July 01, 2008

The First Let-Down

I read today that Barack Obama wants to expand President Bush's Faith Based Initiative. So, sure, there's a lot of fine print about how Obama's vision of the program is different than Bush's, but really, come on... how is the government supposed to regulate whether federal dollars are being used to proselytize? Should the government have to? And why do we say "faith-based" when we really mean Christian?

Now, I understand that churches do lots of good things, lots of volunteer work, and run lots of legitimate, beneficial charities. I just don't think it's right to be supporting that with federal tax dollars. I don't think the government should be supporting organizations that can hire and fire based on religious beliefs. You scream that my NPR shouldn't be funded by the government, well, I scream that your church soup kitchen shouldn't be funded by the government either. There, we're even.

Is Obama just pandering to Christian Conservatives to try to broaden his appeal for the general election? Does he really think this is a good idea? Because I, for one, have had enough of the government and radical religious elements being in bed together. Unfortunately, the choices here both seem bleak. Either Obama really believes this shit, or he's just playing politics, neither of one rates very high on my list of things to aspire to. I realize that I hold a minority opinion on religious belief, but even if I were religious, I can't see chipping away at the wall between Church and State being a good thing.

update
Here is a link to the Obama campaign website that includes a document outlining Obama's faith initiative. It sounds somewhat less sinister, in that it emphasizes support only for secular programs and includes secular, community based organizations BUT I think my criticism still holds-- how can you separate out proselytizing, especially when churches are ministering to very vulnerable people? And although the programs cannot discriminate according to current Civil Rights law, they can still discriminate in their hiring practices and, presumably, in providing services when it comes to gays and lesbians. Not that that isn't a problem in the secular sector, but it seems we often give a free pass to bigotry when it is religiously motivated.

Posted by mwashburn at 12:08 PM | Comments (2)

May 15, 2008

Finally a Little Good News

California Supreme Court overturns ban on gay marriage

Posted by mwashburn at 01:56 PM | Comments (0)

May 01, 2008

You Know, That's What I Was Thinking

So I was walking around yesterday, trying to figure out a) Why people want to pin Rev. Jeremiah Wright's verbal diarrhea on Barack Obama, and b) Why a candidate for president going to church with a pastor who occasionally says offensive things is worse than being a candidate for president who stays married to an adulterous schmuck who dallied with interns in the White House. And great minds must think alike, because The Rude Pundit has quite recently asked exactly the same question.

I'm just glad I don't have to answer for every idiotic thing anyone I've ever associated with has ever said or done.

Posted by mwashburn at 10:55 AM | Comments (7)

April 23, 2008

Things People Said to Me

A sampling of the responses I received when calling voters from Obama campaign headquarters this afternoon, asking if they were registered to vote and whether we could count on their support in the Democratic primary on May 6:

"Don't ask me those kinds of questions"

"I don't want anything to do with HIM" (said in a tone of absolute disgust)

"We don't support him." Click

I'd say I encountered equal numbers of Hillarys, Baracks, undecideds, and hangups, but far more not-at-homes and disconnected numbers. But it was entertaining and I'm apparently going back for more, as they wouldn't take no for an answer.

Posted by mwashburn at 04:52 PM | Comments (2)

April 22, 2008

File Under: WTF Is Wrong With People?

The local news tonight featured interviews with disgruntled motorists at the gas pump, since oil hit an all time high today. So this one whiner says "someone in Washington has to do something about these prices" as he fuels up his Canyonero Gas Guzzler.

Let's think about this a minute. Ever heard of Supply and Demand? Why is it Washington's (and thereby the rest of our, financially speaking) job to subsidize your God-Given right to drive as much as you want, all alone in your gas-guzzling oversized vehicle? Come on, people. I just keep thinking that if everyone stopped for just a goddamn second and thought about how their choices impacted everyone else, and made one little fucking change every day, it would work out better for everyone. But people are too selfish and stupid to bother. I'm just really in a snit about it this evening. Instead of going "gee, things are getting tough, I'd better change my behavior," we have people going "hey, this isn't fair. Someone ELSE needs to pay for my choices." Americans seem to be in this perpetual state of self-centered adolescence, and it's literally ruining the world.

On a more optimistic note, I like to think that there are lots of smart, caring, motivated people working on these problems, trying to find solutions that are viable and affordable, working to change minds and fund better ways. I'm trying to concentrate right now on what I *do* have control over, what choices I can make and the little ways in which I can influence others. On that note, I did something today a little out of character for me and that I've never done before. I stopped by our local Obama headquarters, got a yard sign, and pledged a couple of hours of volunteer time between now and the IN primary. I have always tended to sit on the fence politically, and define myself more by what I'm against than what I'm for. It feels really good to declare that I'm for something and someone, and to do something about it. It's also pretty exciting that the Indiana primary will actually mean something this time around.

In the meantime, I'll be tuning up my bicycle for my short commute to work (though I'll still need to stop and get my car to pick up the Bug from daycare at this point), and Adam is carpooling as much as possible. I lament the fact that we don't have viable public transport options here, but what are you gonna do. They're trying. I actually did make a decision recently to order something online (to be delivered UPS) and pay the shipping rather than drive 30 miles round trip to look for it.

I actually read something really cool last week about how UPS plans all their routes in right-hand loops; delivery trucks save an astronomical amount on fuel by not spending time idling in left-turn lanes. I thought that was really cool. And smart. They're not whining that the government should subsidize their wasteful left-hand delivery route turns!

End of rant. I feel better now.

Posted by mwashburn at 09:40 PM | Comments (1)

March 05, 2008

Sigh.

I am feeling a little crestfallen today, in the wake of the Texas & Ohio primaries. I was actually excited about politics for the first time in my adult life. I mean, it's not over 'till it's over, and we've still got a chance. So, in the meantime, I've come up with a new slogan explaining my personal Democratic Candidate preferences.

"I like my Presidential candidates like I like my coffee. Strong and Black."

apparently. giggle.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:16 PM | Comments (1)

February 11, 2008

It's About Time

I've been standing by the sidelines for far too long. It's time to stop being cynical and standing around saying that nobody lines up completely with my political sympathies. No one is going to. No one electable, anyway. So, I've decided it's time to take a stand. I'm officially coming out as an Obama supporter. I think with a President Obama at the helm, at least people stand a chance of having their voices be heard. Let's do it.

Posted by mwashburn at 11:16 AM | Comments (4)

January 25, 2008

Thoughts on Boxing

I've actually been thinking a lot about martial arts and boxing lately. I really miss the training, the people I worked out with (and, of course, the self-confidence that comes with knowing you can throw a grown man to the ground and choke him unconscious in less than 30 seconds). I suppose many would find my martial arts and boxing obsession odd for a woman, but I think it's a combination of a lot of things for me. I never liked team sports, so when I found martial arts it was like a whole new world of enjoying exercise opened up to me. It helped me get in really good shape, I made a lot of great friends, and it was something that not everyone did.

Other than watching some old Muhammed Ali fights, I never watched a whole lot of heavyweight boxing. A lot of people say that it's gotten too commercialized, that a lot of the spirit of the training has been lost, but now there are a lot of up-and-comers who seem to be bringing some life back to the sport. The Oscar de la Hoya/Floyd Mayweather fight broke all Pay-Per-View records, and the proposed rematch this fall is looking to match it. Here's a link to get Oscar De La Hoya vs Floyd Mayweather Jr. tickets, if seeing it live is your thing.

I think whether you're watching UFC/Mixed Martial Arts style fighting or professional boxing, it's more enjoyable to watch people who really know what they're doing and are really on top of their game. There has been a lot of controversy over UFC-style fighting, but here's the thing... now that it's gone pro, it's pretty darn safe. The bar-room "ultimate fights" that go on can be pretty bad, because there's no regulation of equal matchups, weight classes, or ability levels. And the other thing is the blood. People freak out about the blood. There's less of that now that so many people are training in jiu jitsu and have a good ground game. What happens when you don't wear boxing gloves is that skin ends up splitting from punches. It's ugly, but actually does less damage than 16-oz boxing gloves. Those rattle your brain, which causes knockouts, and can cause swelling and long-term damage to the brain. But it's all safer than Nascar, statistically speaking.

I really need to re-read Joyce Carol Oates' On Boxing. There's another woman obsessed with the sport. Her book is a really great ode to boxing that also explores a lot of the racial, class, and social politics that go with it. Really interesting stuff. I also think it's awesome that more women are getting into boxing and mixed martial arts. Although I think as long as there are ring card girls, it's going to be hard for female athletes to get the respect they deserve. We can be warriors too, dammit.

In any case, as I don't have Pay-Per-View, I doubt I'll be watching the de la Hoya/Mayweather fight live, but who knows, I might check it out online later. Stay tuned.

Posted by mwashburn at 09:04 AM | Comments (0)

January 15, 2008

School Fundraising

Anyone with kids in school has been through one awful fundraiser or another.

This year Bug's school had both a Scholastic Book Fair (halfway decent, but lots of books with Disney Princesses or other characters I don't want to push on my 2-year-old) and a Yankee Candle fundraiser (decent quality merchandise at least, but again, more crap no one needs). We are also enrolled with Upromise so that as we go about our normal shopping, some purchases credit cash back to a college savings account. I like that kind of arrangement, though we don't do quite enough brand name shopping to make it really work for us.

What I didn't know is that you can contribute to school fundraising programs in a similar way with a program called Schoolpop. You can get a Visa card or shop online, and there are some stores I actually use enrolled in the program (including amazon.com. It's great that companies are giving money back, and that people can select their own schools to give to (if they're participating). I guess as retailers get bigger and bigger (and therefore have locations pretty much everywhere) this gets easier to do. And how much better than sending the poor kids home as salespeople to push crappy wrapping paper on their parents' co-workers!

They also have a program for schools to earn money through recycling of cell phones and printer cartridges. I'll need to do a little more research to find out what the company's overhead is, but on first glance it looks pretty good in concept.

I haven't registered yet to see if Bug's school is participating, but I will. I think it's important to still be actively involved in your kids' school, whatever that means, but at the same time if programs like Schoolpop help them earn a little more money, all the better.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:16 AM | Comments (1)

December 13, 2007

This is the Part Where I Stop Paying Taxes

House Resolution 847

Whaaaaaa??? Where do I even start? With "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," or with I'm paying them for THIS or with Wait a minute, I thought by being the majority, and in power to boot, these jokers don't need more special recognition. Was someone afraid that Christmas was going to be taken away? Thanks for ruining my very happy, perfectly secular, Holiday Season, oh ye Legislators. And the fucked up part is that they can arrest me if I don't pay them come April 15.

In a "Religion Watch" aside, I heard a story on NPR this morning where they twice referred to "Hindu myths." What would happen if reporters started referring to Jesus' birth as a "Christian myth"?

Posted by mwashburn at 07:20 AM | Comments (4)

October 11, 2007

Paranoid

I just got Adam a subscription to Harper's magazine for his birthday. It's a good magazine, but the articles are looooong. The issue that just came, though, had a cover story that caught my attention. Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein. It's one of those articles that I'm reading as an opinion piece, I mostly agree with her, though I try not to be a complete pessimist. It's about how the push for privatization in this country has not only led directly to crises like the Katrina disaster, but how these disasters become, in turn, catalysts for further privatization, and how this process is creating two classes of people the world over. The biggest contractors for the Katrina cleanup were those already favored by our government in Iraq. Now, the scariest bit of business, and one I hadn't given much thought to previously, is Blackwater. I hadn't thought about the fact that there is a 20,000 person paramilitary group in this country that is backed by a right-wing government and various right-wing organizations and think-tanks. Somehow Klein paints a pretty bleak picture of the US; a crumbling infrastructure (roads and highways, hospitals, public schools, etc.) ripe for a major disaster, heavily armed and morally ambiguous militia groups ready to "protect us" when the next disaster strikes, and private corporations that have been feeding at the tit of government for years and years ready to provide the good life for those who can afford it when the inevitable happens.

Not good. Not good. I'm not sure how to fix things. I'm really not. I might be moving to Canada.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:18 AM | Comments (4)

September 05, 2007

It's Official

Not only does the government put corporate profits ahead of your health, it puts corporate profits ahead of your baby's health. This article from the Washington Post details how federal officials toned back the content of breastfeeding advocacy ads several years ago (I don't know that they were fantastic to begin with, but we can discuss that at length later) and officials were also pressured to not publicize statistics showing fewer childhood illnesses among breastfed babies. More discussion here.

You knew that formula was manufactured by some of the wealthiest, most politically connected companies on the planet (including Big Pharma), but did you really think they felt so threatened by the message that Breast is Best that they had to play dirty?

And here's some more great stuff compliments of the Motherwear Breastfeeding Blog, about how your maternity nurse may have been bought off to push formula on you. Wake up, people. Breastfeeding is part of motherhood. Formula is necessary in some situations for the health of mother and baby, absolutely, but it should not be the norm, and it should not be pushed for the sake of corporate profits when ALL the facts point to the fact that this "choice" has long-term health consequences for children.

/rant.

A Quick Addendum...
If there were a pill that you could take once your baby was born that would:
•Help speed your post-partum recovery
•Help you lose weight
•Reduce your risk of postpartum depression
•Significantly reduce your risk of breast and cervical cancer
•Keep you from menstruating for up to 20 months
•Significantly reduce your baby's risk of diabetes
•Reduce your baby's risk of female cancers
•Strengthen your baby's immune system and reduce the risk of ear and respiratory infections
•Aid your baby's brain development

Would you take it? Wouldn't you expect your doctor to be strongly encouraging you to take that pill? The problem is, no one has figured out how to make very much money on that particular pill. Well, except for maybe the Boppy people.

Posted by mwashburn at 06:43 AM | Comments (0)

August 17, 2007

Thinking Ahead

It has become something of a Holiday Tradition for Adam and I to go see a performance of The Nutcracker wherever we are at Christmastime. We've seen some good ones and some bad ones, but one of these days we are going to see the Moscow Ballet performance. There are several in our area, and apparently nutcracker tickets are already on sale!

I'm looking forward to reading the story with the Bug, and taking her to her first ballet. We are really good about museum trips, but haven't really done much kid-friendly stuff with theater, music, etc. I think that the patience and appreciation for that kind of thing is learned, and best to start early. Once she's old enough to understand the story, I think she'll have a good time. Who knows; maybe she'll end up taking dance and getting to be one of the little sprouts in a local production or something.

The Nutcracker is just such a cool, weird story. Big Christmas party. Weird uncle shows up with wondrous gifts. Wondrous gifts come to life and transport children to a magical land. Children wake up on Christmas morning. Simple. And I've always loved the music. I can't remember now, but we did see a performance with live music, and really great sets, and so forth. It was probably in Phoenix; the Phoenix Ballet. That was the most professional production we've ever seen, but Indiana University used to put on a very good show too. The Moscow Ballet, however, is supposed to be the best. We have a friend who can't bear seeing anything else now. So this is one more great thing about living so close to Chicago. Though I'm just not ready for the holidays.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:11 PM | Comments (0)

August 07, 2007

Halloween in July

... I mean August. Well, I wasn't gonna do any more PPP posts, but then this one turned up, so I might as well go out with a bang! I'm much more a fan of Rob Zombie the musician than Rob Zombie the filmmaker, not because I think he lacks artistry or competence as a writer/director, but because I just can't stomach horror movies anymore. Zombie's music is catchy, informed, campy, and fun to shake one's groove thang to. His movies cross the line from campy into truly terrifying, so how appropriate that he's remaking Halloween the movie for release on August 31.

[This post is sponsored by Halloween the Movie]

I used to really like horror movies, and I guess my favorites would have to be the Evil Dead movies. Sam Raimi has gone on to do some really fun stuff, and the first Evil Dead really shows his sense of humor. When I first saw it I found it terrifying, but after you watch it a couple of times you get all the "camp" (no pun intended), and it's even more obvious in the second movie. I always did like the B horror flicks, because they weren't taking themselves so seriously (so maybe that made it easier for me to remember that it was just a movie). Rob Zombie definitely worships at the shrine of the classic B horror flick, but takes it to a whole new level.

I'm not entirely sure why so early for the actual Halloween season, but... in any case, it's sure to delight horror movie buffs everywhere. I know that I've seen at least a couple of the Halloween franchise installments thanks to AMC, and it's kinda scary (and hey, isn't that Jamie Lee Curtis in her debut in the original??? That woman can scream!) But in 1970s/80s horror-film tradition, the original is fairly slow paced, relying on suspense rather than explicitness to frighten. Kids these days need a lot more stimulation, apparently, and Zombie is sure to deliver. I read the NY Post interview with Sheri Moon Zombie (Rob Zombie's wife and lead actress in his films to date) and she promises a much faster-paced film with expanded character development from the original. The YouTube trailer (below) gives a taste, and I'll bet Rob Zombie will deliver a more contemporary and artistic (in his own gruesome way) version of the story.

Despite my own aversion to blood-and-guts at this point in my life, I do think there is a lot more to Rob Zombie and his artistry than plain shock value. I actually saw House of 1000 Corpses in the theater, probably the last horror movie I saw. Adam bought Devil's Rejects but I haven't been able to watch it. Zombie is a horrorshow Renaissance man who does everything (visual art, music, film) with a ton of craft, all subject matter aside. And I am also pleased to say that his MySpace page actually uses a background image properly, with text you can read and a layout that is not mindbogglingly stupid. But more about MySpace, design incompetence, and the intellectual decline of our youth later. Happy Halloween!

Posted by mwashburn at 03:13 PM | Comments (3)

August 01, 2007

Random Rants

A couple of recent news items that annoy me:

-The fact that Rupert Murdoch was allowed to buy the Wall Street Journal. I really can't wrap my brain around the fact that this isn't considered a media monopoly at this point. The WSJ was one of the few truly objective conservative journalistic sources out there. I think it's naive to think things won't change.

-The fact that the Hutsells are probably going to do jail time for "permitting underage drinking." As a parent, this is really chilling. I don't know the details of what went on, but I think you can take the concept of parental responsibility too far. I think you're doing your children a disservice if your goal is to be their "buddy" and let them do... well, whatever, under the idea that they are going to do it anyway. I think part of a parent's job is to set boundaries so that kids know when they're off course. However, at a certain point your kids are their own people and are making their own decisions. I don't think there's a magic age at which that happens, but doesn't it seem hypocritical in this country that we are incarcerating more and more minors who are being charged as adults, but at the same time now we want to punish parents for the misdeeds of these same children? Am I making *any* sense here?

-The fact that George W. Bush is still president (and the fact that I'm still pretty lukewarm about all the potential alternatives).

Posted by mwashburn at 02:43 PM | Comments (0)

July 07, 2007

So This Is What It Sounds Like When Doves Cry

Believe it or not, I had never seen Purple Rain. Until last night, that is. And I have to say, not only were the '80s completely embarrassing, but I cannot believe this movie won an Oscar. A Grammy, ok, I get it. It's Prince. But the movie really sucked. It was somewhat entertaining, but what a cornball, misogynist piece of crap.

Doves may have pride, but apparently Apollonia does not. I would have left Prince after the episode at the lake, and that would have been that.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:58 PM | Comments (3)

June 27, 2007

What's Your Global IQ?

Newsweek this week has a feature about "Global IQ," sort of a more up-to-date take on the concept of cultural literacy. They feature a 130-question quiz here on their website to test you. I was shocked at how abysmally I did; my score was 41% (and I was even cheating a little since I'd taken the shorter version in the magazine already). But, it turns out I'm in line with the majority of online test takers. Nothing like feeling completely stupid on a Wednesday morning. Of course I did much better on the questions on health, literature, and art than I did on those about current politics or sports. But it's an interesting mix of current events, global politics, and world history. Check it out if you have a few minutes to waste. And I guess it's time for me to start watching the news again...

Posted by mwashburn at 10:14 AM | Comments (4)

June 11, 2007

Patita and Leigh may have a point

After my recent post about superstition and the American public, the ensuing discussion focused on psychiatry vs psychics and whether one was really any better than the other. Coincidentally, Newsweek this week ran an article by Sharon Begley citing new research that shows that therapy may actually be harmful in as many as 4 in 10 cases.

Worst outcomes seem to be for grief therapy, PTSD treatment, and treatment of dissociative-identity disorder (formerly called multiple-personality disorder). So maybe we are better off giving our money to Madame Rosa after all.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:34 PM | Comments (0)

May 02, 2007

Save Internet Radio

This isn't like that "Save PBS" chain email, this is for real. Proposed legislation enacting new, much higher licensing fees for internet radio will effectively kill the flourishing diversity and reach of both new and established artists via the internet. More info here.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:58 PM | Comments (0)

April 21, 2007

Ego Boost

I just got home from the first real party I've been to since Lily was born (well, excepting the nice New Year's Eve bash we went to). I was invited to participate in a two night "art happening" hosted by a local mural artist. He saw my work up at the Red Cup Cafe a while ago, and wanted me to participate. It was mostly a group of people who already kinda knew each other, a mix of more established artists around here, some college students, etc. I ended up having a really good time. It was part art show, part party, part ACLU fundraiser, and part halfhearted attempt at performance art (the host was completely nude this evening except for some artfully applied body paint.) But, I got to have more in-depth conversation with some cool people I had met briefly before, met a bunch of other artists, commissioned an ink portrait of Lily, painted a tattoo on someone's back, possibly snagged a web design job, and found a new friend for Lily. The host has a 2-year-old daughter who Lily played with while we were there Friday night (who needs performance art when you have toddlers??) and plans were made to get them together again soon, especially when D (the artist's wife) and I found each other out as Extended Breastfeeders.

It was nice to have positive feedback about my work, nice to dress up, nice to meet people who at least pretended to find me and my work interesting, and even nice to be hit on by people I had no interest in. I felt like the old me. I've been feeling more and more like that lately. It's just taken a long time to feel like I can be ME and Lily's Mommy. They both take so much energy. But in any case, I collected lots of business cards, and hopefully will continue on my artistic journey in this little provincial corner of Northwest Indiana.

Posted by mwashburn at 11:45 PM | Comments (0)

March 12, 2007

Movies: 300

Adam and I actually had a real DATE this weekend. Dinner and a movie and everything. Lily is finally completely over the separation anxiety, and we have finally arranged a monthly "date swap" with friends of ours.

We decided that though there are a few movies out we were interested in seeing, that 300 would be the one to see on the big screen. Now, granted I don't get out to the movies a whole lot anymore, but I thought this was a fantastic movie. I really think Frank Miller's artwork is gorgeous, and even though I enjoyed Sin City, 300 was more coherent, visually stunning, and more layered. It was definitely bloody, but again in that sort of over-the-top comic book way that isn't as hard to stomach. Now I want to read both the graphic novel and the actual Greek story, the battle of Thermopylae, which was chronicled by Herodotus. Basically, King Leonidas and 300 Spartan soldiers stand against some ridiculous number of Persian soldiers under Xerxes to defend Greece. You can imagine the results, but it's a great story.

After our movie, we had quick sushi at Fuji, the new restaurant up in Portage. The portions were generous and the fish very fresh, however it seemed to be amateur night with the service. Our waitress was obviously in training, but they weren't training her very well. Her mentor acted completely spastic and rushed, and our waitress didn't look at us, gave very curt responses to all of our requests and thank yous, and actually TOUCHED THE INSIDE OF MY CUP when scooting it across the table to refill my tea. Why is it so difficult to find even competent restaurant service anymore? Servers who don't know which side to serve you from or how to serve a bottle of wine seem to be par for the course. It's a dying art, I tell you. But I hate to complain (no, actually I don't). This was, after all, my second movie since Lilybug's birth, and my first sushi restaurant meal since getting pregnant in 2004 (!) A good time was had by all, even Lily, who got to play with little friend Rue for a few hours.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:25 AM | Comments (1)

February 22, 2007

Cool Books

I am really enjoying exploring children's books with Lily right now. There's just so much fantastic illustration to take in. A book I came across recently is just so cool that I wanted to share. Look Out Bird! by Marilyn Janovitz is a neat little circular story that starts with a snail slipping off a leaf.

The illustrations are a little trippy, almost 60s-ish, with the action illustrated by repeated images of each animal in various states of motion. Lily loves it, and knows most of it by heart now.

Posted by mwashburn at 04:26 PM | Comments (0)

December 30, 2006

On Being a Liberal

I don't usually feel a need to define myself politically, or to explain or defend my political sympathies. However, spending the last week or so with a NeoCon and a staunch right-wing Republican have caused me to really think about WHY I think the way I do. My blood pressure tends to rise and make me completely incoherent when I have to listen to people blowing smoke up Bill O'Reilly's ass for four days straight. My father accused me of wanting no one to express an opinion that I don't like. That is absolutely untrue. I think everyone has a right to express their opinion, but not everyone with an opinion needs to have their own TV show so that they can shout it at me.

Here's what it comes down to: People like my father and Adam's father would rather help no one than accidentally see their hard-earned money go to even one person who does not, in their opinion, deserve it. I would rather see a little waste if people who truly need help are getting it. It seems that many conservatives who laud Capitalism and Free Markets think that rights are attached to dollar bills. I feel that responsibility is attached to dollar bills. If you've earned money, absolutely you have a right to spend it they way you want, and I don't think that social conscience can be legislated. But, I think that this world is a very sad place if we don't give a little back and think about the impact of our decisions on the rest of the world. This attitude of "I have a right to waste my own money and resources, but no one else better" is a bit confounding. If I can afford to drive a gas-guzzling SUV, even if I don't really "need" it, do I have a "right" to drive it when there may be a cumulative negative impact on others? Sure, I'm not causing anyone immediate bodily harm, but is it really right to wait for the "market" to make it more sensible for me to drive something else? It just seems really narrow to expect that my caring for others is only predicated by what saves (or makes) me money. What happens when we don't care about others as human beings? I am certainly not a shining example of humanitarianism. I tend to see a lot of other people as stupid idiots (and I think there's a lot out there to prove my point), but if I make decisions that negatively impact others over the long haul, I think I'm digging my own grave, so to speak. I just read an article on an anti-sweatshop activist who claims that her research shows that if just 2% of Americans purchased goods differently, the practice would be forced to change. But then I also read something last week claiming that sweatshops are good for people– in that they pay higher wages than the people in those areas are used to and precipitate greater wealth and social change in the communities they are in; people line up for sweatshop jobs. I think once again that that looks only at the economics of it, not at quality of life for those people. Women line up in some cities to become prostitutes too, because it affords more cash than agricultural life in the countryside, but can you argue that the short-term economic "good" is worth what it does to the people involved?

Not everyone can afford to live in such a way that they are completely insulated from the hoi polloi. Besides being lonely, it's just plain impractical and unaffordable for most of us. But I often get the impression that people like my father just don't realize how most people actually live. "Pull yourself up by the bootstraps and make something of yourself." Well, a lot of people haven't got the boots in the first place.

So that's my political rant for now. I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist in a lot of ways, but I really think there's two sides to every story. And I think that I'm better for sharing what little I have.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:12 AM | Comments (0)

December 03, 2006

More info on the Delta Airlines Breastfeeding Case

Here's a great article from the online version of newsweek:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15924715/site/newsweek/

Unless this woman is just making shit up, it sounds like she was ejected from the flight for disagreeing with a flight attendant who was offended. And people do react that way. Someone I know here in Indiana was told in a public park, by a passer-by, that she should be arrested for what she was doing and that it was disgusting.

The beginning of the article contains some great information on the health benefits of breastfeeding and also mentions the current American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines, which recommend breastfeeding for at least a year. I am thinking of forwarding the article to some of my relatives, in preparation for the awkwardness of their discovering at Christmastime that I am still breastfeeding an 18-month-old. I certainly never thought I'd be breastfeeding a toddler. But it just kinda happened, and here we are. I am actively trying to reduce the frequency, as gently as possible, but honestly with the dairy allergy I feel it is providing excellent nutrition that she isn't getting elsewhere. It is also a great tool for when she's feeling sick, upset, or just to help get her to sleep. She'll grow out of it. I just try to remind myself that things like blankies, pacifiers, thumbs, etc. are the substitute, not the other way around (though Lils has gotten very attached to two favorite bears that she has to have at bedtime). Even if she nurses until she's three, what a tiny, tiny commitment in the face of a lifetime of parenting. As long as it's still working for both of us, I just don't see what the big deal is.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:08 PM | Comments (0)

October 19, 2006

Art Art and More Art

Well, my crazy running around last week paid off. In addition to my work going up at the cafe at some point in the future, Blue Restaurant hung two of my paintings and six of my collages. Very exciting. No sales yet, but at least my work is out of the studio and in front of eyeballs. In addition, my little screenprinting experiment paid off, (thanks to this cheapo DIY screenprinting site.) I used $1 silk scarves from Goodwill and lo and behold, notecards with screen printed swallows!

(If you are interested in owning a set, please see my Etsy shop.)

I'm working on another series of mixed media paintings, based on the Elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water; not the Periodic Table, sorry).

I also want to give props to my new Etsy friend, Artgoodies, who has some really cool block printed items and handmade books.

And that's all the news this week. We're still sick again here (no, that's not a typo). I blame all the snotnoses at the YMCA. So, it's comfort food and tea all around. Even Lily is in on the action—I have let her sip my mint tea a few times, so now when she sees me with a mug she says "tea. Mmmm. Some!" I swear, I want her to be one and a half (almost) forever.

Posted by mwashburn at 01:51 PM | Comments (0)

October 10, 2006

I Don't Suck! [a little brag]

I finally got around to organizing my studio space this past weekend, and thanks to a light design schedule and a newly arranged work-time-childcare-swap with a friend, got some work organized and new pieces started yesterday. So this morning, I finally got my courage up and took some work to the funky little cafe in the town north of here. The owner LOVED my work, is putting me on the schedule for a show, and was introducing me to people (including a local gallery owner who happened to be there this morning) in the cafe as "an artist whose work we are going to be showing here."

So, this definitely gave me a little lift this morning, and I have plans to shop my work around at a couple of other potential venues in the next couple of weeks. Now off to take advantage of nap time to work on the new series...

Posted by mwashburn at 02:36 PM | Comments (4)

September 26, 2006

All the Goodness of Church, without the Jesus Aftertaste

This past Sunday, I attended my first Unitarian church service. My main goal in checking this all out is the future religious education of young Lilybug. While I indentify as atheist, I still recognize that religion is an important element of our social stew, and think that she will at least need to understand what this whole God thing is about if she is to make her own, informed decisions as a young adult someday. The Unitarian church is all about tolerance, multiculturalism, and the demonic idea that people should just plain be nice to each other. I like the thought that she can go to one church and learn about Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Paganism, and Zen.

Everyone was very friendly, and it was the expected mix of aging hippies, geeks, and assorted intellectuals. I really liked the minister a lot. What was strange was that the service followed the format of your standard church service, but to me it seemed like church in bizarro world, since there was no mention of Jesus and the dying for our sins and all, and very little God. There is a great blank space behind the pulpit, which I found a bit eerie, but here's the thing-- it's a blank slate. Congregants are asked to do a little more work in bringing their own concept of spirituality to the table and actually THINKING about what all the talk means. No easy answers. I like that. Apparently there is also a lively discussion of religion and spirituality that takes place over coffee prior to the service. I'm interested to check that out. The idea of discussing the meaning of God and religion with the intent of questioning and seeking is very appealing to me, rather than having someone who has all the answers tell me why I am wrong. Because, despite my lack of faith in a sentient Superhero God in the Sky, I do think about the Universal questions, and why we have religion, and what the intent is, and what the meaning of life is, etc.

On a related note, Newsweek recently ran an article about atheist scholarchip (The New Naysayers, September 11, 2006) and what really struck me is how misrepresented and misunderstood the whole concept of atheism is. It seems that most of the American public thinks that atheists are miserable, amoral people who'd just as soon murder you as look at you. I just go back to the idea that atheists are also obligated to be nice to their fellow citizens, not because of the fear of God or punishment in this life or the afterlife, but because if this world is all there is, you'd better make the most of it. Other people are all we have, and it's pretty obvious how interconnected we all are.

End of sermon.

Posted by mwashburn at 01:26 PM | Comments (0)

September 07, 2006

And in Other Art World News

Paris hacked by Banksy!

Posted by mwashburn at 11:51 AM | Comments (2)

September 06, 2006

Where Children and Art Meet, There's Bound to Be Controversy

Thanks to Adam for pointing me in the direction of this article about photographer Jill Greenberg's work showing crying toddlers.

I'm not sure yet what I think about the whole thing, but one assertion in the article that I agree with is that the whole controversy says more about the internet/blogging than it does about photography. People anonymously venting their outrage without knowing all the facts. I guess I lean towards thinking that it is quite doubtful that any lasting damage was done by withholding a lollipop for half a minute (despite A's very fatherly declarations that such an action is a "cuntish" thing to do). If so, then every time I take a dirt-covered cracker from my daughter or tell her not to stick her finger in an electrical outlet I'm scarring her for life. I guess the issue is causing upset without a practical purpose (assuming here that ars arte is not, in fact, practical). But we know that there are throngs of people out there just waiting to screech "Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children," a la Mrs. Lovejoy on the Simpsons.

Is emotionally manipulating young children a good thing? Probably not. Is the artwork good? Time will tell.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:25 PM | Comments (6)

July 05, 2006

Sorry, Ben, You're Going to Need to Find a New State to Live In

Kentucky Governor Ernie Fletcher not only believes Intelligent Design should be taught in schools, he seems to think that ID is "self-evident truth" to some 90% of the population.

According to an article in this month's Skeptical Inquirer, the letter reproduced in the above blog is a form letter, sent out by the governors office. The Kentucky Academy of Science received an identical letter in response to its letter expressing objections to the governor's state of the commonwealth address, in which he endorsed the teaching of ID in schools. SI also notes that Kentucky law "requires science teachers to give credit on exams for Bible-based accounts of human origins."

Sigh.

Posted by mwashburn at 10:27 AM | Comments (2)

June 23, 2006

Since I'm Having Some Art Time Today...

I LOVE Fred Tomaselli

And that's that.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:57 PM | Comments (0)

March 23, 2006

Proud to Be...

a member of America's most mistrusted minority?

I had no idea. This idea that atheists are self-centered, materialistic, immoral people is just idiotic. I think Christopher Hitchens puts it quite well in his article The Future of an Illusion, where he basically argues that atheism is the morally superior position because it requires that we live well and treat others well because of a rational recognition of the fact that we are all connected and our lives affect one another, not out of coersion by a priest, church, dogma, or fear of repercussions from some all-knowing deity.

If we are alone in a spiritual sense, then we'd better treat other human beings well, because they're all we've got. Conversely, if we are rewarded with a glorious afterlife for following our chosen creed, it becomes easy to divide the world into "us" and "them" and consequently dehumanize those who don't believe the way we do. Terrorism, the Crusades, the ongoing violence, rape, torture, and misery across the planet from Darfur to the Middle East to the former Soviet Union are the fruits of religious devotion.

Just my two cents, I suppose.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:40 PM | Comments (2)

February 06, 2006

Just Plain Out of the Loop

I actually looked at the headlines on NYTimes.com today. Everything is too depressing to bother reading in-depth though. The government is a mess, Iraq is costing MORE money, shootings in gay bars, bird flu, riots in the Middle East over Danish cartoons. I just can't take it.

Listening to an NPR report the other night I realized that I am very soft on illegal immigration. My attitude is that if someone wants to be here, wants to work and obey the laws, then I have absolutely no problem with them being here. As to the whole argument of illegals taking jobs away from hard-working blue collar Americans, well, then bust the companies that are illegally hiring them and they'll stop coming. More specifically, the report was about a class action lawsuit in the state of California brought by University of California students paying out-of-state tuition who say that it's unfair for illegals to get in-state tuition. Now, if you came here as a baby or young child, illegally, but had to attend public school, spoke English fluently, finished high school at the top of your class, and met all the acceptance requirements for an in-state school, why in the hell shouldn't you be able to attend and pay in-state tuition? UC is claiming that the in-state tuition is not a benefit, per say, just that out-of-state students pay extra for not residing in the state.

The best way, in my humble opinion, for people to get out of poverty and have options in this world is through education. If they were raised here, legal or not, and meet the educational requirements to get into college, let 'em go! I'm assuming that if they have jobs, they're paying taxes, and if they're buying shit in their home state, they're paying sales taxes, so why shouldn't they benefit from in-state tuition policies?

Here's a link to some coverage in UCLA's student paper.

Posted by mwashburn at 11:24 AM | Comments (6)

September 27, 2005

Now They're Just Trying to Piss Me Off

So it's expected that the Vatican will issue an official statement barring homosexuals, whether celibate or not, from the Catholic priesthood.

Where to begin... with the outrageous fact that gays are being blamed for the Church's own shameful coverup of the victimization of children? With the fact that homosexuality and pedophilia are once again being conflated in the media? With the fact that the Church apparently has no interest in protecting women and girls who are abused?

The misunderstandings behind this, and the inquisition-like way in which seminarians are allegedly being screened and asked to report on conditions in the seminary is ridiculous. A vow of celibacy is a vow of celibacy, regardless of what one's natural inclinations might be. Why is it assumed that a gay man making that vow is going to have a more difficult time living by it than a straight one? As far as I know, the Church's stance is that they only have a problem with homosexuality if it is acted upon (I certainly would differ, but I'm not the Pope). So why not punish those who do wrong when they do it?

As if I didn't have enough reasons already to have a problem with religion, this just really takes the cake. It's a witch hunt, and I don't think it is going to do much good for the Church. Or gays, unfortunately.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:35 PM | Comments (0)

September 26, 2005

Our Big Outing

We had been hoping to go for a stroll in the park on Sunday, but since the weather was glum and a bit rainy, instead we set our sights a bit higher and headed up to Chicago for the afternoon. I had really been wanting to see Tououse-Lautrec at the Art Institute. So, we jumped in the car, Lilybug in tow, and drove up. It took just over an hour, and that with bad traffic going into the city. Lily was a little angel, all decked out in blue long-sleeve onesie and pink bunny slippers (thanks Heidi!) for the occasion.

The show was really nice. Well designed, and included both well-known pieces and really interesting sketches and studies, as well as posters and ephemera by both Toulouse-Lautrec and others from the Montmarte scene. It was really crowded, which was the only bummer, but the show closes Oct. 10, so I wasn't surprised.

I carried Lily with me in the sling most of the day, and I was kinda surprised by the number of harried-looking moms pushing crying babies in gargantuan strollers. If you have multiple kids, the stroller totally makes sense, but if you've only got one... well, I wouldn't want to be pushing the thing through throngs of people. But that's just me. I was also entertained by all the rich babies in their berets and Burberry shorts...

We were all a bit tired afterwards, so there's lots of napping going on around here today. Zzzzzz.....

Posted by mwashburn at 02:29 PM | Comments (2)

September 07, 2005

Won't Somebody PLEASE think of the Children...

And this time I don't mean it sarcastically.

The American College of Nurse-Midwives has responded to Hurricaine Katrina by soliciting donations of baby blankets and clothing for the refugees in the south. Here's a link:

http://www.midwife.org/news.cfm?id=357

Donations of ready-to-use blankets and clothing can be sent to:

Texas Health Care Nurse-Midwives
1050 South 5th Avenue, Suite F
Fort Worth, Texas 76104

24-hour phone: 817-870-3686

or

Carolyn Nelson Becker, CNM
Dept of OB/Gyn UTMB
301 University Blvd
Galveston, TX 77555-0587

Since Lily has outgrown all of her newborn clothes and the few disposable diapers we had, and has a plethora of flannel and fleece blankies, I sent a big box down that way hoping that someone can use it. Just thinking of being in the situation of some of those people with tiny babies makes me feel so awful.

Anyway, birthday post later, and I *promise* I'll get MT Blacklist installed this week.

Posted by mwashburn at 10:11 AM | Comments (1)

June 27, 2005

Some Recommendations

At the risk of offending an already cranky baby, I thought I'd sit here and let you know some tunes and a movie that you need in your life. Gorillaz Demon Days is a really good listen. I like it better than their first release. Good good stuff. Good to dance to with a cranky baby. Enjoy.

And a movie recommendation: Dirty Pretty Things, with Audrey Tatou, the cute cute girlwoman from Amelie. The movie is about the underworld of illegal immigrants in London, and it's incredibly interesting, well-acted, and good. Part love story, part mystery.

And that's all she wrote. For today at least.

Posted by mwashburn at 09:53 AM | Comments (0)

June 03, 2005

Update on the Smithsonian and ID Film

No guys, no baby yet (just thought I'd get that out of the way).

I've been following the story of the backlash against the Smithsonian for the screening of the Discovery Institute's new Intelligent Design film. Apparently, the Smithsonian yesterday issued a press release stating that they will go ahead with the scheduled screening, but that they will not accept the Discovery Institute's donation and that they will remove their co-sponsorship of the film.

Now, I am very cranky and hungry at the moment, so haven't gotten around to putting all the links in this post, but it's all out there and widely available should you care to take a look on today's Internets...

To clarify some of what was said in my previous post, this film screening was not to be a public screening, but an invitation-only event, which is the usual format (as well as the SI's "co-sponsorship") for events in this venue at the National Museum of Natural History.

James Randi, of the James Randi foundation also got involved (his organization works to debunk paranormal phenomena and pseudoscience) by offering the SI $20,000 *not* to screen the film.

While I am glad that the SI took this step, at the same time by not thinking this through (and tending their mission) ahead of time, they are unfortunately fueling the flames of the ID movement's assertions that they are unfairly shut out of the debate, that the horrible atheist Darwinists dominate the media, etc. etc. As a former museum professional, I just see this as a horrible no-win situation that could have been avoided by more careful consideration beforehand. The SI ends up with egg on its face, and ID advocates have more fodder for their victim-status rantings. The Discovery Institute has already been playing up the fact that their film will be shown at the Smithsonian-- a newspaper article in the Iowa press braggs that "assistant professor so-and-so's work is in the Smithsonian," so they certainly are using this opportunity to try to leech off the Smithsonian's credibility and reputation to further their own agenda.

Posted by mwashburn at 11:45 AM | Comments (0)

May 30, 2005

Welcome to the Dark Ages

As reported in today's New York Times online, the Smithsonian will screen a documentary film endorsing Intelligent Design. I'm a bit outraged. Spokesmen for the Smithsonian claim that this is not an endorsement of ID theory, yet the museum is presenting the film in exchange for a donation from the Discovery Institute, the anti-evolution organization that produced the film. I understand that the Smithsonian often arranges for organizations to use their auditorium in exchange for donations, but especially in this context, shouldn't they be a bit selective about what they could be appearing to endorse?

If not the Smithsonian, then who?

Why can't someone stand up to these people and once and for all quell the "debate?" I am tired of hearing about museums compromising content in order not to offfend those who "don't believe" in evolution. We don't coddle those who believe the Earth is flat. I am tired of the compromises being made in childrens' education to appease powerful religious groups who oppose the teaching of evolution. There are a few FACTS that are getting lost in all this.

First, there is no scientific debate about evolution. The debate is a theological, not a scientific one.

Second, the definition of the word 'theory' is being abused. Evolution is NOT "just a theory"-- it is a theory in the same way that gravity is a theory. We know it exists because we see it working and all credible evidence points to it. The body of evidence keeps building, and the word 'theory' here is used to mean a body of evidence explaining a phenomenon, not 'theory' as in 'guess'.

Third, there are a number of misconceptions about evolution being promulgated by ID proponents, that take advantage of those with weak background in science. One of these is that 'random' processes could never result in the complexity of life that is the human race. Evolutionary mechanisms and natural selection are anything but random. They merely rely on a large pool of possible variations, which can and do arise randomly. The ID view also assumes that mankind is the pinnacle of creation. Darwin never saw it that way, and scientifically speaking there is no reason to believe that man is the penultimate creation or that we are more than another moment in the long history of life on this planet. I suppose that upsets those who thinks that we are somehow special. Yes, we are special, but we are not the ultimate goal in terms of the development of life.

Darwin is often misquoted as having said "only the strong survive." He did not. He said that those most adapted to change survive-- the "fittest," in that sense. Darwinism is often confused with Swift's "social darwinism"-- a horrid sort of eugenicist thinking that I have heard quoted as a reason to oppose the idea of evolution. What unscrupulous and bigoted people do with science is one thing. The strength of the underlying principles is another matter entirely.

Fourth, most evidence for ID is poor science. Some of the PhDs trying to advance ID theory flaunt their "Dr. So-and-so" titles but in fact hold PhDs in fields of questionable relevance to evolutionary theory. In the interest of fairness in reporting, Dr. Duane Gish, of the Institute for Creation Research holds a PhD from Berkely, but I'm not able to find exactly what his PhD is in. Dean Kenyon, author of the much-touted book "Of Pandas and People" (being proposed as an alternate textbook in school districts wanting to teach ID) holds a PhD in biophysics from Stanford. And Stephen C. Meyer, Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute holds a PhD in the History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge. There are a number of websites detailing the debates launched by many of these figures and websites tearing their theories apart, so I'll spare you here.

Good science begins with open ended questions such as "what experiemental methods will best tell us how old the earth might be?" Creation science starts with "what evidence will prove that the Earth is the age told in the Bible" thus making it very easy to ignore or reject inconvenient bodies of evidence (dinosaurs, anyone?). ID is creationism by another name, that's all-- the only organizations that seem to be pushing it are religiously-based ones. The Catholic Church long ago reconciled the fact that there is a place for science and a place for theology and faith, and embraced the validity of evolutionary theory. What's the problem?

I have no problem with people believing whatever they like in the religious/spiritual sphere, but when that crosses the line into attacking true science and holding back science education for the entire country, I get a little cross. And when national institutions such as the Smithsonian don't have the backbone to turn down a donation in the name of taking a stand against this co-opting of scientific integrity, it just makes me really sad. I'm sure they will endure a huge firestorm over this decision, and perhaps that was shrewdly tactical. Maybe that is what it will take to shed a little more light on this controversy. On the other hand, when we're talking about the Smithsonian as our national museum, largely run by the U.S. government as our national repository of history, science, and culture, and our own president has declared that "the jury is still out" on Evolution (it isn't), maybe it really is a case of wolves in the henhouse.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:48 AM | Comments (4)

May 11, 2005

If it Weren't for Austin...

...The State of Texas would be, in my mind, utterly without redeeming value.

The state of Texas has recently proven itself exceedingly good at wasting time and taxpayer money on intrusive, idiotic, outside-the-logical-or-legitimate-concern-of-the-government legislation. The latest is a bill that would ban "sexy" cheerleading displays.

Come on; can't we leave this up to schools and parents? I really can't believe these people have nothing better to do all day than sit around drafting legislation about every little thing that bugs them. There are real problems on this planet and real things that need addressing. Why do legislators think that their jobs are to draft law upon law upon law? We have enough problems enforcing the laws that exist already, why overburden things even further with this nonsense???

Posted by mwashburn at 08:30 AM | Comments (4)

May 01, 2005

The American Taliban

While I would not say that I rely on The Daily Show for in-depth news coverage, I do tend to get a 'heads up' about certain things from that oh-so-entertaining and reliable source, Jon Stewart. I knew about the huge politico-religious gathering happening at the MegaChurch in Louisville, featuring such heavy hitters as Bill Frist (yeah, I know) and James Dobson. One of the really choice moments was a speech (which I *think* was by Dobson, please correct me if I'm wrong) where the speaker was quoted as saying something along the lines of "they're saying we're going to have a theocracy... a theocratic government. What are we? The Taliban?" The irony of this would be funny if it weren't so damn scary. These people see no problem with a theocracy because, well, they're right, aren't they? So maybe they won't be stoning women to death, but they will be imposing their view of morality, government, etc., on everyone despite the WALL between Church and State called for by the founding fathers. I just find it frightening that these people think that they are SO right that they have the right and the mandate to do this. No respectable religious figure ought to be proselytizing through the force of the law, I'm sorry. I don't want a God that has to be forced down my throat.

Oh, and hooray for Texas, which not only has legally banned gay marriage, but just passed a House Bill that would bar gays and lesbians from adopting foster children. Using as their evidence for the bill specious and misleading "research" from the Family Research Report, a non peer-reviewed, opinionated, and filled-with conjecture "study," the proponents of this bill need to be taken to task for bigoted legislation based on nothing but homophobia. The writer of this study bases his findings more on what he calls "common sense" than on anything resembling hard science. He read some newspapers, and extrapolated his resuls from just 22 cases, mixed with his own bigoted hunches, classified pedophiles as "homosexuals," and is now being quoted by these assholes in Texas as support for why they're right. I was also charmed by his graphs showing molestation by "homos" and "heteros." Just super. You should be real proud of yourself there, guy. Your assumptions about 22 news stories is not "empirical evidence."

I wish some of these people would get out and actually meet some fucking gay people and gay parents. It's really infuriating.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:11 AM | Comments (0)

April 19, 2005

Special Report

The new Pope has been elected. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Germany is now Pope Benedict XVI. The conclave elected a hardline conservative Catholic as the new pope. In his first public address, Benedict slammed "dangers" such as communism, liberalism, religious pluralism, and atheism, stating:

“Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the church, is often labeled today as a fundamentalism,” he said, speaking in Italian. “We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism, which does not recognize anything as definitive and has as its highest value one’s own ego and one’s own desires.”

What could possibly be more egotistical and elevating of one's own desires as declaring one's own religious docrine the One Truth and proclaiming that all those believing otherwise are in the wrong? What could be more harmful to world peace than NOT recognizing the relativistic nature of culture, ideology, and religious belief?

It is believed that Benedict may well undo much of the reaching out that the Catholic church has done and the tolerance it has managed to engender in recent years, and Benedict also poo-poohs the priest sex abuse scandal as being largely orchestrated by the media. Well, I suppose he is infallible.

Posted by mwashburn at 03:16 PM | Comments (5)

Untitled

Today I bring you the

Vin Diesel Random Fact Generator

Because it hurts my brain less than talking about the ongoing battle for contraceptive rights.

When does moral objection cross the line and become activism? It's illegal to block the doors to an abortion clinic, so why should it be legal to take a woman's prescription away, not fill it, not find someone who will, and not hand the piece of paper back? I still stand by my assertion that the decision has already been made between the woman and her doctor, and is not for the pharmacist to suddenly interject his/her belief into the matter. This is all aside from the fact that prevention of implantation of a fertilized egg is not, in my opinion and most reputable medical opinion, the same thing as terminating an already established pregnancy. Most medical literature puts it at 20-25% of all fertilized eggs actually implanting and starting a viable pregnancy. But, I guess when it comes to imposing your religously-based moral beliefs on others, statistics like that are irrelevant.

But, there are a lot of people making this argument a lot more eloquently and effectively than me.

Posted by mwashburn at 10:55 AM | Comments (17)

March 30, 2005

What? Liberal College Instructors?

An article in today's Chicago Tribune (I know this link probably won't work after today; I'll try to correct that) cites a study just published this week, co-authored by professors at George Mason University, Smith College, and the University of Toronto, that shows that 72% of those teaching at American universities identify themselves as liberal. Though they say the findings are preliminary, Stanley Rothman of Smith is already asking whether this might be evidence of hiring discrimination against conservatie applicants for college faculty positions.

I would be willing to bet that there just happen to be more well-educated, qualified candidates who fall on the liberal end of the spectrum. And the phoenomenon of level education correllating with liberal leanings can't just be chalked up to indoctrination in the university setting--Jonathan Knight, director of academic freedom and tenure for the American Association of University Professors, says in the article that numerous studies have shown that the core values a student brings with him/her into college are not significantly affected by the college experience.

I can't say that academia isn't without its problems, political and otherwise, but I've never really seen liberalism in college as the blight the Right seems to think it is. If the alternative is Intelligent Design and Bob Jones University, count me out.

Posted by mwashburn at 11:28 AM | Comments (8)

February 15, 2005

News Update

Since I always strive for accuracy here at Decapitating Shadows, I wanted to provide an update on the story I reported recently about an unemployed woman in Germany who faced losing her unemployment benefits if she refused to accept work as a prostitute. Someone commented on that entry that it seemed a story had been twisted in the British press for political ends. That is exactly what happened, and apparently something that was originally reported in the German press as a hypothetical somehow morphed internationally into the story reported by the Telegraph. Ever our friend, snopes.com clears up the situation.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:56 PM | Comments (0)

February 01, 2005

A Double-Edged Sword

I was working on another, fluffier entry, but then a friend sent me this article from the Telegraph, a UK news source.

It seems that since Germany has decriminalized prostitution, women receiving unemployment benefits are now subject to loss of those benefits if they turn down jobs in the sex industry.

I have always taken a morally neutral position on the sex industry, advocating for decriminalization on the grounds that a) it's not going away, b) if subject to regulation, it would be safer (physically and health-wise) both for workers and patrons, and c) women should have the choice to pursue such work without stigmatization. I think these ideas apply to everything from strip clubs to brothels. The international trade in women is deplorable, and I think that the black market nature of the business at this point makes it even more harmful to women.

However, this article really gives one pause. How, if prostitution is legal, can the government differentiate between sex work and other types of work when enforcing unemployment programs? I'm not sure if we have any regulations in this country that allow someone seeking work to turn down, say, certain types of hazardous occupations without negative impact to benefits. There has to be some middle ground in terms of making this type of work non-criminal, while still recognizing that it is unique in some other ways. I think choosing not to accept a job as a call girl is a little different than choosing not to take a job as a secretary because your training is in telecommunications or whatnot.

Wow. I'm really going to have to give this one some more thought, but I'd like to think that common sense will prevail.

Posted by mwashburn at 03:39 PM | Comments (5)

January 13, 2005

Maybe Common Sense Isn't Dead...

The state of Georgia ordered to remove Evolution "warning" stickers from Biology textbooks.

Just an administrative note-- the blog may be a bit light for a while. In addition to my usual crazy schedule and baby planning, I am taking a night class that demands a lot of attention. Sorry to disappoint my readers. I'll try to substitute quality for quantity.

Posted by mwashburn at 12:09 PM | Comments (0)

January 07, 2005

More Legislative Mayhem

...this time in Virginia.

I haven't the energy to comment. Thanks to Carol and Patita for this one.

Posted by mwashburn at 03:13 PM | Comments (3)

December 20, 2004

1984 Pt. II

According to one article, the original intent of the Michigan Conscientious Objector Policy was to give more weight to pro-life doctors and groups. Because abortion is, to some degree, and elective procedure, I cannot imagine a doctor being put in a position of being "forced" to perform an abortion any more than I can imagine a doctor being "forced" to perform a liposuction.

Here is an article that provides a good analysis and discussion of the other threats to public health posed by this pending legislation. And though the bill does not apply to refilling birth control prescriptions, it would apply to filling prescriptions for emergency birth control, including the "morning after" pill.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:49 PM | Comments (2)

December 18, 2004

Welcome to 1984...

If you can't make it illegal for women to have access to birth control, then make it legal to not give them access.

Confused? The new Michigan "Conscientious Objector Policy," which has passed the Michigan legislature, makes it legal for any health care provider to refuse not only to dispense drugs due to moral objections, but also to deny care to anyone they have a moral objection to. This has chilling ramifications, particularly for gay and lesbian patients, as has already been noted in numerous online publications.

There is a similar bill making the rounds in Texas.

I sincerely hope my next post will not be titled "Welcome to The Handmaid's Tale."

Posted by mwashburn at 02:34 PM | Comments (9)

December 10, 2004

Reproductive Medicine

Here and on other blogs I know and love, the topic of the birth control pill has been discussed, most recently in the context of pharmacists who refuse to prescribe the pill because of "moral objections" based on the belief that the pill is an abortifacient. I call it a belief, because I have not been able to find one shred of medical evidence that the pill does have this effect. In fact, I have credible reports of women who have not only conceived while on the pill, but in fact carried babies full term while on the pill (note: this is not a good idea, so don't try this at home). This casts even further doubt on the idea that the pill routinely prevents implantation of a fertilized egg.

Those crusading against the pill have stated that it "very often" or "most of the time" works by this method. Although I realize it is bad journalism to quote vague sources, I am going to do so here. A respected reproductive endocrinologist recently stated that (paraphrased):

Doctors know that breakthrough ovulation is very uncommon when on the pill. Furthermore, while it can be speculated that hormonal secretion could be blunted and endometrial environment COULD be affected, there is no way to know for certain. This is because hormonal monitoring and even endometrial biopsy will not with any certainty confirm lack of endometrial development.

This doctor has delivered numerous babies that were conceived while on the pill, which he feels reinforces the argument that the abortifactant argument is flimsy at best. It cannot conclusively be proven one way or the other, though. I think this really bolsters my argument that those who "believe" the pill to be an abortifacient are manufacturing fairy tales in order to try and take reproductive rights away from women. Bad science is being used to promote a false idea that is dangerous to womens rights. I have no problem with people basing their actions on a moral standard, however when that moral standard is based on lies and affects other people's lives negatively, we have a problem. I also worry when doctors and pharmacists are relying on something other than solid medical and scientific evidence to guide their decisions.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:59 AM | Comments (0)

December 09, 2004

History Repeating Itself

sigh.

(Link to an excellent article in the NY Times about protest of the new movie Kinsey, which I really have to get out and see this weekend.)

I'm just sort of speechless and at a loss to even rant anymore about our sexual and reproductive freedoms under fire. Having spent seven years in Bloomington, Indiana, two of those years at IU and some time with the curator of several important exhibitions from the Kinsey Collections, there is a special place in my heart for Alfred Kinsey and the work being done at the Kinsey Institute.

Posted by mwashburn at 11:12 AM | Comments (6)

November 13, 2004

What I've accomplished so far this weekend

Never much of a joiner, I finally decided to do some joining.

You figure we're gonna need 'em, what with our reproductive rights under seige, or friends' "lifestyles" in question, and Bush poised to more or less establish a state religion...

Hmm. Gee. Nothing to comment on there...

Posted by mwashburn at 06:04 PM | Comments (20)

November 10, 2004

Woo Hoo!

From The New York Times Online:

WASHINGTON, Nov. 9 - Attorney General John Ashcroft, one of the most high-profile and polarizing members of the Bush cabinet, said Tuesday that he would resign, after a tumultuous tenure in which he was praised for his aggressive fight against terrorists but assailed by critics who said he sacrificed civil liberties in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

There are a few names being bandied about for replacements for Mr. Ashcroft. Will have to do some digging to see if they are something to be frightened about. I still chuckle every time I see Ashcroft's name, due to an Onion article run soon after 9/11. It was a satirical listing of tv programs to be broadcast continuously while the nation was still in shock, and it listed the Cartoon Network as airing "SpongeJohn Ashcroftpants." giggle.

Posted by mwashburn at 09:42 AM | Comments (2)

November 03, 2004

It ain't rocket science, Martha!

(Editor's note: This post is simultaneously appearing on Ennui Central and is our first ever collaboration. --flygrrl)

The original idea came from flygrrl and the impetus to carry it out came mainly from sour grapes. We decided to plot the recent state-by-state 'smartness' index against the margin by which Sen. John Kerry won/lost a given state.

By way of disclaimer (in case you did not already detect the tone of satire in this post), I think one of the worst things we do to each other is to assume that those who have opposing views are "stupid." It's just not the case. I am just sorry that politics are what they are and that some of the issues dividing us are such... issues. I was a little annoyed at Kerry's concession speech today, when he said something along the lines of "Now is the time to heal the American people." OK, so, we've been swinging really sharp machetes and cuttin' y'all up real bad for the last year or so, but c'mon, let's heal up and forget it now, ok? The one saving grace from yesterday out here in Illinois is that Barak Obama was elected (by a freakin' landslide!) to the Senate.

Anyway, on with the show...

Some fun tidbits to share:
• The seven 'smartest' states (MA, CT, VT, NJ, WI, NY, & MN) all went to Kerry.
• The seven 'dumbest' states (NM, NV, AZ, MS, LA, AK, & AL) all went to Bush.

• The median 'smartness' value for all 50 states = -0.45.
  
• The median 'smartness' value for Kerry states = 3.72.
  
• The median 'smartness' value for Bush states = -2.37.

• 'Smartest' Kerry state = Massachusetts (18.43)
  
• 'Smartest' Bush state = Iowa (7.8)
  
• 'Dumbest' Kerry state = California (-7.61)
  
• 'Dumbest' Bush state = New Mexico (-18.09)

• Massachusetts ranks #1 by both accounts ('smartest' state and largest Kerry margin of victory).
  
• Utah, Bush's strongest victory, ranks #28 in 'smartness'.
  

While I'd like to say that there was a strong, linear relationship between 'smartness' and voting for Kerry, the numbers simply aren't that clean. There does seem to be somewhat of a trend, though. You can see a 'cone of confusion,' if you will, amidst the 'dumber' states and the Bush-leaning states, all converging up and to the right, tightening into a nice trend, and culminating in Massachusetts.

As somewhat of an aside, there doesn't appear to be any correlation with a state's 'smartness' and 3rd party votes:

sources:
Morgan Quitno Press 2004 Smartest State Award
David Liep's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections 2004 Election Results (as of 03 Nov 2004)

Posted by mwashburn at 09:01 PM | Comments (7)

four more years

Posted by mwashburn at 11:03 AM | Comments (2)

November 02, 2004

Posted by mwashburn at 02:58 PM | Comments (8)

October 27, 2004

Vote Pairing

I think I may have made a sound decision that frees my conscience. Check out votepair.org. Since I'm not in a swing state, I can vote for a third party candidate, while ensuring that my "viable" presidentail choice gets counted in a state where it, well, counts. And it's all perfectly legal!

Posted by mwashburn at 09:46 AM | Comments (9)

October 26, 2004

More Voting Fun

Did you know that we have a fascist candidate for President? While all of these fine politicians may not be in the ballot in your state, there are 32 of them running for President this election year. You can read all about it at vote-smart.org.

Posted by mwashburn at 08:30 AM | Comments (6)

October 25, 2004

I know, I know

I have been letting my blogging lapse lately, I know. So, until I have time to write an entry about our latest adventures, here's some voting humor.

Posted by mwashburn at 09:31 PM | Comments (1)

October 18, 2004

The Decline of Western Civilization, continued...

I really do let this stuff get to me to much. I was already on edge because of a superfluous apostrophe in the word 'its' (possessive) in a Fox screen quote I spotted on the tv monitor at the gym. Then, I get home, and actually thought for a minute about this one:

I can just picture some family sitting down at the dining room table, and in comes Mom with a frozen pizza on a platter. "Dinner is served, kids!" "But the box didn't tell me I had to cook the frozen pizza!"

Sigh.

Posted by mwashburn at 07:35 PM | Comments (4)

October 14, 2004

The Decline of Western Civilization

I have always thought it pretty ridiculous that we, as a society, are so litigious as to require warnings such as 'do not eat soap' on retail packaging. I realized how far gone things were back in college when I came home to find my European roommate in a hysterical fit about the fact that her laundry detergent was labeled with the information "do not drink or get in eyes." So, I was very amused yesterday to discover the following label on a shaving cream sample I got with my recent purchase from Sephora:

I've never heard of someone chugging shaving cream because it contained (unfermented) hops. But I suppose it could happen. Is it terribly wrong of me to think that people who don't know better than to eat soap and beauty products maybe should suffer intestinally?

Posted by mwashburn at 09:32 AM | Comments (4)

September 28, 2004

O'Reilly v Stewart

As I've stated here before, I generally cannot watch Bill O'Reilly. I'm not even going to get into it. But, I did watch one segment last week, because O'Reilly's guest was Jon Stewart, beloved host of the Daily Show. (Click here for a partial transcript of the interview.)

One of O'Reilly's attempts at humor was to characterize Stewart's audience as a bunch of "stoned slackers," 18-35 year old males with substance abuse issues and no real brainpower to resist the Daily Show's lampoonery of Republicans. A few people got curious about this statement, and according to a now widely-distributed AP article, Nielsen Media Research found that Daily Show viewers were more likely to have completed a four-year college degree than viewers of The O'Reilly Factor.

Does it really mean anything? Probably not. I just thought it was interesting. And after watching the original broadcast, I think that watching O'Reilly try to crack a joke is even worse than watching him flame someone. I was a little frightened, actually, expecting the interview to go south at any moment. Though you could see the fear in Stewart's eyes, he kept his wits about him and did quite well.

Posted by mwashburn at 03:03 PM | Comments (8)

September 11, 2004

Outfoxed

Finally saw the documentary Outfoxed last night. I wasn't nearly as put off as Steve, though I agree that it did drag on and ramble a bit, and maybe didn't present anything that was a big revelation to any of us free thinkers.

I do think it's alarming that true standards of journalism have been so abandoned. Obviously, it's naive to think that any news source is completely objective, but when a station's catch phrase is 'Fair and Balanced' and that phrase is only a marketing term, it's a little upsetting. I also think the blurring of the line between news and editorial content (which has happened in many many information outlets, not just television news programming), is very disturbing. And yes, I do think no matter how smart we are our opinions and attitudes are colored by what we see. And by what we don't see. But on to Bill O'Reilly...

I'll probably get a 'Cease and Desist' letter from the Fox lawyers for even mentioning the man's name, but I have to say, while I am immune to many many people I don't particularly agree with or care for, for some reason Bill O'Reilly has a very negative impact on my blood pressure and I can't help but scream at the television whenever he's on. I'm not sure if it's because he argues like my father, or what. I get so tongue-tied trying to explain my overly emotional response to the man that I just can't bother most of the time. He's mean and quite rude. I don't like the precedent it's set for "debate" programs. I'm not sure they further anyone's knowledge of the issues, they just provide entertainment along the lines of Jerry Springer in so many cases. And this is coming from me, a great proponent of healthy discussion, informed debate, and the Marketplace of Ideas in general.

Posted by mwashburn at 02:00 PM | Comments (1)