Jul 02

2007

I recently posted on the verbal abuse and put-downs that men are subjected to on a regular basis. However, it doesn’t just stop with insults and eye-rolling. A recent study commented on by Dr. Helen

showed that nearly twice as many women as men said they perpetrated domestic violence in the past year, including kicking, biting or punching a partner, threatening to hit or throw something at a partner, and pushing, grabbing or shoving a partner, said Herrenkohl.

What’s really amusing is the commenter who defends the practice. This is progress? Kind of makes you want to do this kind of thing, just as payback for the stupidity of it all.

written by Laura

Jun 15

2007

Pull your trousers up or go to jail, warns Louisiana mayor
By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Published: 15 June 2007

Call it the battle of the drooping drawers. Across the American South, a cry has gone out to ban sagging trousers that show the wearer’s underwear. Bemused violators of the proposed law will be fined or end up in jail.

Deep in Cajun country, the mayor of the Louisiana town of Delcambre is about to sign into law a proposal that will make it a crime to wear trousers that show underwear. “If you expose your private parts, you’ll get a fine [of up to $500 (£250)],” Mayor Carol Broussard said. Repeat offenders could land themselves a six-month stretch in jail.

… She added: “It’s gotten way out of hand out here,” and advises people who like to wear their pants low: “Just wear it properly. Cover your vital parts. I mean, if you expose your private parts, you’ll get a fine. If you walk up and your pants drop, you get a fine. They’re better off taking the pants off and just wearing a dress.”

… But a spokeswoman for the American Civil Liberties Union is puzzled. “Why can’t people just look away?” she asks, pointing out that the laws have to apply equally to males and females. In recent years, Louisiana and Virginia have tried to ban sagging pants, but the efforts went nowhere.

The thing is, people can walk around in their homes as exposed as they want to be. But by ACLU standards, if they’re out in public, allowing them to walk around exposed could sen[d] a message that the [government] endorse[s] [sagging pants].

Fully clothed people no longer feel safe or welcome around people whose clothes might fall off at any moment.

After all, there is a time to [show off your underwear] and that is in your [home]. *But the public [street] is not the forum for [nudity or underwear display].

The [nudity and public display of underwear] sends the message that only [hip hop fashion based public nudity will go unpunished, where traditional nudists must obey the law]. [R]esidents should not be made to feel like second class citizens because they do not [own] the prevailing [fashions] promoted by [hip hop industry]… The [nudity and indecent exposure] in [public] broadcasts a divisive message to the [clothing] pluralistic community.

The problem is that government [ignoring public indecency violations by one group] could be perceived as an unconstitutional endorsement of [certain types of illegal public nudity]. … The goal of the ACLU is not to ruin the [fashion statements of hip hop fans] or any other [style of music], but rather to ensure that the government does not endorse the views of one [type of public indecency] to the exclusion of others.

True, those edited quotes are silly. But maybe looking the other way isn’t the panacea that the ACLU spokesman suggested it is after all.

Trackposted to Continue reading »

written by Laura

Jun 01

2007

Two men did what they thought was right, but the method makes all the difference.

Whistleblower air marshal P. Jeffrey Black stepped up, did the right thing, and will accept the consequences:

Every air marshal that has whistleblown publicly so far has been summarily terminated one way or another. It is just a matter of time before I receive my retaliatory pink slip. I am sure there are TSA/FAMS management bureaucrats in a basement somewhere at this very moment, scheming and drawing up battle plans to attack my character and veracity. I wouldn’t expect anything less from the Transportation Security Administration.

…I know this first hand. In August of 2004, and just two months after the events of Northwest Flight 327, I reluctantly chose to become a whistleblower. The dangerous agency internal policies I wished to expose were so egregious, which seriously jeopardized the health and safety of every air marshal, flight crew member, and passenger, that I chose to take my disclosures straight to Congress. I gave testimony to the Chief Counsel of Oversight and Investigations, and went on the record with the House Judiciary Committee, that I had personally experienced what I believed to be numerous probing incidents aboard domestic flights, and that I believed the Federal Air Marshal Service was not only hiding the details to these incidents from other federal law enforcement agencies, but that they were also keeping this vital information from their own flying air marshals. I also had reason to believe, from speaking to other air marshals across the country, that I was not the only air marshal experiencing these probing incidents aboard domestic flights.

If he does lose his job, others, probably better ones, will be waiting. The only kind of employers who would be unwilling to hire an honest, principled man who is willing to take necessary risks are those who have something to hide.

Leaker Matt Diaz tried to take the easy way out, and later admitted regretfully:

“I could have gone to the chief of staff, I could have gone to the IG (inspector general),” or to his commanding officers in Guantanamo, Diaz said. “There were a lot of better ways to do this, and I didn’t take those better ways.”

He also criticized his decision to send the information to Olshansky anonymously, saying he mailed the information off in a goofy-looking Valentine “for selfish reasons.”

“I wasn’t really willing to put my neck on the line, to jeopardize my career,” he said. ” So I did it anonymously. I’m disgraced, I’m ashamed. I was an inspiration to my family. I let them down. I let the JAG Corps down. I let the Navy down.”

When he gets out of jail in six months, he’ll probably get a job working for some left-leaning person who thinks he’s a hero for leaking. But he knows, as do his wife and daughter, that he is a dishonorable disgrace. He’ll have to work very hard to get his reputation back.

Trackposted to Continue reading »

written by Laura

May 14

2007

Brokeback School? UPDATED

Posted at 6:18 am in Perspective Comments Off

h/t Weasel Zippers

(AP) CHICAGO An eighth-grade girl and her grandparents have filed a lawsuit claiming a Chicago public school allowed a substitute teacher to show the movie “Brokeback Mountain” in class.

Okay, forget about the homosexuality. Forget about the fact that it’s an R rated movie being shown to kids who are 12 or 13 years old. Are kids in Chicago schools so well educated that they can afford to spend class time on watching a movie with no educational value whatsoever?

But, hey… at least Brokeback Mountain isn’t promoting cigarette smoking. Gotta protect the kids, right?

Yet ANOTHER reason why we choose to homeschool.

Update: This Fox news story has more detail. Apparently the substitute teacher willfully showed the movie even though she clearly understood that it was inappropriate:

The substitute asked a student to shut the classroom door at the West Side school, saying: “What happens in Ms. Buford’s class stays in Ms. Buford’s class,” according to the lawsuit.

Now here’s the flip side of the story:

Richardson said his granddaughter was traumatized by the movie and had to undergo psychological treatment and counseling.

In 2005, Richardson complained to school administrators about reading material that he said included curse words.

“This was the last straw,” he said. “I feel the lawsuit was necessary because of the warning I had already given them on the literature they were giving out to children to read. I told them it was against our faith.”

If a twelve year old child is THAT sensitive - that something like this warrants psychological intervention - she should already have been in some kind of counseling. Additionally, was she prevented from getting up and leaving the room? If so, could she not have put her head down on the desk or read a book? Was it a Clockwork Orange situation where she was compelled by some means to keep her eyes fixed on the screen? I’m NOT justifying showing the movie - it was absolutely wrong. Measures should be taken to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. But I am suggesting that if she were THAT traumatized, she had the means to avoid seeing it while she was stuck in the classroom.

And while I fully agree that Richardson was correct to complain about reading material that includes curse words, it is enough to complain about it on the grounds that it is inappropriate for children. I don’t want school systems to comply with any faith’s mores; it is enough to keep things age appropriate, hold to a standard of common decency, and give parents a way to opt out of anything that is offensive to their faith.

written by Laura

May 12

2007

What I Learned While On Welfare

Posted at 2:30 pm in Perspective Comments Off

Back in 1989, I was 21, married and pregnant. I lost my husband. I was already getting free prenatal care from the local charity hospital. After a stay of four days in the hospital due to complications, during which I lost my job, I came home to find an eviction notice taped to my door. No job, no prospect of getting one while visibly pregnant… so I applied for welfare.

I come from a middle class background, and graduated from a large public high school where there was an about equal mix of white, black, and asian kids, along with a handful of latinos. I knew kids from all backgrounds and income levels, but in 1989 I really experienced poverty for the first time. First I lost my telephone. Then the electricity was disconnected - and remember, that means cold showers in a cold apartment, in the winter. I was often hungry, and when I did eat, it was Ramen noodles. (You can’t eat any cheaper than 12 for a dollar.) This was my condition when I went to the welfare office to apply. I stood in line all day - more than once - to show that I met the requirements, and I met people who frankly shocked me. One conversation between two well-groomed women I’ll never forget:
Woman #1 - D.H. Holmes [department store] has Girbaud on sale for $99 dollars - you want to go?
Woman #2 - Yeah, mama’s watching the babies until tonight so I can look for a job.

It’s hard to express the rage I felt. They were in line at the welfare office talking about buying designer clothes - Girbaud was the big thing in the late 80s. I was tired, hungry, and sick. Sick of feeling like crap from living off of noodles, salt and fat, sick of being cold and sick of being dirty. Until you have been truly poor, you have no idea what a luxury it is to be clean. If you have hot water, soap, and clean clothes, you are blessed. Remember that.

I had plenty of time to chat with other women and hear their stories. Most couldn’t even conceive of any life other than the one they had - often their aspirations included things like government housing, and having another baby in order to “get a raise.” One woman whose benefits would soon be cut off because her child was about to turn eighteen hoped to get an on the job injury so she could collect social security. What can you say to a statement like that?

I learned that there is a constant subset of people who will always be poor because they don’t have the vision and the willingness to work to improve themselves. Does my assessment sound harsh? Tough. I’m talking about people who don’t speak standard English - that cuts them out of pretty much any good job right there. Anyone who doesn’t speak standard English need only listen to the radio or television and practice pronouncing words properly. You can also pick up decent grammar that way, just by emulating people who do speak well. The only requirement to do this is to be able to hear, and willing to try. Being functionally illiterate is a bigger challenge, but it can be dealt with - even before the Clinton welfare reforms, when I was in the system, help was available to those who wanted it from a variety of programs, both private and governmental. But the root problem was that these people had no hope, and didn’t seem to want any. Even today I have no idea how to address that; the government can’t give people hope, only a handout. When Jesus said, the poor will be with you always, He wasn’t kidding.

As angry as I was at those two women in line, they did me a favor. I realized that without hope for the future, they simply couldn’t think or plan ahead. They were incapable of being anything but poor, as long as they were restricted by their hopelessness. I learned that the way for me to get off of welfare and out of poverty was to plan - and to plan to work. The Anchoress was entirely correct when she wrote,

The message “you can, if you try” was a louder, clearer and more spiritually sustaining message than “you can’t, so just give up”… When folks feel good about what they are doing, when they feel like they have some control over the direction their lives take - they have hope. And hope is not simply a feeling. Hope says, “awake, O Sleeper, arise from death!” Hope is the builder of bridges, the tamer of winds, the harnesser of ideas and possibilities. A poor man with hope is immeasurably richer than a wealthy man without it, because he carries within him the spark that can alight a thousand tomorrows.

There were other people who inspired me; like the woman who worked three menial part time jobs, and attended a literacy class at a Methodist church three nights a week. Because of her jobs, she didn’t qualify for a cash benefit, but she did take food stamps and Medicaid - she needed it to survive. She said she wanted her kids to grow up seeing her working because she wanted them to have a better life. I’ve often wondered how things worked out for her family, but I’m pretty sure they did okay. She had a plan, and hope to help her carry it out.

I finally jumped through all the hoops and was approved for a cash benefit, food stamps, and Medicaid. The case worker mentioned in a very offhand way that I could get some job training if I wanted. With a baby to support on my own, yes, I was interested. She was surprised - evidently very few people took advantage of it, because the stipend was only $10 a day. You mean I get paid, too? Sign me up! This was my first formal computer training - basically a secretarial course - and the skills I gained I used to get a series of clerical jobs, then as a computer trainer, help desk, technical writer, and eventually I started a web development company which has been my living for the last five years or so. (Along the way I remarried and my husband adopted my daughter.)

As the Anchoress points out in her post, welfare reform could have been Clinton’s legacy, and it would have been a good one. I know the changes implemented during his term have helped. And while I lean toward libertarianism in some areas, I do believe that we need to have a welfare system. I think it should be comprehensive including a thorough assessment, and based on that assessment, require skills training from everything from speech, how to dress and conduct yourself at work, useful job skills, financial management, and child care provided during training. Measurable progress should be a requirement for continuing to receive benefits and training. And then, having given people a second chance to acquire the skills that their parents and the education system should have taught them in the first place, having given them every reason to hope - cut them loose.

written by Laura

Apr 19

2007

I read the Anchoress’s posts on the VA Tech tragedy with interest, especially her son Buster’s response. He reminds me a great deal of my daughter who is the same age - from their faith, to beautiful voices and interest in opera, to the pragmatic and generally conservative outlook. Every time I look at teenage mall rats and despair, I remind myself that there are wonderful young adults like her son and my daughter out there and that they will do a great job running this country some day. In whatever profession they choose, they will be a sane, stable foundation. They are cool, analytical realists, and they are our hope for the nation’s future.

From her first post:

But as I remained parked on my convalescent couch last night I talked to Buster and his friends about how seamlessly they were able to move from watching the distressing images from Virginia to clicking on a re-run of Scrubs. “There is nothing I can do for those people,” one young man said. “I can feel bad for them because they’re in a world of hurt, and if I were there, I’d have done something, or if I were a cop, an EMT worker or something, I could do something. But I can’t. All I can do is sit here and feel bad for them, which I do, but I can’t wallow in it. That would be like making porn of it.” “Yeah,” another one said, “the truth is, these people, it’s horrible, but all you can do is kiss them up to God and then hope when it’s you turn to face something horrible, you can deal with it.”

… I talked to Buster about it later that evening. I asked him what he thought of it all - the shootings, the instinct to move from that story to a sitcom rerun. He said, “Mom, I’ve run the Columbine scenario a million times in my head. I’ve thought about what I would do, depending on where in the building such an attack were to take place. I’ve sat in class thinking about how the windows open, what structures would make the best barricades and how to go about taking the bastard down rather than simply cowering in fear while people are shot to death. I’ve thought of it. We’ve all thought of it, my friends and I, we’ve devoted hours to thinking about it. If you think we’re being cold or cavalier, I think we’re simply aware of the fact that this is what the world is, that no one can ever guarantee our safety - not schools, not governments - nothing is going to absolutely and 100% protect us from what is out there, what can spill into our lives in an instant, and change everything. All we can hope is that when stuff like this comes our way, we can do the courageous thing.”

From her follow up:

Continuing our discussion of last night, Buster and I wondered at the fact that, while some classrooms managed to barricade doors against the Virginia Tech shooter, there seemed to be no class ready to ambush the shooter by having heavy textbooks (or desks) ready to throw at him - “if they’d just gotten him to flinch, just distracted him, they might have taken him down,” Buster said, “and when you’ve got someone down, it’s so easy to kill him.”

“Well, to restrain him,” I corrected, “until he could be taken into custody.”

“No, to kill him,” Buster said. “Why keep him alive, so he can become someone’s hero and spend 70 years on the public dole, running one appeal after another?”

Well, at that age, people do tend to focus on temporal justice more than Godly mercy. But it’s heartening that in the midst of all the “healing” and pacifying psychobabble, the next generation is interested in taking responsibility for their own safety. Society may want to keep these people as infantilized as possible, but Buster, my daughter Susanna, and their like-minded friends are the people who may cause the next generation to earn the moniker of the “greatest generation.” We have a very long war ahead of us - at least until this generation of Islamists raised from babyhood on “Death to America!” dies out - and I’m sure they will be called upon to “do the courageous thing” many times in their lives. From standing up against creeping sharia, reporting anything suspicious and risking lawsuits or even physical retaliation, reaching out to moderate Muslims, or even choosing to enlist as so many are doing - this generation will be called upon to live a life of character far more than my generation was. I believe that they are up to the challenge.

written by Laura

Pursuing Holiness is Digg proof thanks to caching by WP Super Cache!