Obviously I've given up on this blogging thing, and I worry that the waning of this phase in life means that I am the kind of person who perpetually waxes and wanes through various phases and fads. This was true as a child but I had always felt like I would grow up someday and, you know, find and become committed to my true passion. Not that blogging was destined to be, like, my true passion or anything, but I would hope that through all of these phases the light at the end of the tunnel would be there
I also worry that this means I will wax and wane through career choices, and I'm not sure whether these recent reflections say more about my anxieties about life in general or if they actually reflect some kind of truth about my future.
In any case, 2009 will be an exciting year for many reasons. The two most important ones: I will become an aunt AND a college graduate. I've decided to stay in the Bay Area for at least another year's lease and see where that takes me. And even though it sickens me to think about this right now, I remain open to the possibility that I will become so bored with life that law or grad school will become suddenly appealing next fall, in which case I'll take the necessary tests and send off applications and such.
Now, I know that "law or grad school" is like deciding between buying a duplex in Rockridge or a penthouse in San Francisco--equally expensive but totally different-- but I truly have not given it any thought beyond the conceptual ideas. I do not wish to become a lawyer in the long term, but could envision myself as, say, a judge or legal secretary or law professor or something. I have no idea what I would study in grad school; that's just if I decide I hate law school but still want to dick around without a real job.
1.03.2009
11.13.2008
What is wrong with Nebraska?
The headlines in the Associated Press read "Neb. parents rush to leave kids before law changes." The sad part is, the headline actually means that parents from Nebraska and states within driving distance are abandoning children, uh, with abandon, in efforts to abuse a loophole in the state's safe haven policies. The AP followed up when Nebraska legislators closed the loophole with a 30-day age maximum for drop-offs, but how did someone in the legislature not notice the loophole in the first place? Especially if people stupid enough to abandon their teenaged children were smart enough to notice the loophole. One would hope the state government were smarter than that.
The law also didn't say that abandoned kids could only be residents of Nebraska, and so a handful of parents actually carted their kids from other states to get rid of their pesky children. Can you imagine how awkward the car ride from, like, Iowa must have been? Does a parent have to drug the kid to get them to willingly be carted to be abandoned? Is there a Chuck-E-Cheese near the hospital to entice them, or what?
Sheesh. I do not want to go to their house for Thanksgiving. Speaking of which, I cannot wait for Thanksgiving.
The law also didn't say that abandoned kids could only be residents of Nebraska, and so a handful of parents actually carted their kids from other states to get rid of their pesky children. Can you imagine how awkward the car ride from, like, Iowa must have been? Does a parent have to drug the kid to get them to willingly be carted to be abandoned? Is there a Chuck-E-Cheese near the hospital to entice them, or what?
Sheesh. I do not want to go to their house for Thanksgiving. Speaking of which, I cannot wait for Thanksgiving.
11.03.2008
On, you know, voting.
An audibly elderly Yes on 8 phone bank caller apologized today to my roommate for her views after he mentioned his homosexuality. Why she apologized is beyond us-- if you put forth the effort to volunteer your time calling in support of a particular proposition, why apologize to someone directly targeted in that proposition? For that matter, who did this woman think she was calling-- like-minded individuals for a cup of tea?
I can't imagine how a conversation between me and a Prop 8 supporter would go, not because I am avidly against it, but because of what it means to even put Prop 8 on the ballot.
But I don't need to climb on a soapbox about Prop 8, especially not while living in a liberal bubble writing on a blog likely read by reasonable people who may not believe in gay marriage but who believe it shouldn't be constitutionally forbidden, either.
But in the spirit of standing up for my beliefs and not apologizing for them, I've decided to list my decisions for the state-wide propositions. It's also convenient since I will probably forget how I voted in this election after tomorrow morning, owing in part to the vast extent of California propositions and even vaster extent of Alameda County ballot measures.
So here we go. My unsolicited proposition choices for the 2008 general election:
1A: Yes
2: No
3: Yes
4: No
5: Yes
6: No
7: No
8: No
9: No
10: No
11: No
12: Yes
And some explication:
1A: Folks tell me 1A is expensive and won't do anything in any reasonable time period, and while that's probably accurate, 1A gets the ball rolling for something that our kids can pay for later. We know that public transportation in this large state is unnecessarily absent. Something like 1A was on the ballot last election and failed probably because of NIMBY impulses against increased train traffic in towns quieted by the slower pace of freight trains. That's a lame reason to vote against a lot of things, among them public transportation and the UC's sports facility construction at Memorial Stadium (where the Panoramic Way residents supported the Tree People merely because they didn't want construction noise).
2: The eggs I eat are already pretty happy and free range and kinda local and stuff. Those are probably better-selling anyway. That aside, if it's an issue about animal cruelty in our food animals, making California a safe haven for our chickens won't solve the problem; it only moves it to other states or countries where standards are lower and costs of transport and demand are higher. A parallel: Maquiladoras in Mexico were/are an easy way for American companies to avoid accountability for environmental impact and gain cheap and abusable labor-- does that make it any more ethical to say that environmental regulations and labor laws have improved the quality of life for those in America whose jobs were lost? (Also, the whole point of veal is that the calves can't move around, whether or not one believes they should have the right to.)
3: I don't really care, but it makes me feel like a better person to support children's hospitals. I'm sure I could find something terribly wrong with the written proposition, but I'm too tired to bother.
4: No question.
5: It's nice to see something.
6: Eh. Seems a bit much.
7: Researchers barely know what "renewable" energy even means, and the government shouldn't be forcing utilities to follow certain timelines dependent upon uncertain technological advances.
8: Shouldn't even be on the ballot; government shouldn't even be involved in the issue.
9: Potential costs outweigh potential benefits.
10: Why is the government/us in the long run helping us buy a Prius?
11: Ugh. More bureaucracy. No, thanks.
12: Veterans have seriously gotten the shaft lately. "Farms" or "home aid" sort of sticks out as an awkward moment, but maybe those are refreshing changes from the battlefields?
I can't imagine how a conversation between me and a Prop 8 supporter would go, not because I am avidly against it, but because of what it means to even put Prop 8 on the ballot.
But I don't need to climb on a soapbox about Prop 8, especially not while living in a liberal bubble writing on a blog likely read by reasonable people who may not believe in gay marriage but who believe it shouldn't be constitutionally forbidden, either.
But in the spirit of standing up for my beliefs and not apologizing for them, I've decided to list my decisions for the state-wide propositions. It's also convenient since I will probably forget how I voted in this election after tomorrow morning, owing in part to the vast extent of California propositions and even vaster extent of Alameda County ballot measures.
So here we go. My unsolicited proposition choices for the 2008 general election:
1A: Yes
2: No
3: Yes
4: No
5: Yes
6: No
7: No
8: No
9: No
10: No
11: No
12: Yes
And some explication:
1A: Folks tell me 1A is expensive and won't do anything in any reasonable time period, and while that's probably accurate, 1A gets the ball rolling for something that our kids can pay for later. We know that public transportation in this large state is unnecessarily absent. Something like 1A was on the ballot last election and failed probably because of NIMBY impulses against increased train traffic in towns quieted by the slower pace of freight trains. That's a lame reason to vote against a lot of things, among them public transportation and the UC's sports facility construction at Memorial Stadium (where the Panoramic Way residents supported the Tree People merely because they didn't want construction noise).
2: The eggs I eat are already pretty happy and free range and kinda local and stuff. Those are probably better-selling anyway. That aside, if it's an issue about animal cruelty in our food animals, making California a safe haven for our chickens won't solve the problem; it only moves it to other states or countries where standards are lower and costs of transport and demand are higher. A parallel: Maquiladoras in Mexico were/are an easy way for American companies to avoid accountability for environmental impact and gain cheap and abusable labor-- does that make it any more ethical to say that environmental regulations and labor laws have improved the quality of life for those in America whose jobs were lost? (Also, the whole point of veal is that the calves can't move around, whether or not one believes they should have the right to.)
3: I don't really care, but it makes me feel like a better person to support children's hospitals. I'm sure I could find something terribly wrong with the written proposition, but I'm too tired to bother.
4: No question.
5: It's nice to see something.
6: Eh. Seems a bit much.
7: Researchers barely know what "renewable" energy even means, and the government shouldn't be forcing utilities to follow certain timelines dependent upon uncertain technological advances.
8: Shouldn't even be on the ballot; government shouldn't even be involved in the issue.
9: Potential costs outweigh potential benefits.
10: Why is the government/us in the long run helping us buy a Prius?
11: Ugh. More bureaucracy. No, thanks.
12: Veterans have seriously gotten the shaft lately. "Farms" or "home aid" sort of sticks out as an awkward moment, but maybe those are refreshing changes from the battlefields?
10.31.2008
Clap your hands!
The BBC says many Thai people are lately really tired of clapping their hands. So tired (or lazy) that plastic hand clappers are a reasonable and suddenly fashionable substitute for actually clapping one's hands.
Are they attending a lot of performing arts events or something?
Are they attending a lot of performing arts events or something?
10.24.2008
BREAKING: rampant use of ironic headlines renders them less funny
An unsolicited style note from a neurotic Strunk & White reader:
Not that I didn't use this witty strategy myself back in ye olde Clogging days, but seeing as the Clog failed to publicly archive any posts from the time I was actually working, I can't prove the infraction upon its use I've observed in recent weeks. (And, more importantly, neither can they.)
I'm talking about headlines. Breaking! Important! Ironically important BREAKING NEWS that isn't really breaking but is sort of funny anyway because the subject of the article is painfully and hilariously so obvious that the article itself would clearly be less funny if the painfully and hilariously obvious nature of the article wasn't alluded to in the headline.
Only under the aforementioned circumstances should such a headline be invoked, and only sparingly for optimal effect.
The judging the former is up to the reader, but the latter? Twice in one week is sort of pushing it.
Not that I didn't use this witty strategy myself back in ye olde Clogging days, but seeing as the Clog failed to publicly archive any posts from the time I was actually working, I can't prove the infraction upon its use I've observed in recent weeks. (And, more importantly, neither can they.)
I'm talking about headlines. Breaking! Important! Ironically important BREAKING NEWS that isn't really breaking but is sort of funny anyway because the subject of the article is painfully and hilariously so obvious that the article itself would clearly be less funny if the painfully and hilariously obvious nature of the article wasn't alluded to in the headline.
Only under the aforementioned circumstances should such a headline be invoked, and only sparingly for optimal effect.
The judging the former is up to the reader, but the latter? Twice in one week is sort of pushing it.
10.20.2008
Choking on the sweet, sweet air of freedom
I already have spring fever, and nothing confirmed this more than my sheer glee while registering for classes (classes I'm not terribly interested in taking) for the last time in my undergraduate career. It's not that I'm particularly looking forward to moving on or finding a job or paying my loans, so much as I'm just really, really over the whole "school" thing.
In other news, I still have no idea what to do with my life, and I have a paper due tomorrow. As typifies my behavior as a quasi-jaded senior, I have neither finished the reading nor started writing.
In other news, I still have no idea what to do with my life, and I have a paper due tomorrow. As typifies my behavior as a quasi-jaded senior, I have neither finished the reading nor started writing.
10.14.2008
A mid-midterm evening
My first night without rehearsal or performances since September 2, and I'm spending it writing a paper for the director of the play I'm about to finish this weekend.
I don't know what's different-- maybe senioritis, maybe complacency, or maybe being just plain tired-- but I am so much less motivated to write this darned thing than any class I've been in while in college.
Frankly, I'm cool as a cucumber about having finished less than 2 pages in the nine hours before it's due. I know I should feel the pressure soon, the pressure that kicks me into a writing frenzy and cranks out 7 pages in a matter of hours. Deep down I know I want to do a good job, but just above that deep down feeling is a general wash of apathy.
I don't know what's different-- maybe senioritis, maybe complacency, or maybe being just plain tired-- but I am so much less motivated to write this darned thing than any class I've been in while in college.
Frankly, I'm cool as a cucumber about having finished less than 2 pages in the nine hours before it's due. I know I should feel the pressure soon, the pressure that kicks me into a writing frenzy and cranks out 7 pages in a matter of hours. Deep down I know I want to do a good job, but just above that deep down feeling is a general wash of apathy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
