The apocalypse has arrived today. The end of days has begun. The seventh sign has been opened.
Eclipse opens today.
Thousands... nay, millions of female tweens, teenagers and (sadly) adults will be screaming in excitement as they drive en masse for the privilege of standing in line to feed the Beast (aka the box office) in order to satiate their desire to answer the one question that is more important than the meaning of the universe, the origin of life, or why we cannot wear white after Labor Day:
Will Bella choose Edward or Jacob?
Ever since the beginning of time (roughly three years ago), girls of all ages have been fawning over the stories of Bella Swan, a young teenage girl who falls in love with a vampire. They have followed her tragic plight as she soon became enamored with a werewolf and came to realize that she had to choose between them. And when the movies came out, they ran to the theatres like lemmings, desperate to see this story emerge on the big screen.
In time, the masses came to realize that a choice had to be made, one that would shake the core of friendships, families and even strangers. Like the age-old choice between Tastes Great or Less Filling, every individual on the planet Earth had to make the ultimate choice: Team Edward or Team Jacob?
I have been asked this question several times over the last year by my wife, daughter, niece, sister-in-law, nephew, son, fish and dog. Because I have chosen not to make a choice -- which to me is like choosing whether to die by gun or knife -- I have been told that I am on Team Switzerland (whatever that means).
Translation: Choose a team or one will be chosen for you.
Then I had an epiphany. The clouds parted. Sunlight bathed me in golden rays. A new revelation was given to me. If I have to be on a team, then I will make a new one. One that will force others to see the truth in this time of darkness.
And thus, Team Screw Bella was born (actually, it was Team **** Bella, but there are children present).
By now, I am being hunted by several hit squads of offended tweens and teenagers (particularly the Girl Scouts, who have more resources than the CIA), so let me explain the philosophy of this team quickly so that you may pass it along to the unenlightened.
I have sat and watched the movies (which, by the way, should replace waterboarding as a torture technique due to its merciless cruelty). I tried to read the first book (I say tried because the more I read, the more my eyes wanted to shrivel) because I thought the book had something that I must have missed in the movie. However, it only confirmed my opinion, which must be said:
Bella Swan is (a) a whiny, miserable bitch and (b) a terrible role model for girls everywhere.
First of all, from word one, she is miserable. She is so depressing that emos look at her and wonder what's her problem. Since the book is written in first person, the reader is subjected to her misery in all of its ways and forms that I almost think it should be used as a suicide prevention manual. She whines about moving. She complains about moving from Arizona, where despite the heat and sun she's as pale as a ghost (which explains why she moans like one).
Secondly, she defines herself by her relationship with the vampire, Edward (who is perhaps the only person paler than Bella). In the second book, New Moon, when he leaves her to protect her, she goes crazy and tries to get herself in all kinds of trouble because she figures that would be the only way she could "see" him. Even worse, she toys with the emotions of Jacob, using him as a substitute for the absent vampire.
Yes, I know a lot of girls toy with the emotions of boys, but that's not the point. The point is she has no goals, no ambitions other than to be with Edward. He defines her life and gives it meaning. From what I've seen and read, it's the only thing that makes her happy (another sign of the apocalypse). Without him, she is nothing, and not even Jacob (aka the quintessential "nice guy", and you know what happens to nice guys) can change that. If he does, it's only temporary, until Edward returns, whereupon Jacob is put away like the dog that is put out of the house.
Yet, girls want to be her. They want to be part of her world and to know what it is to be torn between the love of a vampire and a werewolf. Yet, she isn't torn. She wants the vampire, but will take the werewolf when the vampire's gone. The vampire's always first choice. And the werewolf? Dangling on a string until she needs him, hoping that some day, he will be the one.
Sigh.
So I say Screw Bella! Edward and Jacob are better off without her making their lives as miserable as she is. If she's not around, then Edward won't have to suffer so much about wanting to bite her (a lesson in masochism if I ever heard one, but that's for another article). Jacob could finally find a girl that would actually appreciate him for who he is and not treat him as a substitute. The little girls that think Bella is cool would learn that having self-esteem and self-ambition is actually good for you and that you can be all right without a man in your life.
So, from here on out, I am on Team Screw Bella. So far, I've recruited the fish and the dog.
Now, I got to run. I hear little feet sneaking around my safehouse. I think the Girl Scouts have found me.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Privacy & The Workplace
The expectation of privacy is a right that all citizens share. And yet, as we advance down the road to technology that is integrated into our daily lives, that expectation will be tested constantly as both citizens and corporations struggle to define where the line in the sand is drawn. Naturally, this will also be tested in the legal system as lawyers on both sides of the line attempt to legally define those same limits.
However, I do believe that in some cases, a good dose of common sense can make things a lot easier.
For example, a recent article I read falls into the "what-were-they-thinking" category of common sense.
In essence, a police officer who sent an excessive number of text messages from a two-way pager owned and paid for by the police department sued the department when they found that many of his messages were personal and that a majority of the messages were sexually explicit in nature and were being sent to his wife and (dramatic pause) his mistress, both of whom worked for the department as well.
The case made it to the Supreme Court, where they voted unanimously that government employers had “the right to review all communications on company-issued computers and cell phones as long as there is a legitimate work-related purpose.”
I don’t see a problem with this.
It’s one thing if I’m using my personal cell phone, which I pay the bill for, and my employer demands to see who I’ve been calling. It’s my phone. I pay it. They have no right to see who I call or for how long or even my iPod playlist.
But I don’t own the computer that’s on my desk. I don’t pay the bill on the company-issued pager. So with those items, there’s a certain expectation from the company that I (as the employee) will use those items in a responsible manner. In fact, when I sign on my computer, there’s a message that pops up before I log in that states, in essence, that by logging in, I am agreeing to use the equipment in a responsible manner and that on it is subject to inspection.
My daughter is on my cell phone plan. She knows that as I expect her to use the phone responsibly. She also knows that I have the right to inspect her phone at any time for any reason. This is also why the home computer is in the living room, so that I can see what my kids are looking at whenever I feel the need. I’m blessed to have great children, so I rarely invoke this, but I have done it in the past just to remind them that it’s there.
When they become adults and pay for their own cell phones, my right to see what they do ends. It’s their bill at that point, so what right would I have to know what they do? That’s right, none!
I expect no less from my employer. They sign the checks and pay the bills. Thus, they have to right to know what the kids are doing with their stuff.
So, if I want to be a bad boy, I’d better do it on my own phone or PC. I think that’s common sense. No lawsuit needed here.
However, I do believe that in some cases, a good dose of common sense can make things a lot easier.
For example, a recent article I read falls into the "what-were-they-thinking" category of common sense.
In essence, a police officer who sent an excessive number of text messages from a two-way pager owned and paid for by the police department sued the department when they found that many of his messages were personal and that a majority of the messages were sexually explicit in nature and were being sent to his wife and (dramatic pause) his mistress, both of whom worked for the department as well.
The case made it to the Supreme Court, where they voted unanimously that government employers had “the right to review all communications on company-issued computers and cell phones as long as there is a legitimate work-related purpose.”
I don’t see a problem with this.
It’s one thing if I’m using my personal cell phone, which I pay the bill for, and my employer demands to see who I’ve been calling. It’s my phone. I pay it. They have no right to see who I call or for how long or even my iPod playlist.
But I don’t own the computer that’s on my desk. I don’t pay the bill on the company-issued pager. So with those items, there’s a certain expectation from the company that I (as the employee) will use those items in a responsible manner. In fact, when I sign on my computer, there’s a message that pops up before I log in that states, in essence, that by logging in, I am agreeing to use the equipment in a responsible manner and that on it is subject to inspection.
My daughter is on my cell phone plan. She knows that as I expect her to use the phone responsibly. She also knows that I have the right to inspect her phone at any time for any reason. This is also why the home computer is in the living room, so that I can see what my kids are looking at whenever I feel the need. I’m blessed to have great children, so I rarely invoke this, but I have done it in the past just to remind them that it’s there.
When they become adults and pay for their own cell phones, my right to see what they do ends. It’s their bill at that point, so what right would I have to know what they do? That’s right, none!
I expect no less from my employer. They sign the checks and pay the bills. Thus, they have to right to know what the kids are doing with their stuff.
So, if I want to be a bad boy, I’d better do it on my own phone or PC. I think that’s common sense. No lawsuit needed here.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
What Do You Mean I Can't Say That?!?
Political correctness - suppressing the expression of certain attitudes and the use of certain terms in the belief that they are too offensive or controversial.
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." (Voltaire)
-----
Ladies and gentlemen, we as a people are too damn sensitive. And naturally, some people will no doubt be offended by this statement.
Let the hate mail commence.
Seriously, folks. I think we have taken Political Correctness (a.k.a. P.C.) to a whole new level. It seems that nowadays, everyone needs to watch what they say to everyone they meet just in case we may offend someone.
Think about it. In December, most stores have policies requiring their employees to say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas as a way to avoid offending customers. When I went Christmas shopping, the cashier said, "Happy Holidays and thanks for coming."
I said, "Merry Christmas and have a nice day."
She smiled and said, "Merry Christmas to you, too."
I often wonder what our society would be like if people said what they meant and meant what they said. There would be a lot of upset people, that's for sure. But think about it. Imagine being in a world where no one has to second-guess the meaning or intention of what is said to them. Where everyone knows exactly what the other person just said because he or she said it quite plainly.
In other words, a non-P.C. world.
Imagine the warning label on a cigarette box:
Old: "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy."
New: "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Can Kill You."
Fewer words. Simpler explanation. Straight and to-the-point. Yet, if I say this to a smoker, they would get offended.
Normally, I'd go into a small explanation to say that I'm not against cigarette smokers. I'm not. But I've recently had to bury my aunt, who was a smoker and died of *gasp* lung cancer. So I won't.
I have a good friend of mine who lives this way. If he sees someone eating a Double Whopper, for example, he will say (quite loudly), "A heart attack waiting to happen." Needless to say, he offends a lot of people.
Two articles of note that I saw recently that prove my point.
First, a woman named LuAnn Haley got into hot water because she said that President Obama "is a hottie, with a smokin' little body." And people got offended by this. Why?!? If she thinks he's a hottie, what's the problem? The President wasn't even offended by the remark. He laughed about it.
As for Ms. Haley? She gets nasty comments and text messages.
Honestly, I feel sorry for her. She didn't really deserve that. She obviously admires the president. It would have been a whole different thing if she solicited him for sex or wanted to be his mistress.
Sigh.
Then there's the Kristen Stewart interview for Elle Magazine's July issue where she was talking about being constantly hounded by the paparazzi. She said:
I have close friends who are rape victims. Me, I feel that any man who rapes a woman deserves to have himself castrated with a meat cleaver and no anesthesia. When I spoke with my friends about this, none of them felt offended by what she said. They all understood that she was not portraying herself as someone who had been raped, but as someone whose privacy has been violated. I thought the same thing.
Many people see it as the price of celebrity. When you choose to be famous, you give up the right to privacy. One of my friends said that it's the same thing as when her rapist said he did it because of the tight outfit and short skirt she wore made her too sexy to resist.
Let me say that I am not a Kristen Stewart fan. (Crap, I'm sure I offended someone now.) But to take her words out of context and be offended by it also means that her feelings on the matter should be disregarded and that she should not feel like a victim.
Never mind that one of the definitions of rape is "violation."
I know that a world without P.C. can't happen. I also have a theory as to why it can't happen. My theory is that a world of blunt honesty can only happen when we as a society can trust the intention of the person who is telling us the truth. We have to trust that the person means us no harm and that it is being done with the best of intentions. And let's be honest -- none of us trust anyone else that much. Maybe you might have that with a sibling, a parent, a spouse, or a child, but no one would trust a stranger with that much power.
And as long as that lack of trust exists, we will always have to approach every conversation with the same amount of caution as one does when walking through an area filled with land mines. It's because of who we are as human beings that the P.C. Beast will continue to be fed.
As for me, I think I'm going to start putting the P.C. Beast on a diet. He's a little too fat for my taste.
Crap. I used the word "fat." I'm sure that someone is upset by this.
Sigh.
To paraphrase Ice-T, we all have the freedom of speech. Just watch what you say.
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." (Voltaire)
-----
Ladies and gentlemen, we as a people are too damn sensitive. And naturally, some people will no doubt be offended by this statement.
Let the hate mail commence.
Seriously, folks. I think we have taken Political Correctness (a.k.a. P.C.) to a whole new level. It seems that nowadays, everyone needs to watch what they say to everyone they meet just in case we may offend someone.
Think about it. In December, most stores have policies requiring their employees to say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas as a way to avoid offending customers. When I went Christmas shopping, the cashier said, "Happy Holidays and thanks for coming."
I said, "Merry Christmas and have a nice day."
She smiled and said, "Merry Christmas to you, too."
I often wonder what our society would be like if people said what they meant and meant what they said. There would be a lot of upset people, that's for sure. But think about it. Imagine being in a world where no one has to second-guess the meaning or intention of what is said to them. Where everyone knows exactly what the other person just said because he or she said it quite plainly.
In other words, a non-P.C. world.
Imagine the warning label on a cigarette box:
Old: "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy."
New: "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking Can Kill You."
Fewer words. Simpler explanation. Straight and to-the-point. Yet, if I say this to a smoker, they would get offended.
Normally, I'd go into a small explanation to say that I'm not against cigarette smokers. I'm not. But I've recently had to bury my aunt, who was a smoker and died of *gasp* lung cancer. So I won't.
I have a good friend of mine who lives this way. If he sees someone eating a Double Whopper, for example, he will say (quite loudly), "A heart attack waiting to happen." Needless to say, he offends a lot of people.
Two articles of note that I saw recently that prove my point.
First, a woman named LuAnn Haley got into hot water because she said that President Obama "is a hottie, with a smokin' little body." And people got offended by this. Why?!? If she thinks he's a hottie, what's the problem? The President wasn't even offended by the remark. He laughed about it.
As for Ms. Haley? She gets nasty comments and text messages.
Honestly, I feel sorry for her. She didn't really deserve that. She obviously admires the president. It would have been a whole different thing if she solicited him for sex or wanted to be his mistress.
Sigh.
Then there's the Kristen Stewart interview for Elle Magazine's July issue where she was talking about being constantly hounded by the paparazzi. She said:
“The photos are so … I feel like I’m looking at someone being raped. A lot of the time I can’t handle it. I never expected that this would be my life.”This, of course, caused a firestorm of controversy from rape victims, counseling groups and her own fans who cried foul, saying that she should not compare her violation of privacy to rape. She even issued an apology for it, saying that she made a mistake in her choice of words.
I have close friends who are rape victims. Me, I feel that any man who rapes a woman deserves to have himself castrated with a meat cleaver and no anesthesia. When I spoke with my friends about this, none of them felt offended by what she said. They all understood that she was not portraying herself as someone who had been raped, but as someone whose privacy has been violated. I thought the same thing.
Many people see it as the price of celebrity. When you choose to be famous, you give up the right to privacy. One of my friends said that it's the same thing as when her rapist said he did it because of the tight outfit and short skirt she wore made her too sexy to resist.
Let me say that I am not a Kristen Stewart fan. (Crap, I'm sure I offended someone now.) But to take her words out of context and be offended by it also means that her feelings on the matter should be disregarded and that she should not feel like a victim.
Never mind that one of the definitions of rape is "violation."
I know that a world without P.C. can't happen. I also have a theory as to why it can't happen. My theory is that a world of blunt honesty can only happen when we as a society can trust the intention of the person who is telling us the truth. We have to trust that the person means us no harm and that it is being done with the best of intentions. And let's be honest -- none of us trust anyone else that much. Maybe you might have that with a sibling, a parent, a spouse, or a child, but no one would trust a stranger with that much power.
And as long as that lack of trust exists, we will always have to approach every conversation with the same amount of caution as one does when walking through an area filled with land mines. It's because of who we are as human beings that the P.C. Beast will continue to be fed.
As for me, I think I'm going to start putting the P.C. Beast on a diet. He's a little too fat for my taste.
Crap. I used the word "fat." I'm sure that someone is upset by this.
Sigh.
To paraphrase Ice-T, we all have the freedom of speech. Just watch what you say.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
It's My Privacy & I'll Tweet It If I Want To
pri·va·cy [prahy-vuh-see; Brit. also priv-uh-see] (noun) - (1.) the state of being private; retirement or seclusion. (2.) the state of being free from intrusion or disturbance in one's private life or affairs. (3) secrecy.
"Relying on the government to protect your privacy is like asking a peeping tom to install your window blinds." (John Perry Barlow)
-----
We are in the age of information, where knowledge is power and your profile is king/queen. The internets (that one's for you, Dubya) is vast and ever-expanding. If you have access to technology, more than likely you will have one, some or all of the following:
Yes, your privacy. Everything you are, translated into bytes of raw data and sold off as a commodity.
It's unavoidable. It's already happened.
That's not right, you say. The Constitution guarantees my right to privacy.
Nuh-uh.
I did a bet with someone regarding that very same statement. You can do this, too, kids. Do a Google search on the word Constitution and pick one of the links (I went here). Use the Find command on your browser (you can press Ctrl+F on your keyboard to bring it up). Type in the word "privacy."
It didn't find anything? Surprise, surprise.
(By the way, I got two lunches for winning the bet.)
Privacy is not a guaranteed right. It is somewhat implied, since the Declaration of Independence gives us "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
We, the People, like privacy. It makes us feel safe and secure to know that things we like to do is not on display for the public to know. If you like to walk around naked, it's great as long as you do it in your own home. I personally don't want to know about it, which makes privacy a beautiful thing. What you read, write, and do that makes you happy should be personal and sacred, which is what privacy affords all of us.
But in this day and age, privacy is no longer the precious commodity it used to be. With a click of a mouse, a user willingly (but without their knowledge -- what a paradox, huh) leaves bread crumbs behind that can tell people who can interpret those bread crumbs all they need to know about you. Where you shop, what kind of clothes you like to buy, what color you like, and many other assorted information that, in whole, describes you.
Want a 10% discount coupon? Subscribe to this newsletter. Then you wonder what caused your mailbox to get 25 spam messages... an hour.
Want to know when the special sales begin? Subscribe here. Oh, boy. Spam went up to 60 messages now.
You did it.
That's not even mentioning the fact that everyone and their mother is looking for their 15 minutes of fame. Or 140 characters, in Twitter's case. Minute after minute, second after second, someone's telling everyone about their business. TMI taboos are being broken in megabits-per-second speed. C'mon, do I really need to know about the really embarrassing things that celebrities want to let their followers know?
Fun fact #1: The Library of Congress is now archiving Twitter feeds so that future generations can view the social culture of the 21st century. Run. Hide. Now. The Terminators are coming.
Fun fact #2: As of May 2010, Britney Spears has more followers (4,952,552) than Ashton Kutcher (4,945,544).
In the age of information, knowledge is money. And you are worth a lot. Companies pay for this information. Think about it: if you knew that a certain product you sold is desired by 30% of all internet users out there, you can make a killing.
They pay for it. You give it away for free.
Common sense says that because who you are is worth something, you should have some control over how that information is distributed. After all, knowledge is power, right? Oftentimes, the problem is that most common users don't have the knowledge, hence they lack the power to fix the problem.
One of the most recent offenders against privacy is Facebook, which has 400 million active users. Over the years, Facebook has changed their policy several times. Now, they are getting ready to roll out yet another change that would force all of its users to opt-in for privacy instead of automatically having it and getting a lot of heat for it. In layman's terms, it's like renting an apartment, then having to tell the landlord that you need a door and closable windows.
Fun fact #3: Facebook's privacy policy is 5,830 words long. The Constitution, without the amendments, is 4,543.
I found an article that helps to navigate the treacherous waters of Facebook privacy settings. It's a good read and will help provide you, the user, with knowledge (which equals power) to help yourself. Then I order you to Google search ways to keep your electronic privacy.
Take back what is yours. I double dare you.
Oh, and in case you need motivation:
And tell your Friends. Or Followers. Or... whatever they're called.
"Relying on the government to protect your privacy is like asking a peeping tom to install your window blinds." (John Perry Barlow)
-----
We are in the age of information, where knowledge is power and your profile is king/queen. The internets (that one's for you, Dubya) is vast and ever-expanding. If you have access to technology, more than likely you will have one, some or all of the following:
- An e-mail address (or five)
- A web site
- A blog
- A Facebook page (if you're over twenty)
- A MySpace page (if you don't know better)
- A Twitter account
Yes, your privacy. Everything you are, translated into bytes of raw data and sold off as a commodity.
It's unavoidable. It's already happened.
That's not right, you say. The Constitution guarantees my right to privacy.
Nuh-uh.
I did a bet with someone regarding that very same statement. You can do this, too, kids. Do a Google search on the word Constitution and pick one of the links (I went here). Use the Find command on your browser (you can press Ctrl+F on your keyboard to bring it up). Type in the word "privacy."
It didn't find anything? Surprise, surprise.
(By the way, I got two lunches for winning the bet.)
Privacy is not a guaranteed right. It is somewhat implied, since the Declaration of Independence gives us "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
We, the People, like privacy. It makes us feel safe and secure to know that things we like to do is not on display for the public to know. If you like to walk around naked, it's great as long as you do it in your own home. I personally don't want to know about it, which makes privacy a beautiful thing. What you read, write, and do that makes you happy should be personal and sacred, which is what privacy affords all of us.
But in this day and age, privacy is no longer the precious commodity it used to be. With a click of a mouse, a user willingly (but without their knowledge -- what a paradox, huh) leaves bread crumbs behind that can tell people who can interpret those bread crumbs all they need to know about you. Where you shop, what kind of clothes you like to buy, what color you like, and many other assorted information that, in whole, describes you.
Want a 10% discount coupon? Subscribe to this newsletter. Then you wonder what caused your mailbox to get 25 spam messages... an hour.
Want to know when the special sales begin? Subscribe here. Oh, boy. Spam went up to 60 messages now.
You did it.
That's not even mentioning the fact that everyone and their mother is looking for their 15 minutes of fame. Or 140 characters, in Twitter's case. Minute after minute, second after second, someone's telling everyone about their business. TMI taboos are being broken in megabits-per-second speed. C'mon, do I really need to know about the really embarrassing things that celebrities want to let their followers know?
Fun fact #1: The Library of Congress is now archiving Twitter feeds so that future generations can view the social culture of the 21st century. Run. Hide. Now. The Terminators are coming.
Fun fact #2: As of May 2010, Britney Spears has more followers (4,952,552) than Ashton Kutcher (4,945,544).
In the age of information, knowledge is money. And you are worth a lot. Companies pay for this information. Think about it: if you knew that a certain product you sold is desired by 30% of all internet users out there, you can make a killing.
They pay for it. You give it away for free.
Common sense says that because who you are is worth something, you should have some control over how that information is distributed. After all, knowledge is power, right? Oftentimes, the problem is that most common users don't have the knowledge, hence they lack the power to fix the problem.
One of the most recent offenders against privacy is Facebook, which has 400 million active users. Over the years, Facebook has changed their policy several times. Now, they are getting ready to roll out yet another change that would force all of its users to opt-in for privacy instead of automatically having it and getting a lot of heat for it. In layman's terms, it's like renting an apartment, then having to tell the landlord that you need a door and closable windows.
Fun fact #3: Facebook's privacy policy is 5,830 words long. The Constitution, without the amendments, is 4,543.
I found an article that helps to navigate the treacherous waters of Facebook privacy settings. It's a good read and will help provide you, the user, with knowledge (which equals power) to help yourself. Then I order you to Google search ways to keep your electronic privacy.
Take back what is yours. I double dare you.
Oh, and in case you need motivation:
And tell your Friends. Or Followers. Or... whatever they're called.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)