silliness

latest post on my other blog. probably my last too. I was going to keep the two separate but I think it's better to have just the one.

This letter to the editor from "name withheld upon request" is just so silly.
silly, silly, silly.
I would withhold my name too if I had penned such a silly, silly thing.

Anniversary announcement alters traditional definitions
Published Monday, October 24, 2005
Editor, the Tribune:
Your article in the anniversaries section of the Oct. 16 Tribune regarding the male couple who celebrated their 25th year of commitment will probably be regarded by many as real progress. Please do not count me among those praising this new ground for the Tribune.

You have eroded the very definitions your publication has used for years. You have given "engagement," "wedding" and "anniversary" expanded meanings. If two individuals become engaged in a new business partnership, will you include it under "engagements"? If these business partners wed their business philosophies, will you include this among the weddings in your newspaper? When this business celebrates its 40th year, will you cover the milestone in your anniversaries section? As ridiculous as these scenarios might seem, they fit just as tidily into the three different sections of your newspaper as the two men’s 25 years of commitment fit into the anniversaries section.

So you included the announcement of the 25 years of commitment because some folks think they sort of have a marriage. If they dissolve their commitment, will you include it with the divorces? Will you start putting cardiac arrests in with other arrests? Will one have to be completely dead or just real sick to be in the obituaries? Will there have to be a newborn baby, or will a positive EPT be close enough to be among your birth announcements?

Never mind the moral issues involved here. Just how far do you plan to take these liberties with traditional definitions?

See what I mean, silly.
And Hateful.

cyclocross

Seems to be the topic these days. Went out Wednesday with Seth and Josh and others including the Perfesser and actually rode my "cyclocross" bike off-road. That stuff is hard. Jumping off the bike at full speed and then jumping over barriers! What sort of sadist thought that up? Why would you want to get off of a perfectly good bike and carry it? All said I had a blast and can't wait to get out again. Would have had even more fun but my headset is screwed up and kept coming loose, gotta check into that.

hard work

Spent all day Saturday selling food at the Sustainable Living Fair raising money for Sam and Zola's trip to Japan next year. That's him and Zola selling food at the Iji Suru Combini, or, Sustainable Convenience Store. We sold homemade cookies, curried rice and lentils wrapped in a tortilla, hummus, coffee, tea, and soda. The boys worked hard all day, selling and making change. Being pleasant behind the counter doesn't come easy to everyone but they did it marvelously. I was on my feet all day too which is not something I do very often anymore. Financially it was a success too.

Next up: a special showing of Howl's Moving Castle at RagTag Cinemacafé. That one will be a lot of work too.

impediment?

Of a three paragraph letter to the editor in today's paper, the middle one is the critical one. I have annotated it below:

"The four-way stop is a situation where a cyclist is a major impediment. [This is the place where a bike is the least "impediment." If it weren't for cars my ride to work would be "unimpeded."] It is easy to follow the rules, but cyclists are comparatively slow out of the gate [speak for yourself]. A cyclist stands to delay the waiting further by occupying a space in the road where a vehicle would otherwise be. [Once again, who's delaying whom here? The same ride takes me 5-10 minutes more when there are cars on the road. And what is a bike if not a vehicle? Dog shit? And on a side note, if you "delay" the waiting doesn't that mean you are not waiting?] The herky-jerky nature of a busy four-way stop has a cyclist doing a dance of "on the bike, off the bike." In an attempt to eliminate this problem, I stay to the side and adopt a car to traverse the intersection. I watch the sequence at the stop and go when the adopted car is up for its turn. [Let's hope the driver is not turning right without his/her blinkers on and is watching for a cyclist. I would not like a bike to do this to me when I am driving my car.]

Crazy!

What this guy is advocating sounds pretty dangerous to me and I have explicitly told my kids not to do it. Plus, if I understand it correctly, the law is on the other side.