced it some to no avail. Elevation I tried, but again lack of results. Eventually I decided to try compression, and that seems to have worked to some degree, as my ankle now actually hurts sometimes. However, the swelling is still there, so I'm going back to mostly apathy.

I'll ice it and compress it some more tonight, but I doubt it will make a difference. Besides, since I'll only be working on the ankle after Capoeira tonight I'll be at a disadvantage anyway. You'd think my trip to FL this weekend might force me to rest it, but as I'm already hunting down a Capoeira school to play at while I'm out of town, I don't see that happening.

If my foot rots off or something equally horrifying, I give you full rights to call me an idiot.

Attempt eight...

Religion, the lack, and everything else, is a difficult subject to tackle. The problem here is that I have friends on all sides of this argument. I have atheist friends. I have friends who range from casually to devoutly held faith. What's important to me is that I keep these friends. Unfortunately it's also important that I speak my mind. This is a post I've been unable to finish several times, but I'm having another stab at it. I may even post this one.

What I am is apathetic, an apatheist to be precise. Basically I don't care if there is or isn't a god. God or not god has had no meaningful or relevant affect on my life other than to be something to argue about, so fuck it. I have better things to do with my time, like stare at walls, chew gum, or get in pointless arguments on the Internet. I don't agree with atheists or theists, so once again I'm in a tiny corner where few others bother to tread. So what do I think about everyone else?

Atheists first. The following is why I'm not an atheist courtesy of Carl Sagan: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." I actually agree with atheists for the most part. However, there are New Atheists, or Gnu Atheists, who basically called open season on religion and are attacking religion at every step. They are rational thinkers and back up their assertions on typically good evidence, but they don't care who they offend at the end of the day calling the religious deluded and worse. While I appreciate the sentiment, being dicks about it isn't really helping as I see it, so I find them annoying even as I agree with much of what they say. But there are plenty of atheists with a live and let live attitude, so fine.

Now religion. Religion is based on faith; that means that you can't prove what you believe but you believe it nonethless. I do not discount that it takes strength to have this faith; I respect that it's difficult. However, what I don't respect is when the faithful viciously attack atheists for daring to dissent or even just for asking questions. Still, there are plenty of religious people with a live and let live attitude, so also fine.

Then we get to politics. Who are the people who hold political offices? Christians. Sure there's the occasional Jewish or Muslim person, but 99% of the time Christians. Most people wouldn't vote for an atheist no matter his qualifications. That attitude is so un-American it makes me want to punch babies. When politicians start bitching about being persecuted by the atheists, secularists, or anything else like that, I want to punch their infant children. That's like republicans AND democrats complaining about being persecuted by libertarians! Like atheists, we libertarians aren't even invited to the party. However, I've never heard anyone say they wouldn't consider voting for a libertarian based on his party alone (just because we're crazy). I can say that I've heard, many times, that people wouldn't vote for an atheist entirely because that person was an atheist. That, in a nutshell, is why I'm so aggressively pro-atheist. If you hate blacks you're a racist and that's not ok; if you hate jewish people you're anti-Semitic and that's not ok; if you hate gay people, you're a homophobe and that's increasingly not ok; if you hate fat people, you're an asshole and that's not ok; if you hate atheists, well, that's just fine? Fucking no.

We are guaranteed religious freedom by the Constitution, all of us, every single American. Choosing to not follow a religion, while unpopular, is something that, as Americans, we should be defending. Unpopular views, even those we find extremely distasteful, are the right of all Americans. I may hate what the Westboro Baptist Church is and says, but they have a right to say it, just as I have the right to revile their existence.

So what's my point? Whatever you believe, so long as you accept the glaring flaws of your belief and don't force it upon others, is fine by me. Whatever you believe, so long as you agree that people who completely disagree with you have the right to believe what they want, then we're good. Fortunately, I think this includes nearly everyone I count as a friend. I am a lucky man.

I hate my fucking job

I have been asking for programming work for now no less than nine months. Last week I was finally given a programming project which I got quite far into on Friday. Then today, I come into work and my computer is hosed. Can't work! I put in the request to get it fixed, but how fast do they get here? They don't. So the only programming work I've had in forever is immediately passed on to another programmer. And it turns out that the information I was given to complete this task was actually wrong. So even if I had finished the stupid programming job, it wouldn't have been right and I would have taken shit for that, despite the fact that I would have been doing what I was told in the first fucking place. Fuck my life.

Breaking up is hard to do

I just ended a relationship with a young lady I had met on the Internet. The attraction was there and while I did like her, I knew that long term potential wasn't there, so I broke it off with her. I did the best I could, I was honest and clear, tried to blunt the hurt as much as possible. She really liked me and she didn't take the news too well, and I hate giving good people bad news. I don't know if it speaks well of me or makes me a wuss, but I really feel like a jerk right now. I made the right choice, that I'm sure of, and I made it very clear to her that she did nothing wrong, but she was shocked and hurt and I hate that I had to make her feel that way.

In a way it's almost better when relationships explode in a fiery conflagration that makes everyone involved angry and screamy. That kind of pain is easy to deal with, or it is for me. This quiet, sad, and drama-free breakup just sucks. I wish there had been something I could have done differently to make it better, but short of staying in the relationship till something better came along which is a most dick of dick moves, there was no way to avoid this.

Stupid emotions. I should, like, be a robot. Or something.

Admitting weakness...

Pull ups, chin ups, you name it, I couldn't do them. I've taken many martial arts, but the ability to pull oneself up was never really called upon. As such I never actually did any pull ups or chin ups. So when my Capoeira instructor brought in a chin up bar, I expected to have a poor showing. Well, worse than that, I couldn't do a single chin up, much less a pull up. I felt appropriately shamed. Though Capoeira is lotsa legs, having appropriate upper body strength is also important, so resolved to start training towards pull ups. I suppose it's worth mentioning that if I cheat, that is I don't start and end at a dead hang, I can muddle out a few chin ups, but do it right or don't do it at all, so my goal was a full pull: from a dead hang all the way up and all the way back down to a dead hang.

After a few weeks of being a cheap bastard and not buying the really expensive bars you hang in a doorway, I eventually found one for a reasonable price and started trying to do what I call L ups because the part of the bar I'm holding are parallel bits that stick out, a nice in between setting of chin up and pull up. Since I couldn't even do one up I decided the best was was to start with dead drops, that is to hop up into position and then very slowly lower all the way down to a dead hang. I found out the next day, with screamingly painful arms, that this kind of workout, while effective, is the most painful way to start. OUCH. So I looked at the other options for people who can't do any ups and found that if I put my feet behind me on a box or something that I could do slightly assisted L ups, so there I started.

It's been a few weeks and I was showing small amounts of improvement but I still couldn't do a single anything up. I had been concentrating on chin ups as my unassisted attempts as they are the easiest to do, but no luck. It was like I was pulling, and could get my shoulders to move a bit, but nothing after that. I was missing an entire muscle group or something. It was depressing, but I soldiered on as I usually do. Then, yesterday, before my full workout, I successfully struggled through a single chin up! I was totally psyched. I tried for a second one, failed, and went back to my normal workout, but I managed it!

With one down now it's just a matter of time before I get to my goal. It may be a long time, but patience is a virtue I have when it comes to strength training. My goal is going to be hard to get to but it is as follows: ten chin ups, ten L ups, and then twenty pull ups alternating pulling up to chest and up to back. From one chin up to forty assorted ups. This ain't gonna be easy, but it will definitely be worth it.

The Pledge...

The Pledge of Allegiance was, originally:

I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

In 1923 the pledge was changed so that new immigrants wouldn't confuse loyalties with their country of origin. It was:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

In 1954, after years of pressure from religious influences, the words "under god" were added, bringing the Pledge to the wording we have today.

Why is this not ok? Because "under god" is an insult to every American who doesn't believe in this nebulous "god". Atheists, obviously, are the first people that pop to mind for who's being insulted, but let's not forget Apatheists, Secularists, Humanists, Wiccans, and anyone else who isn't Christian. Oh, yes, the non-specific "god" is supposedly intended to include other religions, but the words were added by Christians for Christians. This is where the bullshit of "we are a Christian nation" began, and here it must end.

We are not a Christian nation. That's what the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state are all about. We are a nation of all religions and none, or at least we're supposed to be. So every time someone posts their little "say the pledge like we always did" bullshit on Facebook or sends on a forwarded email chain of the same crap I get pissed. This isn't a little deal. It's a big deal. I thought the "under god" line should be removed when I was active at my parents church, I thought the same when I flirted with atheism, the same when I went Buddhist, and the same now that I'm an apatheist. It has nothing to do with my religion and everything to do with believing in liberty and justice for all, because there are no exceptions listed after "for all", and until 1954 there weren't any exceptions in the Pledge either.

To put it in terms that might resonate with you more, imagine if instead of "one nation under god" the pledge read "one white nation". Would that be just as ok? No! It would be unimaginably racist and wouldn't even be considered to be added to the pledge. So how is "under god" any better? It isn't. If you'd like to see this horrible and apt comparison thoroughly examined, read this. It gets the point across more eloquently than I could.

Ultimately, it comes down to this: If the pledge is to be spoken in schools, in government buildings, or in the public square, it must be representative of ALL Americans. Excise two inappropriate words, and no one in the country would ever complain about the Pledge again. That way we truly could get back to being, "one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Why I'm pro-atheist.

I still haven't yet figured out how to write my religion/atheism/etc post, but I do have a number of examples as to why I am very pro-atheist when it comes to politics. This probably won't surprise you, but these examples come from republicans.

Newt Gingrich:
"I have two grandchildren: Maggie is 11; Robert is 9. I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

Me:
This horrifying secular atheist country will be dominated by radical Islamists? What?

Mitt Romney:
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone....[I]n recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning....It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

Me:
Separation of church and state is pretty clear just from the name itself. Stating that religion is a prerequisite for freedom is mind-bogglingly stupid, only beaten by calling secularism a religion.

Sarah Palin:
"...hearing any leader declare that America isn't a Christian nation and poking an ally like Israel in the eye, it's mind-boggling...."

Me:
America isn't a Christian nation. Fish in a barrel. Moving on.

Mike Huckabee:
"If integrity and character are divorced from God, they don't make sense."
"I almost wish that there would be, like, a simultaneous telecast, and all Americans would be forced — forced at gunpoint no less — to listen to every David Barton message, and I think our country would be better for it. I wish it’d happen."

Me:
I know people of integrity and character who don't need a God to tell them that rape, slavery, and murder are wrong. I bet you do too.
Forcing people at gunpoint to listen to David Barton is in what possible way acceptable in your mind?

Tim Pawlenty:
"We need to be a country that turns toward God. Not a country that turns away from God."
"We have, as a country, a founding perspective that we’re founded under God; our founding documents reference and acknowledge God, and acknowledge that our rights and privileges come from our Creator."

Me:
We do? Why?
No, actually, that's a bold faced lie, as God isn't mentioned in the Constitution. It's like the founders, men I might add, were deliberately separating church and state. Shocking.

This is the kind of shit that gets me so angry I can't think straight. How are these people supposed to lead a country when they're busy denying and vilifying an estimated 10% of the population based on a bigoted belief that is expressly forbidden by our founding documents? If we did have a leader who was saying things about atheists, I wish it would be something more like this:

"For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and nonbelievers."

Oh, wait, that one was President Obama. Looks like someone might get it! And he's not a republican. Shocking.

What a difference an inch makes...

.
So I've been taking Capoeira for just over two years and you'd think that, in this time, I'd have made some serious progress. Yet despite all my work and effort, even the simplest things it turns out I still have room to improve on. The ginga, the basic step or stance of Capoeira, I had been doing wrong until just recently, maybe three weeks ago. My legs have hurt ever since, as I'm trying to start doing it right, which is good. It's not necessarily that I was going ginga completely wrong, it's that some of the finer details of the technique were eluding me. Just one class with a different instructor and bam, I'm learning new things.

As for why I'm talking about this now, last night I learned something equally mind-blowing. Cartwheels, called au by Capoeristas, are a basic thing. I was taught them either my first or second night of class. I've been doing them ever since. I thought I was getting pretty good at them. Turns out that during that time I had been placing my hand ever so slightly wrong all this time. The difference in hand placement is at most a couple of inches, and is probably just an inch, but it has such an impact on not only all my au, but handstands, back bends, and other stuff that it's incredible. Honestly, if I showed you the difference, you might not even see it. I wouldn't have until last night.

I'm often awed not by how much I've learned, but how much more I have to learn even about things I thought I knew. Sometimes, like last night, I got this by asking an insightful question that led to a sudden realization. Other times I learn things through instruction. I'm not sure which is more but I definitely believe one thing:

Never stop asking questions. Sometimes the answers will astound you.

Technique vs. Strength in Capoeira

One of the most commonly repeated comments I hear while reading about Capoeira or watching videos is that Capoeira moves are more about technique than they are about strength.

Bullshit.

Yes, absolutely, if you do the move with incorrect technique, it is harder. But ALL Capoeira moves require a certain level of strength and flexibility. Even the most basic step, the ginga, takes strength to do right. Practically anyone can do a half-assed or incorrect ginga, not that hard. To do it right, however, requires a lot of leg strength. I only recently started doing ginga right, and I'm on my 2nd year of training! I'm pretty good at back bends, but it wasn't learning the technique of the move that was hard, I didn't have the upper body strength or back flexibility to do the move in the first place! I imagine most people can't do a back bend, and they certainly can't roll into a back bend from the side.

Specifically the Macaco is the move that I've heard this nonsense the most about. It's essentially a back handspring from a crouch. Technique is important, but if you don't have the leg and back strength to kick up, technique won't mean squat to you.

I'm not sure why people like to spout this nonsense, though perhaps it's some attempt to make Capoeira seem more accessible to people. Technique or not, you gonna take Capoeira, you gonna work and you gonna work hard if you're ever going to get past ginga and some kicks. I'm just sayin'.

Of Mice and Me, Part III

So remember how I said Facilities came and got my dead mouse? Well, they lied to me. The mouse and its stench remained. I complained many times and was ignored so eventually I took it to my boss and told him "fix it, I'm working from home till it's over." Even after my freaking manager gets involved Facilities tried to play it like there wasn't the smell of rotting dead thing in my cube. My boss then played the "I'll CC everyone who can fire your stupid ass on this next email". Then, and only then, did the actually nice people in Facilities show up. And tell me to GTFO of my cube. Seriously, they moved me.

Awesome!

No, really, awesome! I got moved from a cube with a view that was right next to a conference room and had foot traffic going by it all the goddamn time to a cube with half a view and zero foot traffic. I'll miss seeing 100% of the outside, but I'm stuck in a corner where no one can see me unless they walk all the way back here and the all the way into my cube. Freaking sweet. I'm so happy back here I even have some comics back up! My only actual complaint is that I have to walk forever to get to a hot water source that works for my tea, but aside from that, I am pleased.

So, live mice, dead mice, and now? New cube. I like how this turned out.

Death of religion?

The BBC is reporting on the supposed death of religion. I should only be so lucky. The comments are rather entertaining since, at the time of me writing this, most of them are in moderation. However, I think it's pretty telling that this report is coming from the UK and not the USA, as I'm 90% sure the religious seriously outnumber the irreligious here.

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is… right?

Why is this phrase something I remembering hearing a lot when I was younger and one that I have not heard in recent history? That used to be common sense, a reasonable response, the smart response. Everyone knew it, and everyone who didn’t follow it and got burned admitted they knew it sounded too good to be true. Perhaps I’m viewing my childhood with rose-tinted glasses, but I swear I remember people not falling for stupid shit all the time.

Today things seem bleak. Anti-vaccine, anti-science views are on the rise; homeopathy and naturopathy are alive and well; psychics and astrologers are doing good business; that Nigerian scam made loads of bank and apparently still does… what the hell is going on? Was I sheltered from stupid when I was young or are people just getting more stupid, more credulous, and less skeptical?

If someone came up to me after I was in a car accident and told me that to cure me of my accident he’d take a piece of the car that hit me, dilute it ten million fold in water, then put three drops of that solution on my tongue, I would think he’d lost his mind. If I had a child and someone suggested to me that instead of preventing things like polio, rubella, and measles with vaccines, that I should not vaccinate because my child might suddenly become autistic and those other diseases weren’t that bad anyway, I’d assume that person was a lunatic. If someone came up to me after a funeral and told me they could help me talk to my dearly departed, I’d assume that person to be a scam artist and a genuinely evil person. If was engaged to that special someone and some guy told me that, due to the star pattern that I’d be born under, our marriage would fail, I’d think him insane and an asshole to boot. If someone from Nigera emailed me and told me they could help me make money if I’d only give them my bank account information, I would giggle at the utter ridiculousness of that request.

People fall for each of those situations I listed every single day. Beyond that, people don’t seem to be ashamed for falling for this crap; they seem to be even more stubbornly arguing that these fairly pathetic and obvious scams must actually be true because they heard about some guy somewhere for whom it worked. Anecdotes trump evidence these days.

When did skepticism, questioning the unlikely, and belief in science take such a fall? Why is it when I question something that sounds ridiculous, like taking royal jelly from a bees to improve fertility in a human, do I become the asshole? Why is not just accepting something that sounds insane now a bad thing? Are the kids not asking questions anymore?

Unfortunately, I think I have an answer: despair. Life is hard right now, there’s no denying that unless you’re ungodly wealthy or a Republican with your blinders on. People are struggling with jobs, money, housing, health care, children, and more. Businesses are closing, even when they aren’t being run by idiots. The world is heating up, bacteria are becoming more prevalent and more dangerous, and the calamity is Japan is fresh on everyone’s mind at the moment. How is this an answer to why people are more credulous? Simple: people need hope.

Hope is powerful. Hope can make life bearable again. Having recently had a complete 180 in my hope situation at work, I can attest that this is a real thing. And, though it pains me to say this, what I think all these things I mentioned have done for people is given them hope. It’s a long shot, but given how people still buy lottery tickets religiously, long shot hopes might be even more appealing to desperate people. And these days, with hope being in short order, any hope in a storm will give succor.

Even though I can be an asshole when it comes to believing stupid shit (especially homeopathy and vaccines), I have a hard time denying people the only hope they have, no matter how stupid the hope. This may shock you, but sometimes even I know when to just nod, smile, and say nothing. I guess I'm going to just have to bite my tongue for a while. Either that or accept that I really am a know-it-all asshole.

Wow. Just wow.

As reported by Bad Astronomy, House Republicans to a man (or woman) "...voted down a simple amendment declaring the reality of climate change. Not that it was human-caused, or dangerous, just that it existed. Which it does." Holy fucking shit.

You want to argue that global warming isn't caused by man you can get some backup, some evidence that says you might be right. But that global warming is happening? That the planet is warming? You have to rely on cranks and discredited pseudo-scientists to get any evidence to merit your claim. Which is to say, you have to ignore a vast amount of evidence to believe your claim. Or, which may be the case here, you have to be a deluded idiot or being paid for your belief, and in the case of the people who are, in theory, running this country, I'm not sure which of those options I find more horrible.

I disagreed with Anthropogenic Global Warming (man made) for a long time. But now that I've actually spent the time and read a lot of data, I found that the science is sound. Also, 90%+ of climate scientists agree that AGW is real and 97%+ of climate scientists at least agree that the warming trend is real. This little demonstration by the Democrats, for whom I hold little love, just goes to prove one thing: the Republican party is anti-science. That is fucking terrifying.

Democratic Congressman Ed Markey gave a sarcastic speech that summed up the recent attacks on science by the Republican party fairly well.

I have never been prouder to be a Libertarian.

Of Mice and Me, Part II

Well, now that I went out and said how cute mice are, they got revenge on me the only way they had left... The little fucker died somewhere in my cube. I came in today and was greeted by the stench of dead rodent, and as a bonus, I couldn't find the wee body. The bastard had crammed himself into some part of my cube and perished. What a wonderful morning. Fortunately the lovely people from facilities found him somewhere and got rid of his remains while I was out to lunch. Now his mousy remains are gone and I can get back to working without a stench in my nostrils.

Now I'm depressed.

Everyone knows things are going a little rough in the economy. Yeah, you hear "good news" on the news from time to time, but as everyone I know agrees, things are hard right now. It's hit close to home in several places, but it's punched hard with today's revelation...

Between Books may close soon.

My favorite bookstore, my favorite place to get gaming supplies, my comic outlet is close to going under. I spoke to the owner today and he's been having a rough few years, and recently he had to let go one of his only other employees, a staple of the place. Lots of things about today's economy are depressing, but that I might lose my very favorite place to buy books? That one of my friends might lose his life's work? That really hurts. The best I can do is buy some books, which I will do, but unless other people also go buy some books, it's only a matter of time.

Go buy books!

Of mice and me. No, that's not a typo.

So there's been mouse sightings in my workplace. I know this because of the ear-piercing shrieks that come from the women I work with when they catch sight of mice. The otherwise sensible woman I work next to is rendered nearly inconsolable when a mouse appears. More than once when there's been a sighting of these little rodents work has, for those women, ground to a halt as they scream, discuss their terror with other women, jump at every unexpected movement, and pull their feet up onto their chairs.

Now, as a concerned and indeed compassionate adult, after a mouse sighting I take great time and care to make sure these women hear what they need to hear: that they are complete pansies and absolutely entertaining to me in their terror. And, no, I'm not kidding, I rail on these women for being afraid of a thing the size of my Mr. Potato-moto chip-clip. Seriously, the biggest mouse we've seen is, including the tail, maybe the length of one of my fingers.

Maybe I'm just a jerk, but I cannot get worked up over a tiny rodent and find it silly that other people do. A spider the size of my finger would concern me a bit; a wasp that big would get me to arm myself with smashing weapons; but a mouse? A cute little mouse? No. I had lots of little pets when I was a child, including mice, and have seen adorable little rats and whatnot as a grown man. Sorry, not scary. Startling when you're not expecting them, certainly. But that startled turns to "aww" very quickly for me.

One important detail to this story is that in all these scream-inducing mouse sightings, I have barely ever even gotten the slightest glimpse of the little bastard. I think they're adorable, so that annoyed me. However, since the mouse generally ignored me, I didn't hold much hope of seeing one.

Then I neglected to put my breakfast bars into plastic tubs! I didn't see a mouse, but I saw the signs of the little guy eating my breakfast bars. Rather than throw them out immediately, I decided to wait and see if I could see the little guy. And, with my continued neglect of throwing mouse bait out, today I finally got to see the little dude! Twice! And he was a tiny, adorable little mouse who ran away from me with all possible speed.

Obviously, as I value my ears, I haven't told anyone this. The women would either freak out or get mad at me for taunting my mouseless fate; everyone else would just tell me to stop it since it's hard enough to get rid of mice as it is. But, through a combination of neglect and patience, I finally got my very own mouse sighting here at work that didn't involve screaming.

And, yes, I threw away the mouse bait. Otherwise I'd probably get more screaming at some point soon.

The common cold

Everybody's had a cold and nobody like them. Everybody has their own remedies for colds and no one agrees on which ones work. Well, as it turns out, there is evidence based science that tells us what works.

What works: aspirin and other such pain pills; antihistamines combined with decongestants; possibly hot liquids; irrigating the nose with a neti pot may also work. That's it.

What doesn't work: basically everything else. That's right, no echinacea, no vitamin C, no boiled limes, no nothing.

My source is Science Base Medicine's Treating The Common Cold post. It's really depressing, but nothing works on the common cold because the common cold is a freaking badass apparently. Science may sometimes depress me, but at least they aren't telling me to drink disgusting tinctures and cod liver oil. At least, they aren't telling me to do so without good evidence anyway. What's your favorite cold remedy?

Aural fixation

Though I am sure you're probably thinking, "Tee hee, oral fixation," no, this post really is about my aural fixation, that is, my fixation with sound. The first, and most obvious part of my fixation is my musical tastes. I don't just like music. I like all kinds of music, a little bit of almost everything. Music can make me energetic, angry, sad, even bring me to tears. I love music and though I can't spend all my time on it, I listen to music every day.

One of those things about a movie, or tv show or video game that can make or break it is the score. An excellent example of a game made incredible is the original Halo game. That score is dark and beautiful, evoking feelings of sorrow, horror, rage, and righteous might. It's been out for years, but every single time I listen to that track, it takes me back to playing that game. If you've never heard the score and like orchestral music, I highly recommend it.

As a more recent example, thanks to the horrible time sink that is Netflix, I found an anime I'd never heard of called Mushi-Shi. On the face of it, it's a series of disjointed stories with little more than a main character to string them together. It's not very anime of an anime, if that makes any sense, but the idea you get is that the show is supposed to be either creepy or just interesting. It's the music that takes this show to new heights. In the show episodes that are meant to be creepy are made so much creepier by the music while the interesting episodes are still brilliantly scored if less creepy. The music makes you love and hate the characters just right. It's scary good.

I can love a crappy move if the score is good (like Crank) and can despise an anime series if the music is horrible (like Blade of the Immortal). Anyway, that's my take on it. Do you ever feel the same?

That's a bit less maudlin of a post, yes?

Goodbye

Last year, which I really do have to say now, I dated a woman who I had a great time with. Things took a surprising and unfortunate turn for the worse and we sadly but amicably parted ways. Though I'd felt strongly towards her, I figured I'd get over it quickly as we'd only dated for almost two months.

Here I am many months later and I still haven't gotten over her. She's been hovering in my thoughts for this entire time and despite my attempts to move forward, something's kept her there. I'm fairly sure I know what it is now, and I think I know what I need to do... I need to say goodbye.

I did say goodbye to her, but I didn't get to say everything I needed to say. Now I need to say them. I don't know if she ever even got this blog location, or if she did if she follows me or not. I wouldn't if I were her. So me posting this may be just talking to myself. But I think it's important that I put into words what I need to say. Writing what I need to say has a permanency to it that thinking does not. I hope that this is what I need to finally move on.

Yes, this post will be very personal, but I'll maintain appropriate anonymity levels.

Dear Shock,

It's been, well, a pathetically long time since you said we couldn't be together. I know this isn't anyone's fault, and I know it's not what you wanted, but that's not why I'm writing this. I'm writing this to explain a few things it's taken me this long to figure out.

When we parted ways I figured you would get over me in short order and wouldn't waste time looking for someone else. I thought I would too. I went on some dates, met some people, but nothing really stuck. Then I gave up. I didn't try anymore. I chalked it up to a temporary slump, but it's persisted to this day.

When Valentines Day hit yesterday and I saw some of the most foul pessimism about the day and some of the most wonderful and heartfelt attempts it finally made me admit something.

I was with you for less than two months, but in that short time I fell in love with you.

It's not just that I wanted to have someone to give flowers to yesterday, it was that I wanted to give them to you. I wanted to be able to do something sappy and stupid and get you to smile that smile at me. I wanted you to laugh at some stupid joke I made, or throw a chocolate at my head, or comment on my shirt. I didn't care what it was, I just wanted you to be there.

I am intensely aware that this is pathetic. You're some woman I met online who I went on some dates with. Yeah it was great, but it ended and I should have moved on. But you know what? I didn't.

To say you were great isn't sufficient. To say you amazed me doesn't even begin to cover it.

You left me breathless, stuttering, and blushing like every time we were together.

Things weren't perfect, even in my rose colored glasses. You and I were eventually going to have a knock-down, drag-out brawl over astrology and other magical thinking at some point. It's possible we wouldn't have made it past that point. My skeptical thinking and your open mind were bound to have clashes. But I didn't care.

I wanted to try, to give it my all, to be someone you could be proud of being with. I wanted to know that even though we disagreed, we still cared enough to respect each others opinions. I wanted to be with you for more than a few dates. Those fantasies of being with you forever were more than I gave them credit for. I wanted to walk in my parents door with you on my arm and watch that potential catastrophe all the while smiling knowing that you would be with me, no matter what they thought. I wanted my friends to meet you and finally get why I was so excited. I wanted my sister to approve.

None of this will ever happen. I know that. And it hurts to say this, but I'm finally ready to accept that. Goodbye then was goodbye forever. I've immortalized you in my writing, but beyond that, you are gone, out of my reach forever. It's come to this...

I loved you. I really did. I wanted forever with you. But that dream is over. It's finally time to say it and to really, really mean it.

I miss you.

Goodbye.

-S

While I'm on my soap box

Homeopathy is water.

Lots of people out there think that homeopathy is some kind of "natural medicine" (both false) that is a reasonable comparison to "western" medicine. These people have heard all sorts of things in the news making homeopathy sound like a reasonable choice. But, in my experience, almost none of these people realize that homeopathy is almost always 100% water. So, in my tiny effort to spread the truth about this nonsense, the following is how to create your very own homeopathic cure! Specifically the homeopathic product Oscillococcinum, a product that is marketed as flu relief.

Step 1: Get a duck heart and liver and grind them into a paste.

Step 2: Take a single drop of that paste and dilute it with 100 drops of water.

Step 3: Shake vigorously.

Step 4: Take a single drop of this new solution and dilute it with 100 drops of water.

Step 5: Shake vigorously.

Step 6: Repeat steps 4 and 5 four hundred (400) times in a row.

Step 7: Drink 1 gram of this solution!

...

Yes, that's really it. Check out homeopathy and Oscillococcinum on Wikipedia if you don't believe me. How does this in theory work? Well, you see, when you shake the solution the water "remembers" the important bits, and you therefore gain all the benefits even though you are diluting the original solution.

...

Doesn't make any sense, does it? That's because homeopathy is batshit insane. Water memory? Diluting it makes it stronger? And why in the fuck would you start with a freaking duck heart and liver?

So remember, next time someone mentions homeopathy, there's only one response to that: "Homeopathy is water".

I will also accept "Homeopathy is bullshit." Not technically true, but it sure gets the point across.

Immunize for Good

http://www.immunizeforgood.com/

I have become a crusader for vaccines, as you may have noticed. Now whenever I need someone to read up on vaccines and get the actual unvarnished truth, I have a great website to send them to, that being Immunize for Good as seen above. It gives direct honest answers while not sweeping anything under the rug. As sources of information about vaccines go, this is about the best one I've seen. It's easily accessible for anyone who can read, laid out simply and logically, and a lot better than trying to wade through forum discussions to find the truth. Spread the word!

The AZ nightmare

As someone who found out about the shooting thing early this morning by reading a blog, I'm a bit behind on the commenting/twitter/whatever conflagration that's going on right now. I have thoughts that I really want to work through, so here I go.

"Don't politicize this tragedy!"

It's kind of hard not to politicize an attempted assassination of a political figure. However, it's really easy to hide behind politicization to avoid actually having to think clearly. This whole Sarah Palin nonsense is just that, utter nonsense. Yes she made an inappropriate graphic, that's not in question, but did that graphic cause this situation? Um... That's one hell of a stretch. Yes it would be nice to have someone to blame, but life is never so easy.

What about the fact that it was a right wing psycho that killed a left wing target? Well, Loughner (the assassin) wasn't a right wing psycho. He was described as liberal by his friends, he has been reported as a registered Republican and Independent which is confusing, and unless the Tea Party put the Communist Manifesto on their reading list recently, he's just not fitting the cookie cutter "right wing" shape.

Well Giffords was obviously a right wing target, I mean, remember that Sarah Palin document? Once again, details cloud the issue: Giffords was a "Blue Dog" democrat, which isn't the leftest of the lefts. As much as it would be easy to say this is is Red on Blue crime, reality complicates things by not making perfect sense.

Most importantly, we don't, as far I as know right now, know why this happened. It may not have been politically motivated. It seems to make logical sense, but as someone once said "Logic is a method by which we go wrong with confidence." This situation is neither simple nor easy and certainly isn't logical. I read today that Loughner had a gripe with Giffords because she failed to answer one of his fairly incoherent questions to his satisfaction, but was that enough to drive him to try to kill her? As he's not talking, we may never know.

Guns

I have heard over and over that if this man didn't have access to a gun this never would have happened. As this particular event took place outside, Loughner could have done as much damage, or more, with a well aimed car. One of the main reasons the shooting stopped where it did was because Loughner took time to reload and was overwhelmed by two bystanders. Imagine if he had brought a sword and was any good with it? Don't need to reload a sword. He could have done as much damage and more. Yes, the gun is bad, but if sufficiently motivated, any weapon would have done.

I have also heard that a bystander helped the situation by pulling his legally concealed weapon and firing on Loughner, but I can't verify that.

I'm sure I'm beating a dead horse here, but it's not a gun that killed those people, it was a person. He made the choice.

Mentally Ill.

As I am mentally ill, this particular point is really grating on my nerves. I am mentally ill; I have mentally ill friends; the stigma attached to "mentally ill" is not fair to the millions of people in this country who are mentally ill but wouldn't ever do something like this. Not every person with a mental illness is sitting on the edge of a knife, a random thought away from a murder spree.

I've heard it guessed, by a doctor no less, that Loughner was very likely a paranoid schizophrenic and I tend to agree that this is likely. I still have to point out that for every paranoid schizophrenic that does something horrible like this, there are tens if not hundreds of thousands who do not. Demonizing the diagnosis isn't helping anyone, and may indeed endanger people who have this diagnosis. It makes as much sense to say that every person who has a heart defect will eventually die because of that heart defect.

Jared Lee Loughner

This man killed 6 people and wounded at least 14 others. It bothers me that this, his defining moment, will be all we're ever likely to know about the man since he's not talking. He'll be branded as left or right wing, a psycho, and a killer. But is that all there is to him? Just some political beliefs and that he killed people? He liked the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf, but is that it?

It is the usual reaction of people to take someone like this, paint him in black and white, and leave it alone. But this young man made choices, some good, some very bad, and I want to know why. Aside from his choices, he was also a son, a friend, someone who read a lot, and had strong opinions. He liked YouTube and MySpace. He read The Wizard of Oz, Peter Pan, Gulliver's Travels, and Through The Looking Glass. I want more.

My point is Loughner was a person. Whatever his faults may have been, however bad his choices, he was still a person and should be treated as more than just a killer. Yes, he killed people, but if we brush the person off, accept the "right wing psycho" label, and don't try to understand why he did what he did, how can we ever hope to prevent this in the future? He had friends and family. They could see he was unhinged. Could they have done anything to help? Is there anything useful we can learn from Loughner's tragically bad choices?

Imprisoning all the mentally ill isn't an option. Telling politicians they can't do anything that can possibly be taken out of context in a bad light isn't going to work. Restricting guns from responsible adults won't work. We need to find out, from Loughner, how he could have been reached, how someone could have helped prevent this tragedy. Otherwise, we're doomed to repeat this tragedy.