the dogs bollocks
Particularly less so than usual, I don't really have anything coherent to say. Well, I mean, coherent in an extended, long blog post. Instead, I have shorter bullet points that I will make. Not quite the 1000 points of light that others have expounded, but I do what I can.
I saw this on my friend Brooke's blog. This... I don't know. It certainly does raise my ire, particularly since this incident happened in the very same county in which I went to high school. And while I certainly wouldn't want to believe that the fine folks in Howard County are homophobic, it does seem extreme to suspend two girls for the disruption that their kissing made.
Though, I do think it's *hilarious* that they have a concern about not getting into the NHS. What I found when I got to college out here in Chicago was that the NHS is meaningless, and truly, these fine young girls can better spend their time making out than working with NHS.
The text below is an email was sent to my office via the office bulletin board. I just don't know what to say about it. I mean, I am not one to talk about over-thinking anything, no matter how arcane, mundane or inane. And yet. And yet, this little message seems to take the cake (the pumpkin flavored sponge-cake, as it were)
Ok, trivia pros, help me out here.
I have been asked to answer the question "What was the approximate ratio of Pilgrims to Native Americans at the Plymouth Thanksgiving?"
Well I have searched the web and every site I find says "approximately" the same thing:
1) "Less than 50 Pilgrims survived the first winter [of 1620-21]." OK, so let's call it 49 Pilgrims.
2) "Squanto and Samoset brought 90 braves..." -- that would make 93 because it would in clude Squanto and Samoset and the Clan Chief.
3) @49 Pilgrims to 93 Indians is a ratio of 2:1, is it not. (93 -:- 49 = 1.897959 -- I was taught that anything 5 or over gets rounded up to the next highest number)
Well that is the answer I gave and I am told I am wrong.
The only thing I can figure is the person asking the question has information I have not been able to narrow down or get specifics on. I.e., some sites mention one or 2 accounts that state the Native American "Braves" (all 90 of them) came with their wives and families. But, how many of them were married, how many kids did each of them have. Are we meant to assume that each Brave had a wife and 1 child totalling 3 people, times 90, plus Squanto and Samoset and their 2 wives and 2 children, plus the chief and his wife and, OK he's the chief so lets give him 2 children, totals 280 Native Americans at the first Thanksgiving. 280 -:- 49 = 5.7142857, rounded makes an approximately 6:1 ratio. Which is a number I am happy to live with, except that my estimate of the numbers of Native Americans is just pure guess work. They weren't all necessarily married, all of the married people may have had between 0 and 5 children each, there's just no way to know.
Anybody got better information than I've been able to find?
My friend Mike just received a new Beard Trimmer. For, I don't know, Veteran's Day, I guess. Maybe his parents don't want him looking like an old Vietnam Vet, which would only disgrace the fine young men and women who are in uniform today. Again, this is amusing, at least to me, and I've included the relevant text below (and forgive me for leaving out the appropriate [sic]'s):
my parents bought me a beard trimmer, because the one I was growing was getting rather shaggy. It's the kind that sits in a little rechargy thingy and is battery powered, so when I got it, it needed to be charged. I set it all up and then waited like a half hour, and then i started experiementing. I just trimmed and neatened up the beard a bit, and then the thing ran out of juice, so i decided to take a little looksie at the instruction manual, you know... for shits and giggles.
it has an instruction manual.
step one....
no joke.....
Grow a beard.
how funny is that. and after you "grow a beard" it has diagrams and iconic pictures to demonstrate the possible beard styles. which is hilarious. and theres even a hispanic part. blak andd white icons of diffrent beard types.
it instructs you to "visit a stylist and determine which beard style iis right for you." Then it illustrates how to outline the beard style, with special attention placed on moustaches.
why is this all so funny. perhaps it has something to do with the amount of care an precision one needs to put into maintating a beard, which is a symbol of maleness. when masculinity is supposed to be defined by some sort of rugged not caring about personal appearance.... it just goes to show that men are just as image conscious as the ladies, and that a transition to "queer" fashions is not that unnatural afterall, but is merely threatening to the integrity of the traditional male image. threatening perhaps because it undermines the supposed "naturalness" of being a man.
yes, and so i decided to shave more... and ended up hacking off the beard altogether. i toyed with all the diffrent moustaches that i could. the long down he side opf the face moustaches. the bushy flanders, the hitler. oh it was great. finally i settled on clean shaven, with sideburns. I never had sideburns before. i always thought they were pretentious. let me tell you, dan. they are.
oh, and they have a special diagram with an arab looking man trimming his arab looking beard, along with a acaption about "beards must be kept neat and tidy."
I had this whole other post all thought out. I would rail against the crap Conservative-controlled country in which we live. But then, I just ran out of steam. Already, I fear, I am a defeated man. I am convinced that our country is going down the tubes (and you George Carlin fans ought to know just how big those tubes are). I am also convinced, with every passing day, that the Dems are going to fuck it up, and we'll be stick with Bush for four more years.
To that end, I'm thinking, I want to like Dean. I really do. I want to tap into that same Angry White Male vibe that's gotten everyone going so far. I want an angry liberal to spark interest and passion from my otherwise apathetic cohort. But do I want that same man to be my President? The short answer is no.
Like I said, I love Dean's spontaneity, and his willingness to take risks. I appreciate his comment about needing to regain the Southern white vote. What I despise is how is opponents all jumped on him and spun what he said into something it wasn't. As I told someone else already, this being the primary season, that's what presidential candidates do, jockey for position, and bring down the other guy. And while I don't even care about negative campaigning, I, personally, would rather here about why, for example, John Kerry would be good for our country, and not why Dean would be bad.
But ultimately, do I want a spontaneous President? Someone who doesn't always think his thoughts through? Certainly, Bush has demonstrated that such talents (or lack thereof) won't stop him from getting shit down (i.e. bombing brown people). But, I want an articulate President. Someone who is, well, Presidential. Along those lines, I might be a closet Kerry supporter.
Sadly, though, Kerry's campaign is quickly going down the tubes (maybe he'll be an envoy for the rest of this damned country). While part of me thinks that, maybe, his firing of this campaign manager and the subsequent resignations of other senior staffers is just a publicity stunt to get his name back in the headlines (which it has), I also have to accept that he's probably going to lose it all. While he's said that at this point back in 1999, Gore was trailing Bradley by a greater margin, the fact is, Gore still lost (the whole recount fiasco notwithstanding).
What Kyle has said is that Kerry's problem, more than anything, was that he thought he could get by on having Presidential hair alone. And to be sure, his hair is Presidential.
And so, alas, really. Alas, alas, alas. Might as well toss in an 'alack', too, for shits and giggles. I have no steam, and barely even enough ire leftover from that high school thing to muster a fierce condemnation of our President and his cronies. I firmly believe Bush will be around for another four years, and that oil and energy oligarchies will further cement their hold on this world. The Dems will never grow a backbone (that would turn them into Conservatives, afterall), and I'll never get out of debt, or be free from gov't spying. Say it with me now, "USA!! USA!! USA!! USA!!"
Phew, though... I think I'm spent. I have this idea, too, about how our entire generation is just wandering around aimless because we don't have a defining moment to inspire unity/division. But I doubt I'll get to that. After all, it's Thursday, and you know what that means - Survivor!
-dan
email me
Particularly less so than usual, I don't really have anything coherent to say. Well, I mean, coherent in an extended, long blog post. Instead, I have shorter bullet points that I will make. Not quite the 1000 points of light that others have expounded, but I do what I can.
Though, I do think it's *hilarious* that they have a concern about not getting into the NHS. What I found when I got to college out here in Chicago was that the NHS is meaningless, and truly, these fine young girls can better spend their time making out than working with NHS.
Ok, trivia pros, help me out here.
I have been asked to answer the question "What was the approximate ratio of Pilgrims to Native Americans at the Plymouth Thanksgiving?"
Well I have searched the web and every site I find says "approximately" the same thing:
1) "Less than 50 Pilgrims survived the first winter [of 1620-21]." OK, so let's call it 49 Pilgrims.
2) "Squanto and Samoset brought 90 braves..." -- that would make 93 because it would in clude Squanto and Samoset and the Clan Chief.
3) @49 Pilgrims to 93 Indians is a ratio of 2:1, is it not. (93 -:- 49 = 1.897959 -- I was taught that anything 5 or over gets rounded up to the next highest number)
Well that is the answer I gave and I am told I am wrong.
The only thing I can figure is the person asking the question has information I have not been able to narrow down or get specifics on. I.e., some sites mention one or 2 accounts that state the Native American "Braves" (all 90 of them) came with their wives and families. But, how many of them were married, how many kids did each of them have. Are we meant to assume that each Brave had a wife and 1 child totalling 3 people, times 90, plus Squanto and Samoset and their 2 wives and 2 children, plus the chief and his wife and, OK he's the chief so lets give him 2 children, totals 280 Native Americans at the first Thanksgiving. 280 -:- 49 = 5.7142857, rounded makes an approximately 6:1 ratio. Which is a number I am happy to live with, except that my estimate of the numbers of Native Americans is just pure guess work. They weren't all necessarily married, all of the married people may have had between 0 and 5 children each, there's just no way to know.
Anybody got better information than I've been able to find?
my parents bought me a beard trimmer, because the one I was growing was getting rather shaggy. It's the kind that sits in a little rechargy thingy and is battery powered, so when I got it, it needed to be charged. I set it all up and then waited like a half hour, and then i started experiementing. I just trimmed and neatened up the beard a bit, and then the thing ran out of juice, so i decided to take a little looksie at the instruction manual, you know... for shits and giggles.
it has an instruction manual.
step one....
no joke.....
Grow a beard.
how funny is that. and after you "grow a beard" it has diagrams and iconic pictures to demonstrate the possible beard styles. which is hilarious. and theres even a hispanic part. blak andd white icons of diffrent beard types.
it instructs you to "visit a stylist and determine which beard style iis right for you." Then it illustrates how to outline the beard style, with special attention placed on moustaches.
why is this all so funny. perhaps it has something to do with the amount of care an precision one needs to put into maintating a beard, which is a symbol of maleness. when masculinity is supposed to be defined by some sort of rugged not caring about personal appearance.... it just goes to show that men are just as image conscious as the ladies, and that a transition to "queer" fashions is not that unnatural afterall, but is merely threatening to the integrity of the traditional male image. threatening perhaps because it undermines the supposed "naturalness" of being a man.
yes, and so i decided to shave more... and ended up hacking off the beard altogether. i toyed with all the diffrent moustaches that i could. the long down he side opf the face moustaches. the bushy flanders, the hitler. oh it was great. finally i settled on clean shaven, with sideburns. I never had sideburns before. i always thought they were pretentious. let me tell you, dan. they are.
oh, and they have a special diagram with an arab looking man trimming his arab looking beard, along with a acaption about "beards must be kept neat and tidy."
To that end, I'm thinking, I want to like Dean. I really do. I want to tap into that same Angry White Male vibe that's gotten everyone going so far. I want an angry liberal to spark interest and passion from my otherwise apathetic cohort. But do I want that same man to be my President? The short answer is no.
Like I said, I love Dean's spontaneity, and his willingness to take risks. I appreciate his comment about needing to regain the Southern white vote. What I despise is how is opponents all jumped on him and spun what he said into something it wasn't. As I told someone else already, this being the primary season, that's what presidential candidates do, jockey for position, and bring down the other guy. And while I don't even care about negative campaigning, I, personally, would rather here about why, for example, John Kerry would be good for our country, and not why Dean would be bad.
But ultimately, do I want a spontaneous President? Someone who doesn't always think his thoughts through? Certainly, Bush has demonstrated that such talents (or lack thereof) won't stop him from getting shit down (i.e. bombing brown people). But, I want an articulate President. Someone who is, well, Presidential. Along those lines, I might be a closet Kerry supporter.
Sadly, though, Kerry's campaign is quickly going down the tubes (maybe he'll be an envoy for the rest of this damned country). While part of me thinks that, maybe, his firing of this campaign manager and the subsequent resignations of other senior staffers is just a publicity stunt to get his name back in the headlines (which it has), I also have to accept that he's probably going to lose it all. While he's said that at this point back in 1999, Gore was trailing Bradley by a greater margin, the fact is, Gore still lost (the whole recount fiasco notwithstanding).
What Kyle has said is that Kerry's problem, more than anything, was that he thought he could get by on having Presidential hair alone. And to be sure, his hair is Presidential.
And so, alas, really. Alas, alas, alas. Might as well toss in an 'alack', too, for shits and giggles. I have no steam, and barely even enough ire leftover from that high school thing to muster a fierce condemnation of our President and his cronies. I firmly believe Bush will be around for another four years, and that oil and energy oligarchies will further cement their hold on this world. The Dems will never grow a backbone (that would turn them into Conservatives, afterall), and I'll never get out of debt, or be free from gov't spying. Say it with me now, "USA!! USA!! USA!! USA!!"
-dan
email me
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home