Why Lawyers and BigTech Don't Mix

I'm sure we're all familiar with Facebook and Twitter engaging in leftist cheerleading and censorship of opposing views under the guise of "anti-harassment and bullying policies". Yet these are supposed to be platforms for ADULTS, right? Aren't children directly banned from them? And you're looking for civility on the INTERNET?!?!?! Like, what world did these people drop in from?

I actually got out of Facebook jail and for some reason, pedandic crybabies haven't tried getting me banned again but I haven't really done Twitter so much since it's not my medium. I'm a woman of words, not of cutesy brainlessness.

So I noticed LinkedIn, the vanilla version of everyone, started getting more political. Not sure why LinkedIn decided it wanted to be a Facebook clone by allowing photos, videos and other unrelated work stuff including political pages. The problem, however, is it decided to become China in regulations and endorse leftists. For simply making comments and pointing out lack of credibility in certain expressed opinions from users who either were fake, didn't even get a vote on the topic (think foreigners discussing American elections) or people who engaged in blatant hypocrisy, "Ross" claimed that apparently LinkedIn decided to ban me with zero warning, notice or specifics on exactly what words were considered "wrong" to them. LinkedIn is even more so supposed to be a platform for ADULTS and for that matter PROFESSIONALS. Presumably, professionals have actual jobs or businesses and aren't cheering on rioters, corruption and the like.

I thought about this e-mail I got from Ross after doing an appeal (I made it a policy to appeal anytime they tried censoring some comment I wrote though they never sent you a copy of the comment or spelled out WHY they were censoring your statements) & decided that LinkedIn is not essential to my life. I made some good contacts in my pandemic vacation and kept information from those people since they contacted me directly. I'll be informing more of them about the situation soon enough. I also know of other platforms that haven't been corrupted and signed up on those. I also thought to myself "I'll just do more blogging and podcast episodes so I can speak freely." I could even try that on my own website since it's got a blog feature as well. I know of others who've created accounts elsewhere, decided to say "fuck BigTech", that sort of thing. It's also been said that the more known you are, the less reachable you need to be. There are lots of celebrities who either got off social media or didn't opt to be on there in the first place. If it's good enough for them and many others who've decided not to stand for the Chinese law these platforms want to follow, why shouldn't I do the same?

For the numbskulls out there, lawyers are NOT supposed to be onboard with societal BS. It's the job of lawyers to point out oppression, rights being ignored, speak for the voiceless & call out the corruption where it exists regardless of what popular opinion dicates is good or bad. Lawyers are not supposed to be a wing of the censorship police or sit back while the brown shirts oppress others. If you follow history and the rise of communism, then you know that the lawyers were killed just as the intellectuals were since commies HATE independent thinkers. Law is all about critical thinking, especially law school. Oh, and we actually know what the laws say, what the Constitution means and so forth. Leftists in the legal profession are as ironic as rich people supporting communism. Stupid is probably also an accurate term since both will be targeted and offed in those same movements. It's like the ringleaders never read "Animal Farm" or actually studied the rise of communism. I've done both, even reading "Animal Farm" on my own while doing a document review assignment. The parallel to communism is obvious to anyone with basic reading comprehension. My liberal arts college required us to take a class called "Human Nature & the Social Order" where we defintely weren't taught about communism being a great thing. What I got from any class on the subject was "communism is a nice idea on paper but fails in the real world since you're never going to change human nature." Any real lawyer doesn't let anybody bully them into silence and trying to bully me is straight up laughable. I've survied things that most of these brats would have been destroyed by. I seriously wonder why any of these overgrown toddlers are getting media coverage and why these platforms should get to maintain Section 230 protection when they want to be editors instead of publishers. Many class actions are on the rise so the results will be quite interesting. I hope they get slammed as they deserve to be.

Now I'm just waiting to see how the election and so forth plays out. Made plans to see my sweetie for a couple weeks to determine if we've got a future together, hanging out with family, not trying to get overweight though apparently I "look healthier" now and am actually within a normal weight for my height. It took 6 years & a pandemic to get back to my pre-divorce weight. Also looking at the bright sides though my family never did big family holiday gatherings (my sister is probably thrilled about not having to deal with in-laws she's not keen on). I have a great Halloween costume that's even COVID friendly along with fun mask ideas if I ever have to design my own. I also am hoping I get my absentee ballot in time after thinking I wouldn't get to vote at all; as of today it STILL says "reviewing application" with a date of a few days ago. I asked them to send it straight to where I'm staying now and I have to get it postmarked by November 3rd. Hoping that goes off without a hitch but who knows. Otherwise, just more day to day stuff and hoping my income actually matches my training and background sooner rather than later. Now I'll have to do some quality niece time. Who wouldn't want to spend time with her? She's a little cutie.

SJWs and Third Wave Feminists Have No Place in Entertainment: Get The Fuck OUT of the Industry!!!

Now I'm no fan of SJWs (social justice warriors for the unenlightened) and third wave feminists on general principle. How come? The short answer is both groups are hypocritical, obsessed with being politically correct and never listen to the opposing viewpoint but instead resort to shrillness both in tone and shutting down the other side (such as calling people who disagree "racist"). They are certainly as big of bullies as any of them would deem Donald Trump to be. I swear the man could eradicate cancer, give every US citizen a million dollars tax free, murder every domestic abuser & gang banger in the country and people would still hate his guts.

Take the Kathy Griffin incident. She does a photo where she's holding a bloody, severed head of Donald Trump, gets all kinds of public backlash, including from the Trump family THEN turns around a files a lawsuit against the Trump family for harassment. What kind of logic is that? Who is honestly seeing viability in this case?

If I were on that jury, I would think she brought any harassment she claims to have suffered on herself. How would she like it if someone did that holding HER severed head? Wouldn't her kids and her family have a right to be upset? Maybe nobody loves her and she has no children or family members who give a damn if she lives or dies. As she may not even be a natural redhead (I don't know), I should point out that not all natural redheads are uneducated liberal mouthpieces. Some of us actually have fully functioning brain cells and use our critical thinking skills. Yet it seems some brainwashed SJWs and third wave feminists are on her side and seem to think having a vagina makes you God. No, it doesn't.

This is perhaps one reason SJWs and third wave feminists have no business being in the industry but I can identify much closer to home reasons why they need to get the fuck out: they preach for superiority not equal opportunity & support censorship of dissenting viewpoints. They are more than happy to ignore the reality that freedom of speech and employment laws apply to straight white men just like anybody else. I'm actually a member of a social media group that deals with entertainment and some members post job ads.

One such ad sought a "female director" with no details on this project indicating that a female director was essential to doing the job and that a male couldn't do it at all. When one man pointed this out, a significant number of females and minorities chimed in on "why not" and didn't seem to get that "promoting diversity" is not an exception to federal labor laws. I, as an attorney, pointed out that this person just handed someone who could allege employment discrimination Exhibit A for their case to win against the offender trying to do this. Unless you can provide a "bona fide business reason" to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, age, and so forth, you don't get to do that. That's why you can't post a job ad saying "no blacks/Jews/Mexicans/Muslims/women/Irish/whatever" unless it's for an acting or modeling job where you're casting for a particular role or the designer has a particular demographic or body type for his/her collection. Abercrombie isn't required to hire full figured models for their ads anymore than a director is required to cast a woman to play Romeo in "Romeo and Juliet." Implicit discrimination is the same thing as explicit discrimination per legal precedence.

Some of these ignoramuses had the gall to think this was okay because of their dislike for straight white guys and their having lots of jobs in entertainment. Wow, what does that make you when you're telling some white guy "too bad" about this? Are you really any better than the white people who said that to black people who complained about segregation and employment discrimination?

Newsflash: there should be more diversity in Hollywood and the indie film world. But if you want that diversity, you need to be privately contacting female directors or gay filmmakers or whatever "diverse" category of choice person you wish to work with. Go find those people and network with them. Go seek out their works. Go ask those people who they know who might get overlooked generally but who is great at their craft. Get off your duff and start finding these people. Pay them what they are worth.

Most importantly, find the people who are good at this stuff regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. Plenty of people are good on their own merits that they don't need some handout based on affirmative action. What they need is to get into the doors and for the gatekeepers to get to know them on their own merits. We need gatekeepers to have interactions with other groups where people in those groups are professional, humble and just as competent as anybody else without thinking they're God or entitled to anything because of some "minority" designation. We also need the people with talent to show they have it, not spend their time waiting around on a handout or demanding a handout. Almost nobody is handed a career in entertainment so people will heavily resent the whole "I'm a minority" card. If everyone else has to hustle, guess what entitled SJW/third wave feminist? YOU have to hustle too.

Any competent producer of worth hires based on the person, not their race/gender/nationality/orientation.

Maybe the biggest reason SJWs should not be in this field is that art is about telling a good story that everyone finds relatable in some fashion regardless of their race, gender, orientation. If you can tell me a story that might be about a culture or people who have nothing in common with me on the surface but as we go along, you show me there is commonality and a reason for me to empathize with these characters/this culture you're doing it right. If you sit down and say "I'm going to write a story that will appeal to women/gay men/Muslims/whoever," you're doing it wrong.

Art is not a segregated medium and should never be treated in that way. Being a good storyteller has nothing to do with your gender, race, age, sexual orientation, religion, political party and so forth. Your goal there is to show me how you see the world and why I should care about your world/perspective. A good writer is sharing a truth & I personally feel something that is great is something that makes me look at a situation differently, changes my perspective, shocks me, isn't predictable but ultimately shows me that we're really not so different from one another. Others may define their good in different ways but ultimately you're supposed to be telling a story that lots of people can relate to.

I think as an indie film person since I've heard all sorts of really nasty things about Hollywood and don't feel it's a world I could relate to. I'm the type who insists on doing things on her terms or not at all; I'm not about selling my soul or degrading myself to get someplace. I'd rather die with my morals than live as a puppet or a shill or a slave. There may be other "minorities" who feel like I do and there may be some willing to sell their souls. That's a personal decision and also has zero to do with race/gender/orientation/etc. Regardless, anyone should get the opportunity to do what they will.

Getting opportunity has nothing to do with special privileges you demanded from others, which never works in life. People hate feeling policed or like they MUST consider such things in hiring decisions. I've made my own stance on who I am clear in prior entries, even talking about why I wouldn't join a "women's group" and how I don't want to be known for being a "woman" this or that since I'm not some inferior who's just good at it "for a woman" or even "for a natural redhead."

Finally, to address the third wave feminists they don't belong in entertainment because getting offended at old white men calling you "sweetheart" or some other term of endearment that comes from their being from a different generation and time or even geographic region (these types would explode if they had to live in the South where such greetings from strangers are commonplace) is going to be a problem for all concerned. It creates drama as well as trite offense and nobody wants to deal with that. That rage needs to be saved for real sexual harassment situations like groping and being propositioned or told you have to come across to keep your job or get a role. Why not address that stuff instead of whining because someone said "good morning" to you? People who do that diminish real situations and actual victims of sexual harassment; they make things a hundred times harder on them.

Third wave feminist types embody the eggshell skull types we hear about in law school; actually so do SJWs. Those people bother me personally on many different levels and I'm always relieved and gratified to find others who feel the exact same way. Those others have tended to cross racial, gender, socioeconomic and sexual orientation lines. It gives me hope for the world.

College Student Protestors: Am I Just Getting Old or Is This Indeed a Conspiracy to Return to Segregation and Eliminate Free Speech?

I saw this article a few days ago about these people's "demands" to others on racial matters. One of these demands is telling white women not to speak on the subject, quite a few were imposing mandatory "cultural sensitivity" training and so forth. I also read something in Slate.com not long ago regarding people's wanting "safe spaces" i.e. spaces where only minorities of a particular race could be & didn't have to worry about people from other groups.

I actually posted that one on the "safe space" on my Facebook friends and asked my friends of varied backgrounds (particularly my black friends) what they made of this. I wondered if they also thought the concept of a "safe space" sounded an awful lot like segregation, which black people fought to get rid of back in the '60s. As I don't associate with ignorant morons who try to clothe themselves as "liberals," other friends indeed felt that sounded messed up.

A friend also tells me about some student at Cornell who was "emotionally traumatized" at having to read literature by white people in a required course like there's no library at a college or some black studies course she could take to supplement her learning. Some media outlet apparently picked up that story, which I haven't the faintest idea why.

Then I read the above article & as an attorney, member of the most minority of any minority group out there (and you don't hear natural redheads calling for "safe spaces" from the rest of you fuckers) and a rational thinking human being I'm immediately struck by a few things:

1. These protestors would be the shittiest attorneys in the world.
2. These protestors assume that employers never do research on them on social media.
3. These protestors are ignorant of basic history on their own race.
4. These protestors really don't want to go anywhere in life.
5. These protestors have been given zero basic survival skills & are a failure in parenting.

Here is a basic & simple truth; the real world doesn't have "safe spaces." If you want a true "safe space," you'll have to be six feet under. Even if you decide to take on a reclusive existence as a mountain (wo)man, you're going to have to get bullets for your gun sometime, see the grocery delivery people or go to the general store. Unless maybe you go to a completely deserted island devoid of all people, you're a damn survival expert & you'll always have enough food, good weather for it to replenish and no bigger wild animals to eat you or your potential food supply you're going to have to deal with other people. Those people won't always be YOUR race, age, demographic & might not agree with your point of view on all aspects of life. Are you going to demand the gun shop owner to "check [their] privilege?!" Are you going to tell wild animals "This is my safe space & you can't be here?!" Being dead is the only way you'll get a "safe space," kids. Don't you think you deserve a little more time on the earth than dying in your early 20s or sooner? I'm sure my late BIL would have liked more time than that, maybe seen his son grow up & learn to talk and all. My sister certainly would have & I know his family would have. This is the same general rationale why it's not a good idea to spend all your education and time away from minorities, (wo)men, people of other ages and life situations. That distance is unrealistic & when you encounter someone different from who you're used to, it just causes major problems.

Could you imagine what some employer would say to a protestor telling them to "check [their] privilege?" or saying they needed a safe space? If it were my company, I'd never hire that "I'm a special snowflake more worthy of rights than YOU & everyone else who works here" troublemaker. Some of these "demands" are for special privileges not based on anyone's talent or aptitude but just b/c of a minority status. If we were doing hiring and promotions and such based on who's most minority I think natural redheads & those from mixed races including naturally red hair would be Emperor/Grand Master/CEO over everyone else regardless of how competent they were since they'd win rarity arguments in 2 seconds (especially if you didn't look like the typical natural redhead since you'd have gotten far more hassle than anyone else in growing up and living life--those people would get to be President of the US without the voting process or lobbying if that's how the world worked).

A pro tip: the key to getting people to be on your side is to listen to what they say & frame your argument in a way that's going to make them listen/consider your words. Do these idiots think alienating their allies or demanding people to do things they've never expressed an interest in doing i.e. bullying them to do what they want is going to make them their advocates? Hell to the NO!!!! That's the polar opposite of getting anyone to take your side in an argument or consider the problem you're bringing up.

Your typical, rational adult does NOT like being bullied or infantilized. They also don't like you shitting on their efforts to help you. If you don't think it's helpful, here's a novel concept: have a private conversation with the person/entity, explain your point in a cool, rational way and then steer them in ways where their efforts will be more "helpful" to you. Express your deep appreciation for them caring enough to put in any effort at all & don't list this as a public demand picked up by the news media.

What I heard in reading that is "We shit on the efforts of white women & belittle their experiences in this society." I also heard serious paternalism & sexism in there. My response would be "Fuck you & the horse you rode in on. Your 'movement' can crash & burn for all I care and (if you're dealing with an angry enough feminist) I'll make it my mission to knock you down every single chance I get." You think it's fucking peachy to be in that category? You ever try talking to poor, white women & educating yourself on that vantage point? If you haven't, I suggest you check YOUR privilege & shut your mouth since your brain is in dire need of more oxygen.

I learned how to do this listening to other people & appropriately create arguments back in elementary school when we covered persuasive writing. I also took a high school and college class on the subject & had it been available to me, would have been on a debate team since I love doing it. People have outright said to me that I was an attorney long before I ever got the licenses; my history of standing up to BS in life certainly supports this.

The way these people have "demands" tells me they would bomb out of law school long before 1L Fall exams came around. What arguments have they presented to prove their points? Would they tell some law professor to "check [their] privilege?" The law professor would tell you to get out of the class; they don't take mess in law school. They don't coddle special snowflakes who think their shit doesn't stink just like everyone else's & you'll lose that ego real quick in the first year.

Also, if you're going to own your own business the key to getting customers for your product is not being a complete jackhole. Even if you have the best product out there, no one's going to buy it with no publicity (and you've likely alienated any PR person who might have helped you by telling him/her to "check [their] privilege") & you being an ass to customers or giving them the impression that you're a jackhole based on your publicly covered events such as claiming trauma from something students have experienced since the college system existed back in the 1700s/1800s. No one's stopping you from educating yourself but it sounds like you're too damn lazy and entitled to bother with self-learning or see value in it. Customers can be as demanding and exacting as potential employers & unless you've got a product that's VERY popular among a niche that never, ever changes you're going to have to be nice to people who aren't just like you. Imagine a restaurant or bar owner that refused to serve minorities or women or even one legged weasels born under the right side of a watermelon. Maybe not enough to trigger a civil rights violation but enough hostility to stay just above the law. That's how you get a business to fail b/c you are injecting your personal politics into your work & the general attitude will alienate others from your business. Others in the world have friends of all stripes as well as family members who may not look like them. I'm sure they'd not like some business owner who treats their friends and family members like garbage and would refuse to patronize it, no matter how good the food or décor.

Finally, I consider not alienating people a basic survival skill. It's the skill you need to get along in the world, have friendships and so forth. This isn't "don't have an opinion or express a viewpoint" but expressing that opinion and viewpoint in a respectful fashion. No calling your detractors names or making character attacks against them (like declaring them racist for not going along with you) but sticking to objective facts, pointing out logical flaws in their thinking and the like. Bully, coerce and emotionally abuse at your own peril. That just makes people angry, focus hatred on you & do everything to shut you down. At least, that is what a person like myself would totally do to you.

Let's just say that in spite of where I'm at in life, I don't forgive or forget. There's no way you can forget or forgive someone like my ex-husband for his behavior. You can't forgive or forget about someone who molested you or your child either & I'd find it insane to try shaming people in those circumstances to do either of those. The best I can take away from that is advising others in similar circumstances or sharing that story so maybe they won't make the same mistakes or do some of the things I experienced to someone else.

The friend who shared the article about the "traumatized" student over the reading material advanced an interesting theory: that the media and press are covering these whiny little brats to erode free speech rights and set progress back. Logic going "Hey, they ASKED for segregation so let's give it to them!" When you dissect it & know that the mainstream media in the US is far from impartial, that makes a lot of sense. In the world I know of & that I think the majority of my generation and up know of, those kids would have been shut down in 3 seconds. No administrators would be taking them seriously & no news organizations would have allowed these nutjobs to censor their coverage or editorial voice. They'd have said "Go study or we'll expel you."

I'm very curious what these people's parents have to say. I'd be embarrassed & furious that my kid wasted the money on tuition, where the parent likely had to take on loans or pay out of pocket, to waste their time ruining their future job prospects & likely letting their grades slip to be professional protestors and not even doing a very good job at it. As an attorney, if I had a kid like that I'd be appalled that my kid hadn't learned the basic rule of argument or how to rally diverse hearts and minds to their cause; it'd be utterly embarrassing. Reading all this, you kind of wonder where those hardliner parents constantly commenting on stories regarding the student loan crisis are. The ones that say "My kid is going to XYZ local school & they'll work their butt off at it since I'm not supporting him/her after graduation or letting him/her leech off me while doing nothing." Some of them are also the ones who demand their kids take particular majors/fields of study and make the best grades possible or else. It'd be interesting to hear what these protestors' parents have to say about this stuff or what they said to their kids after they were in the national media on stuff like this.

My parents would likely have supported me in my endeavors but I also knew what types of causes were or weren't worth it for me to take on, didn't slack in my studies, didn't make "demands" for things or alienate potential allies. I also didn't advocate for a rolling back of basic human rights like free speech and freedom of association. Nor did I bitch about school curriculums where no one was stopping me from doing my own reading of what I wanted or taking classes I wanted to take. People have never liked their mandatory classes most anyplace so I can't have sympathy for that kind of fight.

But seriously, the "it's an attempt to roll back rights" theory does have some teeth if you ask me. I also don't think I'm quite THAT old to notice history and recognize institutions like segregation when I hear about them.

How the Wheel Turns, Putting Student Loans Into Perspective & Another Reason Not to Anger a Natural Redhead

There's some BIG news on the horizon for me. Started last week after my husband had gone out of town. For one thing, did some networking (as I'm apt to do). I also had a guy try picking me up on the subway (marking the second time this has directly happened).

This happened after leaving a party where this guy in a grad program for Math saved my evening after this bitchy woman who had no clue who the fuck she was talking to dared to make little gestures at me and be a bitch about people sitting in her precious little VIP booth (simple polite words would have been fine; making little scurrying gestures is another story). I did make sure to loudly say it's not a good idea to piss off an attorney after getting up but not sure if anyone heard or not.

Before that, I'd sat down and some guy asks me "Who are you?" Not "Hello," or "How are you?" Taken aback, I was about to say "An entertainment attorney you shouldn't mess with," when the aforementioned bitch walked up. Funny that I also saw 2 people I knew at this event, one of whom has landed himself on my future victims list & may very well have landed a spot on my shit list. We'll see how he conducts himself in a face to face setting with me to assess that one. He also wins the Captain Obvious Award for deeming me "weird." It's what "No, duh! What planet do YOU live on?" I had to ask him what his first clue was after that e-mail considering when he met me in person, it was fucking obvious I'm not some conventional or ordinary person.

Life lesson: don't piss off an entertainment attorney, especially if you work in the entertainment business. We can & WILL fuck you up. That's a promise & we won't even bother violating legal ethics rules to do it.

Back to this little subway pick-up scene: I'm listening to music & riding the subway to my transfer point. The guy sitting next to me asks what time it is. I tell him & then he asks "Are you single?" I said I was happily married. To his credit, he didn't say anything further or, to quote Positive K's song I Got a Man, say "What's your man got to do with me?" That will get you smacked in real life.

That is the proper way to handle a failed pick-up. Civilized people do this instead of harassing the woman, creeping her out or otherwise pestering her. Let's face it, I'm one of the last women anyone ought to be hitting on considering I've got options if I wanted to use them.

That statement is probably only going to be more true in the near future considering I got a great opportunity to do something lots of women would like to do (some might even kill to do it) but probably couldn't. Not disclosing much here but let's just say that after feeling that I get harassed so darn much by guys I ought to be getting paid based on my looks, that feeling will most likely become reality in the short term future. High school me would have loved it & did get an offer once but couldn't take it b/c of that whole being in school during the day thing.

I also learned something interesting on Monday at my City Bar Entertainment committee meeting. Rumor has it that the current City Bar President may have the same gripe I've had for years about the entertainment being offered at NYC Bar. You can imagine the response of the majority of the committee; massive conniption fits all around. Somebody else may want modernism as well. Now, who would YOU say is the biggest modernism proponent in these bar associations? If my name doesn't come up, someone hasn't been around lately. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a more anti-lawyer than me, especially considering my entertainment work & my actually knowing good writing, living the life I've lived (my diverse & unusual experiences) and my general creative personality. Maybe sticking around will pay off again.

As an artist, I've felt stifled except for exactly one time in the year where I can present MY creative voice and do what I want to do. If I didn't have that one event, I would be gone. I spoke up about my recent forum that's become the talk of NYCLA and led to people coming out of the woodwork to thank me for doing it, ask me for mentorship, connect with me on social media, etc. I'm hoping I got some people the average events wouldn't muster a second glance from.

For me, good entertainment is art. Art is not politically correct! It makes you think, provokes something in you, even if it's just making you laugh or feeling empathy for someone or a group. For me the two go hand in hand.

Censorship bothers me on a very deep level & while I was asked to be part of the delegation to meet with this President to see if the rumor is true, I did mention I'm a button pusher and I think any objection City Bar has to something could be solved with a simple disclaimer saying what we do is NOT to be taken as a representation of City Bar's views. Commentaries to movies and TV shows have this. This blog even has a disclaimer lest anyone thinks my personal views are = to those of any company I own or work with.

I'm not the type of person who has patience or tolerance to cater to the most offended people in the room. I say if you're that offended, you should stay home & stick to programs YOU select for yourself. If you're making some big complaint about my art in that context, I'll have to assume you're trying to shut down television shows and so forth because you refuse to parent or get off your large butt/grab the remote & change the channel/turn off the TV set or radio like every other human being on this planet. Nobody's putting a gun to your head & making you watch or listen to anything. Plenty of reality TV shows offend ME but you don't see me trying to shut down Snooki & JWow, The Real Housewives of Wherever, or anything else that offends me. You don't see me picketing TV networks or advertisers over it. I just don't watch them. End of story.

Last I checked, we were also adults here. Why should we be doing acts catering to 5 year olds? I haven't even seen little kids at the shows I've been to unless they were related to the person being honored at the 12th Night show.

There's also question of if City Bar wants to act like the Hayes office or network censors when it comes to our entertainment. I think I'd have to point out the hypocrisy if it rears it's ugly head. Lawyers are supposed to be PROTECTING the Constitution and the 1st Amendment freedom of speech is a basic right everyone is familiar with in there. A bar association, run by attorneys, censoring other attorneys is a major problem for me as an artist, film exec and entertainment attorney. That's a good way to get all of them to flee in droves & you bet I'd tell everyone I knew in entertainment if that happened and how hypocritical it would be for a particular attorney in the field to stick around. I'd have to also share with my creatives so they knew who to avoid for legal services; clearly endorsing the censorship of someone else's art means that lawyer isn't going to protect any other creative like (s)he should.

I'm also wondering if modernism is an issue, will the old guard take new writers and ideas seriously? Will they give people room? I feel like maybe I could get room since I don't think you have to pee on history or tradition to accomplish that goal & I've built some goodwill (in singing & acting at least so I think I can push writing, considering I've been published) but who knows about anyone else.

I know if I didn't get room, I would react very strongly. I even shared this issue with the old City Bar President & he pretty much told me "it's very competitive" and left it at that. I would welcome not having that committee feel like a high school or college drama club where the same people do the same things year after year, nonstop & no one ever will get a chance to do anything until the current people die (which is worse than waiting on the seniors to graduate). I'd feel the same if people I brought in didn't get room since that's the same as being nasty to me.

I've also been looking at more publicity for myself & had to jump on board for something else I'm not going into detail on. However, it was the reason I had to claim this blog officially.

These days, I don't spend much of my time reading the so-called "law school is a scam" blogs but I did see an entry on this story that made me want to rant.

This happened in the US, where having student loan debt means you are an indentured slave.

So, hotshots who claim we need no student loan debt reform, tell me how you like the idea of this guy doing what he did? What about him committing suicide over these student loans?

Personally, I'd have taken some different people with me. For instance, some paid off government officials or high ranking employees of these student loan companies that flagrantly violate debt collection laws. I have no beef with my law school administrators like the scam blog writers do. Perhaps settling personal scores before you go or having sex right before you kill yourself.

Then again, if you had sex first you might be so happy afterwards you talk yourself out of suicide unless you were severely, chronically depressed & wouldn't be able to have sex with that person again for some reason. Granted, it would also be bad to be the man or woman who had sex with that person & now had to worry about continuing to put out and delivering whatever game they delivered in the first place so the suicidal person doesn't kill himself/herself (unless that person was a total monster or knew they had nothing to do with the choices of the suicidal person; hopefully they have some measure of care toward the suicidal person).

Still, I wouldn't want to go without having good sex first. That includes the presence of consent.

Nonetheless I know the people railing against reform would whine & cry about how that's terrible and "suicide's not the answer." They'd be joining in the whole community mourning and all that outpouring of grief. I don't think they'd have the balls to go against that view.

Well, what IS the answer bitch (or bastard)? Your own religion would punish you for speaking ill of the dead or saying they will burn in Hell like you're a judge announcing a verdict. If you're not religious, you're still asking for karma to bite you in the ass.

Get a job? Have you opened your eyes to today's economic reality where college kids are forced to work in retail & fast food making minimum wage or far less than $10 an hour? See that recent article about the McDonalds that required a college degree to be a cashier there? Entry level in the legal field is non-existent. Nor is the state bar obligated to get jobs for new attorneys or law schools obligated to get jobs for new graduates. It's sink or swim, fuckers!

Payment plans? Do you know how private loans operate? Do you know that most law graduates have a good chunk of debt in private loans, meaning the government's got squat to do with them & the providers are, for whatever reason (probably lobbyist money), a legalized Mafia organization whose motto is "Fuck you, pay me!"

Networking? That's a limited solution, not a one size fits all concept. Some people are shitty individuals & no one likes them. Not everyone has the charisma or charm for it, especially many attorneys. You also have to be able to find the right people to network with & if you're not in those circles, you aren't in.

Join the bar associations? Doesn't really work if the bar association doesn't have a committee in your field of interest. It also doesn't work if you aren't willing to jump into a conversation of 4-5 people who already know each other & don't know who the fuck YOU are (assuming you aren't a gorgeous creature busting up a group of people of your preferred gender to sleep with) or get approached by people (that also increases if you're a gorgeous creature). One of my big gripes with bar associations is that new people who aren't social butterflies have no way to effectively meet and integrate with attorneys there. If a sorority did that in recruitment, the school or Nationals would attack them in about 2 seconds.

Let's also not ignore the obvious fact that many attorneys are assholes & I definitely encountered plenty when I was a law student/new attorney regardless of my unusual career path.

Finally, if you aren't some BigLaw worshiper with a T1 school on your name you are considered fucked by many circles of the legal field (circles I don't deem worthy of my time or attention). I personally don't think innovation or subbing those assholes ought to mean people commit suicide over unconscionable & disgusting student loan contracts and repayment terms.

I find most of the anti-reform crowd are either old farts who went to law school before 2000 (and the later exemption of student loan debt from bankruptcy, including private student loans, in 2005) or people with no graduate school degree or training to their name who haven't the faintest clue how going to law school works. These people need to shut the fuck up & propose useful, relevant and practical solutions instead of rattling off the same old tripe a hundred times. We're sick of "when I was YOUR age, I walked 15 miles in the snow to school" logic. Boo hoo! Look how sympathetic I am to you sitting in your little mansion & eating at the most expensive restaurants in the world.

Repetition doesn't make your argument magically more sound. It just makes you look more stupid, clueless, out of touch & at worse, a heartless piece of shit who should just go work for one of these loan companies and have blood sacrifices for them. You love them so damn much, why aren't you sacrificing animals to them? You're already figuratively sacrificing humans to them. Why not make it literal?

Read this article from Secret Agent Man on Backstage & apparently this is another reason not to piss off redheads. Seems our presence at a casino table means good luck.

Now if I ever go to Vegas and guys ask me to blow on their dice before they throw them, I'll know why they're asking. That could also explain anyone following me in the pursuit of high payouts. Hopefully, that knowledge will keep my husband from killing folks.

Do you think a redhead you have pissed off is going to bother helping you in that respect? I don't know if this applies to natural redheads exclusively but I'd say this is more reason not to piss off natural redheads. We could fuck up your ability to win in casinos by alerting the Fates & thereby making sure you lose. I would do that. So would any of my naturally red haired family members. We've got tempers, you know.

So How Come Political Correctness Doesn't Extend to Sexism of Women?

Answer me that, folks. In particular, if we're going to ban certain classic cartoons because of offensive racial stereotypes (and yes, the Censored 11 stuff is pretty bad).

Yet we're STILL being exposed to the stereotypical 1950s housewife types in the classic Twilight Zone along with Olive Oyl in the Popeye series, various bitchy housewives in the Looney Tunes cartoons that beat up on cats for daring to eat birds (usually it's Sylvester because he dared to eat Tweety, who's a freaking canary). When you get down to it, there's a ton of sexism in the old cartoons.

I was watching some Popeye cartoons earlier & my husband reminded me of a rant I've not done: I absolutely can't stand Olive Oyl. She epitomizes everything stereotypical & insulting about women. Cartoon Olive, at least. Comic strip Olive is less offensive since she actually knows how to take care of herself.

I thought my husband & I were the only people who hated Olive Oyl until we watched a special feature on one of the Popeye DVDs that came out. Fortunately, the entire era of the cartoons that we wanted was put out on DVD & we got to buy them. One of the women speaking on this particular feature said she hated Olive Oyl as well. I was like "YES! Finally, someone else feels like I do."

So, why my hatred? I'll gladly explain:

If you've seen classic Twilight Zone episodes, you should be familiar with the bitchy and helpless housewives. Apparently, Rod Serling was not good at writing women in his stories. He admitted this in the introduction of one episode (I believe it was from Season 1) that we caught on DVD. Spotting these characters is like spotting pornography: you can't define it but you'll know it when you see it.

I personally watch these women in action on a lot of them & there are some I don't feel any sympathy for. It's like if some guy were married to them, you could hardly blame them for wanting to beat the crap out of them. Now I'm not a supporter of domestic violence but I'd want to beat them since they annoy the shit out of me.

Olive Oyl in the Popeye cartoons is like these women & I'm going to give you numerous examples of why she sucks.

1. She is a fickle bitch. In most of the Popeye cartoons, she's dating Popeye then tosses him aside for Bluto because she thinks Bluto is more suave or has a clean shave or whatever other reason. In real life, she'd be knocking boots with this guy. You know what we call women like that in modern society? A slut. Loose. Plenty of other names that you don't want to be called if you're a woman. I wouldn't find "fickle" flattering, either.

2. She is a total tease. Probably wrote the book on it, in fact. She acts like she's interested & then when Bluto makes his move, she goes all helpless & whines for Popeye. Popeye, of course, always saves her in the cartoons.

You know what Popeye would have done in real life, especially in today's time if some chick was doing this Olive Oyl impression? He'd say "Fuck you, bitch! You wanted Bluto so have fun. Don't come crying to me!" I know real life men would say something similar. Even Superman did in one story, according to my husband the comics expert.

3. She's downright shitty to Popeye in plenty of them. Has zero respect or regard for that relationship & then has no regard for Bluto if she's supposed to be with him. She also laughs her ass off at Popeye's expense in many of them. Classless could be an apt description as well.

"So, you still want to save that bitch?" I ask Popeye in my brain. I wouldn't do shit for you if you had dumped me then laughed at my expense when your new significant other was mean to me. Popeye would have moved on in real life.

4. She's totally & completely helpless. You know what would happen if you went all Bluto on a natural redhead & hopefully most modern women? She'd hit you right in a sensitive area & you'd be traumatized from even thinking about sex for a long time. Maybe even years. No, I don't mean the crotch. There are other sensitive areas that work for both genders & any woman who took a self-defense class knows what they are.

Why is it that she can do a token hit but it means nothing? Why is she so damn helpless? I appreciate a guy intervening if some scumbag is bothering me but don't do it because you think I'm helpless! Unlike cartoon Olive Oyl, I'm not helpless.

Most women aren't Olive Oyl. Yes, I'm sure there are Olive Oyl types around encouraging wannabe rapists to hate & attack us but we have our own ways of dealing with them (wannabe rapists & the Olive Oyl types). If I knew any Olive Oyl sorts myself, I'd definitely handle that. No woman in my family fits that one, that's for sure. That includes me, my policy on date paying notwithstanding.

I had respect for men I dated & have respect for my husband. You wouldn't see me ditching him for some guy with more money, a better car, better clothes, whatever. If some woman is doing that, she's not respectable. If she knows about this guy's private parts, you're definitely better off without her.

I also was not a tease. I never led guys on. I was always honest & probably to a fault. That always pissed me off when guys did it so I felt it was uncool to do that to them. Certainly other women agree with me on this. Plus, I have a healthy sex drive (if Manswers is accurate, it's a natural redhead thing but you can't tell me that only the smallest minority on the planet has a healthy sex drive; otherwise, you'd only see natural redheads with kids & all the people in sex therapy would be natural redheads). Most women aren't frigid or asexual. Those are the people who should do their dating on Christian Mingle or create some new dating site for people like themselves since they don't fit the majority of us.

Furthermore, most of us are adults. We don't expect some guy to save us from a situation we created ourselves. Respectable women operate from a place of truth & don't go leading folk on. They aren't assholes or little kids like Olive Oyl. We don't need some pimp to bail us out & I really hope a pimp wouldn't do that.

Nor do they trash someone they supposedly care about with their new beau & later expect them to do shit for them. Nope, if I've insulted you not only have you deserved it but I'd sure not ask for your help later on.

We've already established my lack of helplessness. I'm also not a fan of helpless people. Actually, I really hate helpless people (that is, the ones who can't claim a medically diagnosed condition & have something so bad, they actually need anti-depressants). For one thing, it's a state of mind. Few people are truly helpless & even the people everyone thinks of as being helpless (those who've lost limbs or senses) are usually functioning better than the rest of us.

For another, I believe in being the change you want to see. If you don't like something, you need to get off your butt & do something to change it or shut up for good about it. You don't get the right to bitch about things you took no steps to change.

Finally, if you truly feel helpless & you aren't suffering from a medically diagnosed case of depression (WebMD diagnoses don't count) why are you still doing the same stuff? Take some personal responsibility for YOUR life & YOUR behavior!!!

Maybe that's the crux of why I'm not an Olive Oyl fan: she lacks personal accountability. You never see her making the connection b/t her actions & people's reactions to her. It's like "Are you that dim?" To me, if you're that dim how do you manage to function from day to day? Can you even walk & chew gum at the same time? Maybe we should euthanize you for your own good. Many people ought to be euthanized for their own good but that's never going to fly until laws are changed.

With all this though, you don't see me or some other women's groups sending down a shit storm on broadcasters or anyone else & demanding them to never show some cartoon because of the sexism to women. You don't see networks censoring that stuff but they'll do it for other groups & most recently have done that for Native Americans (yet, you could still see those stereotypes in old cartoons when they aired in the late '80s & early '90s; I know b/c I saw them personally).

How about some respect for women here? Or better yet, no censorship for anyone? Women, Italians, Irish people, no one else who didn't choose their status in life should get to be fair game while other groups aren't. To even encourage it just furthers racism & causes more problems. Discrimination is discrimination. Why don't you PC cops get that?

If you ask me, the portrayals of women you see to this day just further sexism & ill will toward us. I think it's totally undeserved when it comes to me & probably undeserved for many women. How about the PC police tackle that one instead of setting up barriers to honest discourse & meaningful conversation? Olive Oyl doesn't represent me any more than Mitt Romney represents most of the Republicans I know.

Job Hunting Pet Peeves I Don't Think I Covered, DVD Censorship & Liberal Christians a.k.a.

Man, I have a TON of rants in me to write. I'll have to do another installment of appalling Craig's List ads soon, there's the upcoming trip to Comic Con, starting another year at Monday Night Law and general trying to catch up on things.

There's also been the recent plague of illness in my house & my husband's choosing to spend the day in our living room cloaked in darkness (and it was a sunny day). I can't do that during the day, even if I'm a little sick unless I got no sleep the night before. He had a headache but I can't function like that so I had to sit elsewhere & fire up the laptop.

From time to time, I do occasionally look into paying positions I see posted online that I might be qualified to do & aren't from mega-corporations. Oftentimes, I inquire about the job. I do this for multiple reasons:

A) My career, background & skills aren't typical. My film company work was set up specifically for me & my career ambitions. I also tended to get more work in things as a result of good service in jobs I had. Plus, if you put everything I've ever done or even have done recently in one resume, that resume would be a tome. No one would read it.

B) As a business owner, I'm all about efficiency. Even if I weren't one, I'm still concerned about it as a lawyer and steward of time. If you have a very competitive atmosphere, don't appreciate people's hard work & offer zero advancement or reward opportunities for good work, why do I want to bother dealing with you? If you require weekend work, why do I want to bother? If you engage in needless dog & pony shows and never tell anyone the truth, why would I want to bother?

C) I'm not the typical attorney & the typical legal environment is not for me. I also notice that people who claim not to offer these typical environments & want someone who isn't a typical stereotype are outright liars. Like anyone with a brain, I believe actions speak much louder than words.

I judge people & their businesses based on my interactions with them. You can even read here about businesses I thought did job searching well along with those who royally fuck it up. In fact, I start judging you when I read your ad.

If I see misspellings, you announce irrelevant information about a protected category, put in duties that lawyers don't actually perform or duties the person you're seeking to do can't legally perform them (like law students committing unauthorized practice of law) or you're asking for some very shitty job terms (like full time internships or $40K a year for a lawyer with 5 years experience & a demand to see a law school transcript), I will bypass you & may even ball you out for being a moron, an exploiter or God knows what else that's tarnishing MY name & MY field since you're purporting to represent it.

So when you have questions about an ad, don't you hate it when you ask questions & the person either doesn't bother giving answers or insists that you submit your resume & cover letter without knowing ANYTHING?

That outright pisses me off since I do explain why I'm asking questions.

Personally, I welcome people to ask me questions if they might not quite fit for a job my company posts. If you want to be paid for a non-paying position, I don't want you interviewing me & my CEO to then drop that on us when we're about to give you an offer.

I also don't want to send my materials someplace where they will just go in the garbage b/c the hiring person or HR rep is a small minded asshole who won't bother considering anyone with a legal license to do that particular role, even if they say they are not seeking a career there & don't mind doing it.

Nor am I working for a company that doesn't belong to me & isn't in the entertainment industry as an attorney for $35K a year. That is exploitation and sorry, not interested in being a slave to anyone. I usually ask for a salary range so I can get an idea of what the prospective employer's expectations are & list what I have made in the past to set a foundation for what will or won't be acceptable to me. If you can't meet that, lower your standards or find someone with less experience.

One is going to suffer: take your pick.

Unlike some people, I can take care of myself & don't need to be anyone's slave or victim. I didn't put up with that at my high school retail job so I sure won't do it when I'm about to hit the 5 year mark in admission to 2 states as a lawyer.

I also don't want to deal with yet another person who's going to pull a disappearing act. If you're not serious & can't commit to things, don't waste my time.

The reason I'm asking questions is to avoid wasting OUR time. That includes YOUR time. If you are too dumb to get this concept, then you have no business being an HR person or in any management position in a business. If you can't even say "I'll ask & get back to you," if you don't know the answer then you have shown me that your employer is probably a badly managed business I want nothing to do with.

If you're a CEO or head of the company & you do this, you have insured that I will stay far away from your business & warn people I know not to work with you since you have no concept of efficiency or time management.

Another huge pet peeve (particularly on Craig's List): demands to get MY resume and materials with MY personal information when the ad poster gives you ZERO information about themselves, not even listing a company name.

First off, slick, I have an increasing public profile. I'm on IMDB & last I checked, my LinkedIn profile was the first result when you Googled my name. I'm not a "Jane Smith" or someone with a super common name. There are significant safety & professional reasons for me not to give out my personal information to total strangers who I know NOTHING about.

If you're reading this blog for the first time, you should know that people in the entertainment industry DO get harassed by the general public. Not just actors but people who are higher ups in production companies or work in casting offices & other areas where random people will want to be your buddy b/c of your job. We don't want you asking us to read your script, audition your sister for acting work, meet famous people, or anything else that tends to come up when you work in this industry & random people find out about it.

There's also the more sinister side with stalkers & haters trying to stop people's careers, particularly for actors & anyone working in front of the camera.

You get information about me at MY leisure, not because you Googled me before ever talking to me. You might even find things that are illegal for you to consider in the hiring process.

Second, how is it fair to expect people to give you blood samples when you can't even give your company name in your ad for someone to research? There are scammers out there & lawyers especially have to watch out for them. It's about gotten to the point where I'll need to start asking to see financial reports before I work with an employer due to some of the experiences I've had. Even the appearance of shadiness is bad for a lawyer to work in, regardless of the employer.

I deserve the right to vet you just as you should get to vet me to verify what I say. If you refuse to give an equal exchange of information, I'm not dealing with you. How do I know YOU are legit & not just another scammer?

Some people could totally use a lesson in "treat others as you'd want to be treated." Would these chuckleheads give out their personal life stories to ads with zero information? Would they hand over all their details for some job they might not even find suitable for them due to salary, company fit, hours, unrealistic expectations, etc.? If you own a business & you wouldn't do this, then maybe you should NOT be expecting strangers to do such things.

I also heard that the next season of Tiny Toon Adventures is finally coming out but they've decided to leave off an episode where the characters were drinking to be cool & that was apparently aired only once. Apparently, Warner Bros has ignored the fact that the kids who watched this show are now ADULTS who can make their OWN choices on things & will most likely be buying this set instead of little kids who never saw it, never heard of it and very likely didn't watch it.

I feel like we should boycott the set in protest or complain about it someplace. Considering they've had plans for eons to release the Censored 11 (which I've talked about before), the same principles should apply here. Allegedly, people complained about that episode but who are we talking about? Old people who watched it ages ago? Parents who are too damn lazy to skip the episode or, gee, PARENT for a change & say "no" to their kids?

If kids have been exposed to online porn, Prince's '80s catalog, racially offensive cartoons in the '40s and '50s and even a Spike Lee movie or two, then why in the hell is Warner Bros censoring this DVD set that will be bought by adults?!?! You know, the people who have the disposable income to PAY for it. As I recall, I'm sure this set will be at least $30 if not more. That's not exactly easy money for a child to get & again, do these children pay rent or own their own homes? Do they not have PARENTS who would say "No you can't buy that," if they have an issue with this episode being included?

I hate the "we must protect the childrens" argument (misspelled on purpose) just as much as I hate the tradition argument. It's NOT my job or that of any entertainment company, performer or creative to shelter your little babies from real life. That's YOUR job, parents!

You notice the real parents never go around demanding this of creative types. It's time they & everyone else stood up to these breeding bullies & told them to shove it up their collective asses while perhaps getting Social Services involved to take those children out of such an abusive situation. Yes, expecting everyone else to parent for you is emotional abuse against your kids (that is neglect, after all) as well as little Hitler behavior that will probably get you taken out sooner or later when you piss off the wrong person. I think "unfit" is a perfect adjective for that kind of parent.

Lastly, meet some Christians who aren't assholes. Apparently, they are called liberal Christians. They also exist in one of the last places most of you would expect to find them: Oklahoma! Everyone describes that region as a bastion of intolerance, homophobia and right-wing Christian fundies who want to create the Christian Taliban in this country.

Guess those people would be wrong. Rev. Lance Schmitz & Faithful America sound like some good folks to deal with. Bravo, Reverend for calling the owners of Hobby Lobby on their bullshit.

In case you are not aware, Hobby Lobby is a crafts store owned by the Green family. The Green family is a pack of fundie Christians & we all know what fundie Christians are like; in case you don't, they're much like radical Muslims in their adherence to the concept of "my way or the highway." There's no room for moderation or fairness to people who are different with fundies; that's why they are "fundies," after all. Otherwise, they'd be moderates or mainstream Christians.

Hobby Lobby is suing the government over the Affordable Health Care Act, which means employers have to cover contraceptives. Their beef is that "it should not be forced to provide workers with health insurance that covers the morning-after and week-after pills." They claim covering this violates their religious beliefs.

The Green family apparently wishes to tell its employees how to live their personal lives & force any females working there to carry babies they don't want. This Rev. Schmitz said that not only should these assholes not get to use religion to deny women access to birth control but that they need to stay out of women's reproductive decisions since the issue is about contraceptives, not abortion as the fundies claim they are.

Look, fundies & anti-choicers: you lose all credibility with me and any rational thinking person when you dare to ban access to contraceptives while also banning abortion & cutting welfare. You get one or the other. You are NOT going to stop people from having sex & if you think you get to tell ME what to do, then you will be in for a bloody, vicious and no holds barred fight. Just as YOU have the right to wait until you get married to have sex or use it only when you want to have babies, I also have the right to do what I want to in my own life & make my own decisions free from you assholes telling ME what to do.

Do you hear me or anyone else who is pro-choice telling YOU to get an abortion? Are any of us telling YOU to have sex or when to have it? Until you do, you DON'T get to use your religious beliefs to order me around! Beliefs, I might add, that I DO NOT share, support or give any credence to. If I'm not telling you as a grown up what to do, then you don't get to tell me what to do either.

Otherwise, you'd better be ready to go back to the days when women were property, couldn't enter into legally valid contracts (meaning no more student loan obligations from women) & men were liable for anything their women did i.e. wives & daughters. You DO know what they say about there being nothing worse than a scorned woman, don't you?

I think their lawyer is totally lying when he says his clients aren't trying to suppress women or respect the beliefs of people who are different. Classic CYA stuff since they know if they admit to being medieval cretins, people will slam them. If there was one of these stores in my area, I would totally boycott. Heck you could probably also find this family's information & tell them off on this as you want.

How is this different from Chick-Fil-A, you may ask? Well, in the Chick-Fil-A situation the owner wasn't trying to deny insurance coverage or rights to gay employees nor denying them jobs or telling them to harass gay patrons. If they were doing that, as I said before, it would be a different story.

So, see not all Christians are jerks or micromanaging assholes. I told you so! The parishioners of this pastor's church should be proud since he is exemplifying true Christianity & I'll bet would make sure anyone who came to his church, regardless of race, orientation or beliefs, feel welcome. If more Christians were like these folks, we'd have fewer problems in the world. I'm glad more are standing up to the intolerant fundies who make religion look awful.

Faux Unions, the Straightjacket and Close Calls

So, my life may be facing yet more upheaval. My husband's employer has decided to arbitrarily force the librarians to transfer to other places for no rational reason other than to apparently make them quit, piss off the public (who'll have to deal with angry workers who don't want to be there) and be assholes. They were also given zero notice of this & a little sheep who will now be known as "Little Bitch" had the nerve to try & censor me when I made a general remark about my personal availability for an unrelated event. She had zero authority to do it & I responded as I always have and always will to that kind of shit.

This union, who I'm pretty sure I've mentioned before, is completely useless & may as well not even be there with the submitting they do. Not to mention the management at this place is so grossly incompetent, I wouldn't trust them to care for a cactus or watch a pile of dog crap turn white.

Someone who has worked there for 15 years even got one of these notices. As usual, they're doing it all by seniority & forcing people to work with XYZ person regardless of what a bitch/bastard XYZ is, how many problems XYZ has caused in the past & how incompetent XYZ is. I think people working there could keep their jobs even if they rape a lower ranking co-worker considering they allow racists & incompetents to continue there.

I don't think these idiots are aware of my being a lawyer or the fact that I have quite a few friends who have been absolutely disgusted by the situation. I have encouraged people to go & contact this library director personally and dial direct on his sorry ass. Listen, fucker if you're going to make decisions affecting the general public (which includes ME) you need to be held accountable and action needs to be taken against you. Furthermore, try putting my husband in some ghetto hellhole & see what happens to you.

I know these fuckers don't value the lives of their employees or their kids (they're also changing the shifts to 11-7 p.m. every weekday for most of these branches, regardless of the fact that no daycare center in Queens is open later than 6:30 at night). Being totally brazen against a lawyer like me, however, is a new level of stupid that's just going to lead to death. Little Bitch has already caused problems for herself & is clearly not capable of any real responsibility since she can't actually face anyone directly, slacks off during working hours (as evidenced by her actions on a non-work related social media platform) & is apparently wasting our taxpayer dollars playing Administrative Tattletale/PR Queen/Censorship Police. Oh, and neither Little Bitch nor anyone else at that place has any right to censor the free speech rights of people who don't work there or punish their family/friends for the exercise of those free speech rights. I found this out for certain.

I dare Little Bitch to try shit with me. She can become a casualty as well & I will have zero qualms about it. After all, she rolled out the red carpet for trouble to come charging in. If anyone transfers my husband to some hellhole, they'll also be inviting trouble on themselves & perhaps their families as well. Have no regard for mine & I won't give a damn about yours. Why should I?

In case you're new to reading this blog, let me pass on some free advice. There are certain types of people you don't fuck with. Some examples:

1. Lawyers
2. Natural redheads
3. Anyone who works behind the scenes in the entertainment industry whether a producer, agent, director, executive, anyone who deals with a lot of BS & won't stand for it
4. People who have nothing left to work for or aspire to that will help society
5. People who have been kicked around forever; eventually, those people snap
6. Quiet types
7. Loners

How many murderers and serial killers fit at least one of these categories? How many violent crimes could be explained by one of these categories? When someone fits more of those categories, that means you don't fuck w/the person times a trillion. Add up those trillions for each category the person falls into & that's how much you should be avoiding problems with that person.

I know forcing involuntary servitude on folk will backfire & in a powerful way. Whether I'm in the thick of it or not depends on if I get to have the luxury of having something to aspire to & reasons to care about concepts like law and order.

Clearly, I'm not the sort of person who should ever have a union job. At least not one with this union. Actually, you should call it a faux union since they have a no strike clause. Do you need any more reasons to call it that?

For that matter, any union that has a no strike clause shouldn't even exist. My mother, herself an employee of UPS where the drivers have a union that actually works for THEM, even said that if you have a no strike clause, you have zero protection against management abuses. Imagine where SAG/AFTRA, the Teamsters or any other entertainment union would be if they had no strike clauses in their contracts. Who would join those? My husband didn't voluntarily join his; he was forced in. Nor did he ever vote for this "no strike" shit. Only a moron or someone taking kickbacks would support that. Funny but if I were taking kickbacks or anyone else I knew in the legal field were doing it, we'd be disbarred, suspended or at least publicly censured for it.

So as I left town I had to deal with that bullshit. Not Little Bitch but the whole news aspect; I vowed not to let Galante ruin my trip or send off (he's the prick responsible for this who performed his one humane act for me personally many years ago by passing on my husband's information to the proper person). I was going to see family members I care about. Decided it was better to call it a trip not a vacation. A "vacation" implies that your journey will be relaxing & free of stress. That's definitely not the case when I go to NC.

When I go to NC, I feel like I'm in a straightjacket. Not a literal one but at least a metaphorical one. Though this time, maybe it was closer to literal since my sister & mother were trying to play fashion cop with me. Apparently, their hometown should be renamed to "Frumptown" or "Frumpville." Something with the word "frump" in it.

Being in that town makes me want to listen to Prince constantly as well as any sexually explicit song that's not okay for kids to listen to. Is it my relatives or is it the whole social climate down there? I'm not quite sure.

First off, when it's hot outside I'm not killing myself with layers or wearing a burka. I'm not Muslim or even a practicing Christian. I'm not practicing any religion.

Second, I also have horribly sensitive skin & hate getting sweat zits. They hurt.

Third, I'm an adult well over the age of 21. I have my own money & should be entitled to wear what I damn well please.

Fourth, I have the figure for shorter things, have never been mistaken for a prostitute & even if I want to dress like one, is it not my choice? Do I not get a right to be sexy once in a while? I won't have a figure forever so why shouldn't I get to enjoy it while I have it?

Fifth, I'm childfree. Here's another perk of being childfree: you don't have to dress like an old person when you aren't one & don't even look like one.

Finally, I live in New York Fucking City! Nothing I own is nearly as bad as countless things I've seen people wear. Even going naked or topless might not shock many New Yorkers though I wouldn't do full nudity. I've considered going topless on excruciating days (since it's not illegal to do it in NYC unless you're advertising) but I hate getting sunburn & know I would in a second if I did do that. Not to mention all the hassle I get anyway.

With it being in the 90s, I was wearing some new short shorts I got last year & a top I wore before my sister's wedding in a different color. This prompted a bunch of hand wringing, utter sexism and being told I should dress all boring because of my 8 year old nephew. I think them initiating this conversation in front of him was probably worse than anything I could have worn. Not to mention that my nephew will likely learn more bad things from his own parents & television than he'll ever get from being around me, a relative he rarely sees. I even pointed this out to my mother, who did give me that point.

I asked if my sister plays fashion police with everyone who comes to her house & everyone who appears in public around her kids. Can you imagine walking up to strangers & telling them their top shows too much cleavage for your precious little babies? How about actually being a decent parent? My mom was like "Oh, no one dresses like that." I said that the majority of my sister's friends are parents; I'm childfree & that's one of the perks.

My sister even had the nerve to say she couldn't believe my husband "lets [me] go out like that." Pissed me off. I pointed out that my husband doesn't "let" me do anything since I'm an adult & we treat each other as such. Plus, I've gotten hit on & harassed while wearing pajamas, grubbies and my working clothes at Godiva. No cleavage or excessive leg showing necessary. Therefore, no sense in demanding me to dress like a frump. I'll get hit on anyway. My husband also knows this & accepts that reality just as I do. If that's the case, why not let me dress to my comfort & taste?

Plus, I was supposed to be relaxing and on a pleasure trip not going to work or a business function. Why should I have to wear anything different in my "off" time? I'm also at the point in my life where I insist on being myself around people who claim to care about me, including relatives considering I'm an adult & feel it's artificial of me to be something I'm not. How can you have a real connection with someone if you can't even be yourself around them? I feel you can't. What's the point in preserving such a relationship?

My mom said that apparently I scare the country boys in her area since they're not used to women dressing like me.

If we could apply that to my hometown, maybe that explains why I couldn't buy a date there while I had to practically get a stick to beat guys off from college onward. I also said when my family visits me, I should demand that they dress like they're in NYC if they're going to insist that I dress like someone in their area. Adapt to MY culture, damn it! I'd at least get a laugh from it. At least they will take public transit & aren't assholes to gay people. Nor do they go lecture strangers but apparently, they find it okay to lecture to me.

I'm still hardcore childfree, by the way. Oh, yes!! I love my niece & nephews (especially the eldest since I can talk to him and he actually cared about my presence) but no way could I do what my sister's doing. I've not got the patience for little kids and both my mother & sister seemed to get all offended because I yelled at my over 2 year old nephew for screaming at random. First off, I don't hang around small kids on a regular basis. Second, I do have eardrums & if you're screaming a short distance from them human nature is to react. Third, being around small kids is emotionally exhausting for me & if I had to parent them it would be worse. Not something that interests me (never an interest of mine, in fact) & I feel that's a task for people who actually want to do it, not someone who'd resent it like I would.

Oh, and you may like this if you're childfree.

If you want to kill someone's libido though, small kids work pretty well. Maybe that's another reason I'm not interested; I'm not about to give up my sex life. Remember, my marriage isn't typical & I'm rebellious by nature. Sex was a huge forbidden zone topic in my upbringing; compared to the women in my immediate family, I may as well be a former prostitute even though my experience is closer to that of the average person.

Speaking of people who might as well be prostitutes, seems it's a good thing I got rid of last year's black hole. The attempted wedding wrecker apparently learned nothing & is still doing the same shit. Only now she's pregnant, this guy is unemployed & somehow, women are dropping their panties for him like he's Hugh Heffner instead of an unemployed illegal with a baby mama.

Tell me something: if you're going to debase yourself for some guy, why would you ever do it for an unemployed guy with zero ambition? I think debasing yourself for anyone is a shitty idea but if you're going to do it, why would you not at least pick a guy with money, fame or something scarce? Some people seriously need to expand their social circles & raise their standards a little; you can find good sex & you can certainly find a guy with enough, if you get my meaning. I do know of some single male attorneys; I'm sure some of them will happily treat you like shit & at least not be around enough to get on your nerves. Perhaps they'd even pay for dates & might buy you presents; not all of them are unemployed or making poverty wages after paying student loan debts. It just occurs to me that I bet this guy doesn't even pay for dates with my former friend.

Shallow things to concern yourself with but it just piles onto the whole "Why debase yourself for someone?" issue. Felt like I had a close call there but I can't be friends with someone who changes into a person I not only don't recognize but can't even respect.

Getting to NC was also a close call experience. My train was about 3 hours late (I won't fly b/c they also have delays & I won't subject myself to a strip search/grope fest/invasive bullshit that violates basic civil liberties & brands me as a criminal with no proof to get on a plane). One of those delays was due to some trees that fell on the tracks. We were literally 7 minutes away from the station I had to get off at & we had to wait for what felt like ages. It's worse when your cell phone has died, you left your charger at home & you don't have internet access to send e-mail. At least I was in business class (if you can afford it, I highly recommend it to save yourself time & heartaches) so they did give us updates.

Apparently, if we'd been there 20 minutes earlier one of these trees could have fallen on our heads. After hearing that, I thought "This has to be a sign that things will work out in my life. Otherwise, God, what was the point of sparing my life today if it's all going to fall apart in two weeks?" If God sees everything, then God knows how you're going to react to things already.

More points on religion that I never got: no one ever believes a gay relationship/marriage or an abortion were part of God's plans for anyone. Either God is the ultimate mastermind & everything you do is part of the plan (including all this "sinful" stuff) or God's an observer who casts people off to Hell for violating things that don't make sense and were probably distorted by sexist white guys who had some power in biblical times. Make up your mind; I don't have a stake here. This is part of my late night contemplating. Whether things actually work out remain to be seen. You'll either get to see the rise or the fall.

General Musings Part 23

You may not see many blog updates from me in the near future since I'm sorting through internship applications for my film company. If you want to apply, go see the ad on Mandy.com.

Otherwise, got a ton of links & some insights/remarks on them. Here we go:

Edie Falco just rocks! That's all. I have the EXACT same viewpoint on reality TV "celebrities." Plus, she's a great actress; I have every season of "The Sopranos" and think "Nurse Jackie" is great. This just makes me respect her more than I might have.

I can agree on rejection sometimes being a good thing. I got rejected on the very first round of cuts during sorority recruitment my freshman year; if I hadn't, I might not have become an AST member & gotten the valuable leadership experience I have.

I probably wouldn't have the career I have if some law firm had hired me instead of all of them rejecting me for jobs. Probably wouldn't have passed the NY & CT bars on the first try if I'd gotten into CUNY School of Law (I found out after I started law school that they had a 50% bar passage rate vs. my school's rate being about 80%). Finally, if I hadn't gotten dumped by guys all the time while in Atlanta & CT and completely shunned by them while growing up in NC, I probably wouldn't live in NYC now and would just be miserable wondering about what might have been. Nor would I have nearly as great a spouse as I've got.

The establishment has also done next to nothing for me. I've reconciled myself to the fact that it will continue to do nothing for me. That means non-traditional resources and learning how to hustle. I think I've more or less accepted that I am anti-establishment and in a way, I rebel from it. I figure I'll keep doing things or my terms or I'll die with some dignity because I didn't sell out.

The problem is if you're in a position of do or die. Then you end up poor. Here's a Cracked article telling you about that.

All of this is true, btw. I saw flashbacks of my childhood as I read it & I even described life as a child as living in an endless game of Tetris on Level 9-5 (for those unfamiliar w/Tetris, this is a level where the pieces are almost at the very top & you have to stress out big time to either get them in properly to reduce your pile or die; in fact, I believe it's the hardest level in the game).

Speaking of being poor, there have been yet more articles on the high costs of college (forget grad school since no one seems to give a damn about that unless THEY went themselves). One study says the cost of a college degree in light of this economy isn't worth it.

You'll see constant resources telling people to learn a trade or even just be uneducated. That might work for some people but it's not a one size fits all solution by any means. I agree that the value of degrees is becoming deluded & that pisses me off but I'm not sure a mass movement to toss out "book learning" is the answer. Some people aren't smart enough or insightful enough to go educate themselves. Some of us also aren't the self-study types. Teaching yourself can be EXTREMELY difficult, especially if you don't have someone who knows about the thing you're trying to learn around as a resource or to make sure you're understanding the concepts.

Another problem is that college (at least as I understand it) is also supposed to be about broadening horizons & getting new experiences away from your parents, your little town and your local community. I went to school out of state by myself and think that the experience is important for transitioning to the real world. There are experiences and skills I use from that time now that I'd have never had if I'd just been in my hometown or around everyone I knew from high school while attending college. "High school, Part 2" doesn't help anyone. Who even really, truly enjoyed high school?

So I think before advocating the live at home approach, people should consider these facts. What if a kid is like me & wants to go someplace where no one the family knows is living? What if the kid is really smart? Do you punish them by saying "Son, we know you're an academic scholar & were in National Honor Society but sorry, you're going to community college." Perhaps taking away that stigma of community & junior colleges would help but in most places, they are regarded as not the place for academically gifted students. If you want this to be a viable path, those schools are also going to have to hire top notch faculty who know what they're doing, give a crap about the students learning the material & teach them practical skills.

I just think living at home when you're an adult robs you of the experiences you get when you're on your own and have to deal with paying bills, buying your own groceries, doing laundry, feeding yourself, managing your time and even participating in social events. My parents certainly wouldn't have let me bring guys home or stay out until 5 a.m. at a party while I got to do this stuff when I lived on campus in a single dorm room.

There's also the networking opportunities, Greek life & so forth that you're just not going to get in some of these proposed ideas. You don't have to dorm with strangers or interact with those different from you if you're living with family or going to community college. Living in a dorm prepares you for getting a roommate in an apartment and dealing with people at a job who aren't the same as you.

I think there should be some kind of arrangement where kids who want to go to school far away & can't afford it can do this. Happiness trumps & if you're going to spend the money, you'd better make sure your kid is happy or they'll just flunk out anyway.

I've said this before but I still firmly believe in it. I racked up loans to do this but I wouldn't trade my experiences to be debt free & miserable. That's precisely what would happen if I'd not followed my ambitions in life.

As a former retail worker, this just pisses me off. Standing for long hours is part of the fucking job! It's not a job that requires grad school & if you're doing this as a career, it's motivation to go to school so you can get a job easier on your health. Any job that has a low barrier to entry requires some manual component. I don't see servers suing over this & they have a much harder job than the average sales associate. Being a sales associate is a cakewalk by comparison.

This fact is one reason I would not go back to retail. Some jobs are for younger people. If you are not up to the inherent demands of the job, stop whining and filing lawsuits! Use that money to go get an education or to fund lobbying efforts/protests to government officials so better paying jobs are out there. Don't take it out on store owners.

Second, if you leave seats out on the sales floor customers will inevitably sit in them no matter what you do. When I worked in retail, we had chairs & customers sat in them. Are you going to walk up to customers & make them move so you can sit? That will leave a very good impression on customers. How would you feel about seeing your sales associate kicking back in a chair during working hours? Especially if the worker kicked a customer out of it? That could get really ugly in a lingerie section if it's a man who's stuck there because his wife/girlfriend forced him to go bra shopping with her. Not to mention making kids move! These people would sit in our chairs all the time. We'd look lazy if we did it.

Does anyone find this ironic in light of the attempt to create censorship in this country with the COICA act? Apparently, the senator who originated it does not keep up with what's going on in his own house. Once again, these morons are trying to turn the USA into China. See this for details and do the right thing. If you want censorship, find a theocracy to live in. You've got many to choose from. Don't inflict it here, capice?

Whew, can't believe this is the 250th post.

General Musings Part 20

Can't believe I'm at part 20 already. Okay then, sit back because there are a LOT of articles today.

First off, this author of this piece is a total tool. I saw nothing in here about improved public transit or any effort to increase it in light of $5 gas. As long as you've got oil lobbyists controlling government and getting tax breaks, there's nothing good about gas prices squeezing out poor people from mainstream society and turning the middle class into indentured servants.

Oh, and no one will have any money to shop locally when they can not get employment since all the jobs are located in areas where you have to drive & pay for $5 a gallon gasoline. These so-called "benefits" do us no good when the average person can't survive without becoming a beggar on the street.

Not to mention that it wouldn't change the existence of pedophiles, PC hysteria, helicopter parents, crime, etc. In fact, most people will still have to drive fuel inefficient cars because they will be less likely to have the money to upgrade to a car with higher gas mileage even if they want to.

So until you get the oil companies & interests out of government, invest in new technologies and put funding into public transit akin to that in Europe and Japan (which make NYC's subway system & Amtrak look prehistoric by comparison), stop being a pro-oil company profiteering cheerleader. It's unflattering, elitist and could get you lynched in some neighborhoods.

The lack of guaranteed efficient public transit improvement to all the boroughs (not just Manhattan) is also why I did not support the congestion pricing plan in NYC.

Seeing this makes me feel a little optimistic but the fact remains that entrepreneurs and small businesses are not being helped by this current government's regime. So many things need to be done to fix things, it's not funny but I'm sure people more knowledgeable than me can come up with the bulk of it.

One suggestion is not subjecting college students & grad students to non-discharegable loan debt that's as large as most home mortgages. There needs to be serious reform instead of making people debt slaves for the next 20+ years. If any of these politicians really valued education, they'd be pushing for that change & telling the banks to suck it. Maybe they'd think twice about who they gave student loan money to if this happened. Again, lobbyists & interests ruining everything.

But at least there is one instance of a government doing something right. Yeah, yeah, employers getting around it...blah blah blah. Thanks for saying something, though. Maybe it will make others follow suit, though I think the fines ought to be a lot higher (say $10,000 then $50,000 for subsequent offenses). That would get a point across. I don't notice small businesses doing this nearly as much as large, multi-million dollar corporations.

We also have an EEOC, employers. Read it, embrace it, love it. Because otherwise, it's just a matter of time before you get in trouble for violating it & I'd likely have zero sympathy.

Oh, but the BS! It continues!

Not sure if I've ranted about this particular interview question but employers, just give it up already. The "biggest weakness" question is nothing more than an attempt to learn how manipulative the applicant is & how good they are at reciting societal bullshit.

Seriously, if you're asking this question & expecting honesty, you're naive at best. You know you're not getting an honest answer to this one. If you get pissed by the "I work too hard" or "I'm a perfectionist" response, then you're an even bigger douchebag than you were when you asked the question.

If you want a lesson on shortcomings & how one improved, why not just ask about that? Hmmm...that would be HONEST.

That would get the answer you're looking for.

That would save everyone the time of this little pretense & mind game.

Why the hell would you ask an interview applicant that one?!? Shouldn't you be asking their references or past employers about it? I think they'd be a tad more objective & have records in front of them to support the answer, don't you?

And what about people with delusions of grandeur or who are sociopaths? You're just discriminating against them by asking them about their weaknesses since they don't believe they have any.

They should form a class action & file a lawsuit against any employer asking this one. Being a sociopath is a mental condition, you know & people do seek treatment for that stuff. I'd like to see this one as an ADA discrimination claim; that would put this asinine question in the grave once & for all. Hey, if we can have some of the bullshit that has become lawsuits, there's nothing to stop this one from being a viable legal claim if you have the right plaintiffs!

I also saw this career article on what not to wear to an interview. Here's the simple answer, at least as I see it: anything reflecting that you have a personality. No, no don't show a personality. Be a robot!

Thank God I take steps to vet potential employers & avoid interviews for any job where I'm expected to be a robot. I simply ask what I should wear to the interview so I'm not overly dressy or intimidating since female lawyers have enough problems without me playing to stereotypes of being frumpy and fashion clueless.

Oh, and this is one more thing that irks me about the education system. I'm pretty sure the high school children have heard far worse at home or speak even more graphically in the hallways. For all you know, some of these children are already sexually active & you're going to fine this teacher for "using curse words in front of kids?"

Gee, I'd swear this happened in Mississippi or even NC instead of Manhattan. In some circles in the South, cursing is tantamount to treason. Using the "f-word" is as bad as murdering someone. I'm surprised no one's been incarcerated down there for saying it on the public streets; they probably would be if we didn't have 1st Amendment lawsuits on it.

More asinine censorship:

* A man in the UK was arrested for singing the song "Kung Fu Fighting" because some Chinese man & his mother were offended. If you'd have been "offended" in America (particularly NYC or more vocal places in the South), you'd have been told off by the audience & if the singer saw you, you'd be told to get over yourself (actually, it might be "Fuck you" in NYC or Jersey). Now if this singer were telling the crowd to murder Chinese people, that's a different story.

But singing a song you don't like? I just wonder when some whiny PC obsessed jerkwad is going to try that in America.

If we started going down that route, we'd have no classic cinema, music or anything else because racism has been alive and well since those long before those mediums were born. Oh, and everyone's offended by something. Live your life trying to find something to be offended by & you'll certainly find it. I'm offended by people who do nothing but bitch about everything & make zero effort to do something about it. I'm also offended by these busybodies daring to tell me what I can or can't hear, watch, read, listen to, whatever by filing lawsuits to suppress what THEY don't like.

If you want to live in a bubble away from mainstream society, I suggest you form your own religious community like the Amish or particular Mormon sects (or move to an island where you'll be the only one there, whatever).

Otherwise, get the hell over yourself and shut up unless someone attacks you or your loved ones personally (and I mean a real attack not "pulling the race card" bullshit). Get some earplugs, change the channel & go on your merry way.

* Fox is apparently not showing this hurricane themed animation block tonight because of the recent storms in the South. Thankfully, none of that hit my family members.

You know something, though? Maybe some of the people in the South who lost things might have appreciated some humor in their lives. It might have made them laugh and feel a little better. Did you ever think of that? I think this is just yet another instance of asinine censorship garbage that's catering far too much to the PC crowd.

Have the people who made this call ever watched these shows? PC they aren't. Why worry about offending anyone now considering some of the jokes on Family Guy? Can't speak for The Cleveland Show or American Dad so much since I don't really watch them anymore (stopped after 1 season) but yeah, this is just stupid.

If you'd be offended by that or think "oh, it's in poor taste" then you have never watched Family Guy in the first place & likely wouldn't start watching it anyway.

* But here is much worse overly PC garbage. Apparently, you shouldn't call your dog or cat a "pet." Seriously, read this.

Yeah, my cat has never complained about being called a "pet." If anything, I think this encourages people to assign human qualities to their animals which is just as bad. A classic example of why this is bad is the show Fatal Attractions on Animal Planet. Stupid humans want to go around assigning human qualities and motivations to their dogs, cats, snakes, bears, chimps, tigers, etc. while ignoring the fact that you are dealing with a dog, cat, snake, bear, chimp, tiger, etc. They have instincts, drives and other characters that make up their species & will never be humans.

They don't want to go vegan, need to be entertained every 5 seconds, want to wear clothes, socialize with other animals (my cat, at least), or go to school to learn the alphabet. Treat the animal like its species: I love my cat dearly & let's face it, cats own you but I know he's a cat. I don't have to cook his meat or put him on a vegan diet. Cats are carnivores: vegan diets would hurt them. I'm not going to dress him up or walk him on a leash. You can bond with animals and mourn their loss as companions but stop trying to make them into furry humans! They don't want or appreciate it. My cat would be offended if I treated him like a human; he expects better than that.

My cat wouldn't give a damn if I called him my pet, critter, fuzzy beast, etc. As long as I feed him, let him snuggle on me, scratch his head & tell him what a good cat he is, he could care less what I refer to him as if I'm not directly talking to him. Yes, I've talked to every cat I've ever had & if you don't like it, piss off you animal hating jerkoff!

And he IS a fuzzy beast since he does kill things (which is one reason we love him). He's usually "Mr. Cat" or given deferential titles. I just think this article goes too far & encourages some other bad human behavior. Just makes you wish for a flaming stick to beat the offenders with.

Finally, I saw this article on supervised teen drinking. Personally, I think the drinking age should be lowered to 18 and we should have a more European attitude about the whole thing. This coming from the child of an alcoholic. I realize not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic & not all people who drink become fight picking jerks who put their fists into walls or throw things at people (yes, my father did do this stuff).

The reason I think that should happen is the high rate of binge drinking and the idea that if you ban something so hard, you make it that much more of a curiosity and alluring to the person who can't get it. How many stories are there about pastor's kids who are total hellions either as teens or once they get out from under their parents' roofs? I certainly rebelled some when I left home. It's probably why I dated in college and why I have different attitudes about sex than most of my family. If there isn't some balance in the home and some room to deal with kids rebelling, you're just going to have an out of control hellion on your hands sooner or later. So many people I knew who went to the religious private school I went to had their rebellious moments & many ended up in major life situations. If my mother had continued being as strict when I was a teenager, I'd have probably gotten a police record, become a teen mom, skipped school or God knows what else.

If that's not proof moderation is better than outright authoritarianism, I don't know what else you need. I think the drinking age should be 18 since if you can be drafted, go to college, etc. you can get alcohol from older friends anyway. Plus, tons of kids over 18 have opportunities to drink and it's foolish to think that they don't, especially if they're in college and living far away from home.

Otherwise, let's move the age of adulthood to 21.