A Day In The Life
PREFACE:
It seems that (other than a pic) the majority of you would like a nice, long post. In trying to figure out what specifically I could drag out, I decided to do this instead. This post will take you through last Friday with me, the whole damn day. I figured that might be long enough for you. :)
7:00 AM
The alarm rings. At least, I have to assume the alarm rings. Boyfriend has a rediculous snoring problem, and it has forced me to sleep with an air conditioner, a rain machine, and earplugs. I'm serous, his snoring reminds me of something out of a horror movie. Not only does he have the intake snore (you know, choooooocccccccchh), but he has an out take snore as well (pchhhhhaaaaa) which just makes me want to smack him upside the head when I'm trying desperately to fall asleep and the only thing I can hear are the freakish sounds that are emitting from his septum.
Regardless, the alarm rings. Now, the deal is, I sleep in the earplugs so that boyfriend no longer fears for his life; and he wakes me up when the alarm goes off. Simple, right?
Wrong.
What usually happens is boyfriend will get out of bed, hit the snooze button, and go back to sleep; leaving me none the wiser and late for class. Brilliant.
7:15 AM
The alarm rings for a second time. Did I hear it? Of course not. Did boyfriend wake me up? Yeah, try again.
7:30 AM
Now we're really pushing it for time constraints. There I am, sleeping peacefully with purple squishy memory foam sticking out of my ear canals, and boyfriend is using much more effort to get out of bed, hit the snooze, and then get back into bed than it would take to simply shake me and tell me the alarm is going off. Men.
7:45 AM
I am going to be so pissed when I finally wake up! I mean, fifteen minutes... I could make that up in the shower; but forty-five? By some grace of God I wake up on my own about this time, and have one of those "Ohmygodi'msolatei'mgoingtoleapoutofbedandrunaround" moments. Fun times; great way to wake up in the morning.
7:50 AM
After five good minutes of yelling at boyfriend (it's better than coffee, you should try it) I finally hop into the shower and get ready for school. If it's alright with the rest of you, I'm going to glaze over the shower and drive to school; it's really a pointless event and I really don't want this blog turning into Literotica ("cue the porn music") while I discuss soaping up in the shower.
8:55 AM
After battling traffic for the last forty five minutes (I took a VERY fast shower) I manage to make it, albeit quite breathlessly, to my first class of the day: Civil Liberties. For those of you who don't know, this is a class taught at State U as a law school class; so if you are considering going to law school, this is the class you should take.
This is, possibly, the most labor intensive class I have ever taken. We have this HUGE green legal case book and we have to brief at least four cases ahead of where we stopped the class before. It's set up as a complete discussion class, where the Prof will mention a case, and we have to chime in with the answers. Pressure pressure pressure.
I pull out my blue folder with my briefs and he dives right in.
"And what were the two requirements for Fourth Amendment protection regarding Katz?"
I wait the obligatory three second pause before chiming in. No one, least of all me, wants to be a show off.
"The respondent must show a personal manifestation of subjective expectation of privacy and society must recognize this intent as valid," I respond.
"Exactly," he responds, and I sit back in my chair, feeling rather smug with myself. We continue on with the Fourth Amendment's protection, specifically regarding the search and seizure of marijuana. Here's a tip: if you're going to grow marijuana, have a grow house, don't do it in your back yard. Here's why:
Police received an anonymous tip that this guy, Ciraolo (pronounced Sih-rah-low), was growing pot in his backyard. When they showed up at his house, they realized that he had enclosed his backyard in a ten foot privacy fence, then surrounded that fence with a six foot fence, and had a big nasty dog running in between. Not a very "neighbor friendly" guy. In order to get a search warrant, the police had to have probable cause that he was growing pot in his backyard, so what did they do? They rented a plane, flew it 1,000 feet in the air, and took pictures of his plants in his backyard. Ciraolo felt that the police's actions were a violation of his Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The Supreme Court said that while he definitely had a subjective expectation of privacy (the fences) since the air above his house was public property, the police were well in their rights to fly above his home and take pictures of his pot.
The next case involved yet another anonymous tip (hint: if you're going to deal in large amounts of marijuana, don't piss anyone off) regarding a grow house owned by a fellow named Kyllo. The police, in this case, parked on the street and used a thermal detection device that allowed them to gain heat readings off the house. They determined that the heat readings were consistent with grow lights (really strong UV lights used to grow pot indoors); obtained a search warrant and confiscated his pot. This time, however, the Supreme Court said that the police violated the Fourth Amendment because they were using technology that was not available to the general public, and they were probing, in a sense, into a man's house without actually going into his house.
Moral of the story: if you're going to grow large amounts of marijuana, grow it indoors.
9:55 AM
I head down the hall of State U towards my next class: Sociology of Religion. I really like this class; however, I don't so much care for some of the people who attend. Some people have yet to understand that this class is Sociology of Religion, not "My religious views are better than yours so I'm going to spend all class debating them." Fun times.
Today we are discussing individual forms of religiosity, and the Prof has separated four categories. We're focusing on what he calls "religious switching," which occurs when you change your personal religion without experiencing any specific change in self. This can occur for a variety of reasons: marriage, geographical change, status change, etcetera. He stops for a moment on the subject of marriage, and introduces the idea that some people switch for the benefit of any children that may be conceived in that marriage.
"Uh-oh," I'm thinking to myself, "this can get rather volatile."
Sure enough, someone starts to chime in about how children need to be brought up under one religion, and someone else chimes in about how children should be allowed to make their own decisions, then the girl behind me really gets me fired up when she pops off with:
"I really don't think it matters as long as your religion isn't too different, like if one person is Christian and the other is Jewish or Muslim."
I am unable to keep my mouth shut. I shouldn't let it bother me, but I do.
"Well," I start, "I'm Jewish, and Boyfriend is Methodist, so it's not really a big deal for us. Because my status as a Jew is ascribed (inherited), regardless of whether our children attend Church, they will still be Jewish."
"There," I though, triumphantly, "that should put an end to that." I had forgotten, unfortunately, how strong small minds are in the South. No sooner had I spoken than a girl in the back chimed in as well.
"Um," she said, starting in, "my momma tough me that you shouldn't mix your yolk with someone else's egg."
"Oh, you've got to be kidding me," I thought. But no, not kidding. In fact, she continued.
"See," she continued, "it says in the bible that you shouldn't do that. That you should only mix your yolk with someone else's yolk that's the same as yours, otherwise there could be conflict. And if you had kids, they would be conflicted. So you shouldn't get with someone who's different than you or else you'll have conflicted babies. And so you shouldn't have babies."
I turned to my friend, Joyce, in horror and a mixed form of intrigue.
"Did she just refer to my unborn children as conflict?!?!"
Joyce laughed, and the Prof. put an end to the discussion. Luckily, we were out of time.
10:55 AM
I walk with Joyce out of the classroom when the girl behind me (the one who made the Jewish comment) stops me.
"Um, I really didn't mean to offend you," she said, "so I was wondering if you would tell me what exactly Jewish means."
This is a recurring exchange for me regarding a lot of people from the South. They'll say something bigoted (whether they mean to or not) and then after I mention to them that I am Jewish, they'll barrage me with questions so they no longer feel badly. The whole way up to my next class I was explaining the subtle (hah!) differences between Judaism and Christianity. Fun times. One day I'm going to freak someone out and tell them we pray to a four-headed dog with eyes the size of saucers.
I head into Introduction to Social Work (my next class) and take my seat in front of Jason, my flamingly gay and fabulous friend. I'm recounting what happened last class and we got into the discussion of homosexuality in the bible.
"You think what happened to you was bad? Try hearing 'Thou shalt not lie with a man as one lies with a woman' you're whole life!"
"Here's what I don't understand about that," I start. "That verse comes from Leviticus, in the Old Testament."
"Right," Jason responded.
"Well," I began, "right next to that verse are the Jewish dietary laws."
Jason looked at me blankly so I continued.
"You know, the cloven hoof and the fish without scales? Don't eat pork or shellfish?"
Jason nods in understanding so I press forward.
"From what I understand, the reason Christians don't have to follow the dietary laws is because Peter (I think) said that Jesus created a whole new set of laws in the New Testament, so that you guys didn't have to follow the rules in Leviticus and Deuteronomy."
"Right," Jason said.
"So, if you guys don't regard or pay attention to the dietary laws in the Old Testament, why do you pay attention to the one verse in Leviticus about homosexuality?"
Jason didn't know, and neither do I.
Social work went by relatively quickly, and I headed out to meet Joyce to get something to eat. We had Chinese. Yum.
1:00 PM
I'm in the lab, getting ready for Senior Seminar to start. This class is your final class in sociology where you actually write your first independent thesis. I decided to do mine over gender-traditional roles as perpetuated by the mass media.
Here's the way I see things: television consistently portrays stereotypical sex roles in their programming. Even in shows aimed at preschoolers (Barney and Friends) it consistently shows boys as the active sex (running, jumping, playing) and girls take on the more matriarchal role (cooking, cleaning, playing with dolls). Even when these shows depict adults, they're always doing gender-traditional things. In regards to prime-time programming and commercials, women are continually overrepresented in the 20-30 year age category, whereas men are free to age with grace. Additionally, men are three times as likely to be shown in high power career roles than women; and when women are shown in a position of power, there's almost always a man who is in a position above them.
Think about it. Take "Law and Order" for a moment. The district attorney is female (on SVU), but her boss is a guy. How many shows do you know revolving around a single dad (Full House doesn't count!).
Interestingly enough, I found that in predominantly African American forms of media, the women are depicted in opposite gender roles. Additionally, African American women are more likely to be shown as a "Lolita" character, and be more combative with their partners.
So, my hypothesis is that: people who have high levels of television viewing are more likely to exhibit traditional gender-role attitudes. This is especially true for Caucasion/White viewers.
After pulling some more articles and discussing Britney Spears (seriously, she's lost it) class was over. Time for me to head home.
NOTE: I'm going to post this now to give you all something to read, and I'm working on the rest of the story: what happened at work that night. :)
It seems that (other than a pic) the majority of you would like a nice, long post. In trying to figure out what specifically I could drag out, I decided to do this instead. This post will take you through last Friday with me, the whole damn day. I figured that might be long enough for you. :)
7:00 AM
The alarm rings. At least, I have to assume the alarm rings. Boyfriend has a rediculous snoring problem, and it has forced me to sleep with an air conditioner, a rain machine, and earplugs. I'm serous, his snoring reminds me of something out of a horror movie. Not only does he have the intake snore (you know, choooooocccccccchh), but he has an out take snore as well (pchhhhhaaaaa) which just makes me want to smack him upside the head when I'm trying desperately to fall asleep and the only thing I can hear are the freakish sounds that are emitting from his septum.
Regardless, the alarm rings. Now, the deal is, I sleep in the earplugs so that boyfriend no longer fears for his life; and he wakes me up when the alarm goes off. Simple, right?
Wrong.
What usually happens is boyfriend will get out of bed, hit the snooze button, and go back to sleep; leaving me none the wiser and late for class. Brilliant.
7:15 AM
The alarm rings for a second time. Did I hear it? Of course not. Did boyfriend wake me up? Yeah, try again.
7:30 AM
Now we're really pushing it for time constraints. There I am, sleeping peacefully with purple squishy memory foam sticking out of my ear canals, and boyfriend is using much more effort to get out of bed, hit the snooze, and then get back into bed than it would take to simply shake me and tell me the alarm is going off. Men.
7:45 AM
I am going to be so pissed when I finally wake up! I mean, fifteen minutes... I could make that up in the shower; but forty-five? By some grace of God I wake up on my own about this time, and have one of those "Ohmygodi'msolatei'mgoingtoleapoutofbedandrunaround" moments. Fun times; great way to wake up in the morning.
7:50 AM
After five good minutes of yelling at boyfriend (it's better than coffee, you should try it) I finally hop into the shower and get ready for school. If it's alright with the rest of you, I'm going to glaze over the shower and drive to school; it's really a pointless event and I really don't want this blog turning into Literotica ("cue the porn music") while I discuss soaping up in the shower.
8:55 AM
After battling traffic for the last forty five minutes (I took a VERY fast shower) I manage to make it, albeit quite breathlessly, to my first class of the day: Civil Liberties. For those of you who don't know, this is a class taught at State U as a law school class; so if you are considering going to law school, this is the class you should take.
This is, possibly, the most labor intensive class I have ever taken. We have this HUGE green legal case book and we have to brief at least four cases ahead of where we stopped the class before. It's set up as a complete discussion class, where the Prof will mention a case, and we have to chime in with the answers. Pressure pressure pressure.
I pull out my blue folder with my briefs and he dives right in.
"And what were the two requirements for Fourth Amendment protection regarding Katz?"
I wait the obligatory three second pause before chiming in. No one, least of all me, wants to be a show off.
"The respondent must show a personal manifestation of subjective expectation of privacy and society must recognize this intent as valid," I respond.
"Exactly," he responds, and I sit back in my chair, feeling rather smug with myself. We continue on with the Fourth Amendment's protection, specifically regarding the search and seizure of marijuana. Here's a tip: if you're going to grow marijuana, have a grow house, don't do it in your back yard. Here's why:
Police received an anonymous tip that this guy, Ciraolo (pronounced Sih-rah-low), was growing pot in his backyard. When they showed up at his house, they realized that he had enclosed his backyard in a ten foot privacy fence, then surrounded that fence with a six foot fence, and had a big nasty dog running in between. Not a very "neighbor friendly" guy. In order to get a search warrant, the police had to have probable cause that he was growing pot in his backyard, so what did they do? They rented a plane, flew it 1,000 feet in the air, and took pictures of his plants in his backyard. Ciraolo felt that the police's actions were a violation of his Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizure. The Supreme Court said that while he definitely had a subjective expectation of privacy (the fences) since the air above his house was public property, the police were well in their rights to fly above his home and take pictures of his pot.
The next case involved yet another anonymous tip (hint: if you're going to deal in large amounts of marijuana, don't piss anyone off) regarding a grow house owned by a fellow named Kyllo. The police, in this case, parked on the street and used a thermal detection device that allowed them to gain heat readings off the house. They determined that the heat readings were consistent with grow lights (really strong UV lights used to grow pot indoors); obtained a search warrant and confiscated his pot. This time, however, the Supreme Court said that the police violated the Fourth Amendment because they were using technology that was not available to the general public, and they were probing, in a sense, into a man's house without actually going into his house.
Moral of the story: if you're going to grow large amounts of marijuana, grow it indoors.
9:55 AM
I head down the hall of State U towards my next class: Sociology of Religion. I really like this class; however, I don't so much care for some of the people who attend. Some people have yet to understand that this class is Sociology of Religion, not "My religious views are better than yours so I'm going to spend all class debating them." Fun times.
Today we are discussing individual forms of religiosity, and the Prof has separated four categories. We're focusing on what he calls "religious switching," which occurs when you change your personal religion without experiencing any specific change in self. This can occur for a variety of reasons: marriage, geographical change, status change, etcetera. He stops for a moment on the subject of marriage, and introduces the idea that some people switch for the benefit of any children that may be conceived in that marriage.
"Uh-oh," I'm thinking to myself, "this can get rather volatile."
Sure enough, someone starts to chime in about how children need to be brought up under one religion, and someone else chimes in about how children should be allowed to make their own decisions, then the girl behind me really gets me fired up when she pops off with:
"I really don't think it matters as long as your religion isn't too different, like if one person is Christian and the other is Jewish or Muslim."
I am unable to keep my mouth shut. I shouldn't let it bother me, but I do.
"Well," I start, "I'm Jewish, and Boyfriend is Methodist, so it's not really a big deal for us. Because my status as a Jew is ascribed (inherited), regardless of whether our children attend Church, they will still be Jewish."
"There," I though, triumphantly, "that should put an end to that." I had forgotten, unfortunately, how strong small minds are in the South. No sooner had I spoken than a girl in the back chimed in as well.
"Um," she said, starting in, "my momma tough me that you shouldn't mix your yolk with someone else's egg."
"Oh, you've got to be kidding me," I thought. But no, not kidding. In fact, she continued.
"See," she continued, "it says in the bible that you shouldn't do that. That you should only mix your yolk with someone else's yolk that's the same as yours, otherwise there could be conflict. And if you had kids, they would be conflicted. So you shouldn't get with someone who's different than you or else you'll have conflicted babies. And so you shouldn't have babies."
I turned to my friend, Joyce, in horror and a mixed form of intrigue.
"Did she just refer to my unborn children as conflict?!?!"
Joyce laughed, and the Prof. put an end to the discussion. Luckily, we were out of time.
10:55 AM
I walk with Joyce out of the classroom when the girl behind me (the one who made the Jewish comment) stops me.
"Um, I really didn't mean to offend you," she said, "so I was wondering if you would tell me what exactly Jewish means."
This is a recurring exchange for me regarding a lot of people from the South. They'll say something bigoted (whether they mean to or not) and then after I mention to them that I am Jewish, they'll barrage me with questions so they no longer feel badly. The whole way up to my next class I was explaining the subtle (hah!) differences between Judaism and Christianity. Fun times. One day I'm going to freak someone out and tell them we pray to a four-headed dog with eyes the size of saucers.
I head into Introduction to Social Work (my next class) and take my seat in front of Jason, my flamingly gay and fabulous friend. I'm recounting what happened last class and we got into the discussion of homosexuality in the bible.
"You think what happened to you was bad? Try hearing 'Thou shalt not lie with a man as one lies with a woman' you're whole life!"
"Here's what I don't understand about that," I start. "That verse comes from Leviticus, in the Old Testament."
"Right," Jason responded.
"Well," I began, "right next to that verse are the Jewish dietary laws."
Jason looked at me blankly so I continued.
"You know, the cloven hoof and the fish without scales? Don't eat pork or shellfish?"
Jason nods in understanding so I press forward.
"From what I understand, the reason Christians don't have to follow the dietary laws is because Peter (I think) said that Jesus created a whole new set of laws in the New Testament, so that you guys didn't have to follow the rules in Leviticus and Deuteronomy."
"Right," Jason said.
"So, if you guys don't regard or pay attention to the dietary laws in the Old Testament, why do you pay attention to the one verse in Leviticus about homosexuality?"
Jason didn't know, and neither do I.
Social work went by relatively quickly, and I headed out to meet Joyce to get something to eat. We had Chinese. Yum.
1:00 PM
I'm in the lab, getting ready for Senior Seminar to start. This class is your final class in sociology where you actually write your first independent thesis. I decided to do mine over gender-traditional roles as perpetuated by the mass media.
Here's the way I see things: television consistently portrays stereotypical sex roles in their programming. Even in shows aimed at preschoolers (Barney and Friends) it consistently shows boys as the active sex (running, jumping, playing) and girls take on the more matriarchal role (cooking, cleaning, playing with dolls). Even when these shows depict adults, they're always doing gender-traditional things. In regards to prime-time programming and commercials, women are continually overrepresented in the 20-30 year age category, whereas men are free to age with grace. Additionally, men are three times as likely to be shown in high power career roles than women; and when women are shown in a position of power, there's almost always a man who is in a position above them.
Think about it. Take "Law and Order" for a moment. The district attorney is female (on SVU), but her boss is a guy. How many shows do you know revolving around a single dad (Full House doesn't count!).
Interestingly enough, I found that in predominantly African American forms of media, the women are depicted in opposite gender roles. Additionally, African American women are more likely to be shown as a "Lolita" character, and be more combative with their partners.
So, my hypothesis is that: people who have high levels of television viewing are more likely to exhibit traditional gender-role attitudes. This is especially true for Caucasion/White viewers.
After pulling some more articles and discussing Britney Spears (seriously, she's lost it) class was over. Time for me to head home.
NOTE: I'm going to post this now to give you all something to read, and I'm working on the rest of the story: what happened at work that night. :)
posted by Jennifer at 10:55 AM
41 Comments:
That is a very interesting thesis topic. Any idea where you are going to get the statistics (damn statistics) to support it? For something like that, I would imagine you would have to get a broad range of people, and take into account ethnicity (we are all members of the human race), gender, and socio-economic status. Sounds like a tough job ahead of you, but worth it.
I am glad to be in the minority - my wife has more degrees than I do, and makes twice as much. I'm OK with that.
Anyway, thanks for the post. Glad to have you back.
Yayyyy a post!
And some people just say silly things...
anon:
we are using data from the General Social Survey. You can find it by googling it. They ask about 1100 questions to a variety of people (about 2500). It's a good data source.
Waitress
Okay -- maybe I'm weird because I'm from the north or something, but I seem to recall (if I really stretch my brain) something about Judiasm in the history of Christianity. Just something -- might have been a verse or two in the Old Testament. Anyway, next time a so called Christian asks you what "Jewish" means, you can take the short route and just remind that that Jesus (yeah most Christians should know who he was) was a Jewish boy.
"my momma tough me that you shouldn't mix your yolk with someone else's egg."
Nice to see Eugenics is alive and well in the 21st century.
"From what I understand, the reason Christians don't have to follow the dietary laws is because Peter (I think) said that Jesus created a whole new set of laws in the New Testament, so that you guys didn't have to follow the rules in Leviticus and Deuteronomy."
You actually can get into crazy land politics from here :) Specifically, the line of thought is that with the cruxification of Jesus, a new covenant was created. Jews operate under the old covenant and have to obey kosher laws, and oh, yeah, the 10 commandments. Out there some theologians argue that for Christians the 10 commandments are no longer valid since they have a new covenant in the New Testament. Thus, it is not going against G-d's word to commit adultry, kill (ala death penalty)etc.
I've enjoyed reading your posts, but usually don't leave comments.
I'd like to point out first that referencing homosexuality as a sin is not isolated to Leviticus. You can also find references to it in Genesis, Judges, Deuteronomy, 1 Kings, and 2 Kings.
For topic's sake, I won't tangent off to explain why I think that "Jesus created a whole new set of laws in the New Testament, so that you guys didn't have to follow the rules in Leviticus and Deuteronomy" is faulty. Heh, instead I am going to point that that the New Testament also references homosexuality as a sin in 1 Corinthians 6 and Romans 1.
You might have stopped reading at this point, assuming that I'm just another bible thumper trying to be in your face righteous. Actually, I spent all of college debating that homosexuality is okay and homosexuals should be accepted.
It wasn't until I brought the issue before God that He pointed out that homosexuality is a sin and we should not sin, but no one ever said anything about rejecting homosexuals. The basic message is "hate the sin, love the sinner."
Being homosexual and Christian is hard though. I already have a hard time with keeping my pride in check. It must be a thousand times harder to remain celebate throughout your entire life because God asks you not to sleep with the people that you would be attracted to. Not to mention, a lot of Christians who do not struggle with the same sin will project "hate the sin" onto someone who professes to the sin. I guess everyone needs refinement.
Thanks for listening. - tk
Nice, if long, post. I recently found your site via The Waiter (waiterrant.net) and was intrigued by the title...so how about some more stories from the strip club? Merci beaucoup ;-).
I am from the south. I moved to California. Need I say more...
I am from the south. I moved to California. Need I say more...
Welcome back, my dear! I look forward to reading more...
You should direct further questions regarding Judaism to the website of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Bob. That will really perplex them.
Heh. Religion really does get people all steamed up.
Heads up: it's "Yoke", not "Yolk". The one has to do with cattle, the other has to do with eggs.
I take Criminal Procedures: Investigations, which is part of the requirement for a BA in Criminal Justice rather than a law class, but, I just found it amusing that we've studied all the same cases but and I knew everything you were mentioned but all we learn out of is the text and our professor/day time lawyer's legal mouth. Blows that you have that giant casebook.
I just found that amusing. Hope you have some better days.
Guess me and my hubby are off the bible baby girls x-mas card list, since we're a "mixed" marriage, he being brought up catholic and all.. ANd double my sin list, My kids were/are being brought up to make a choice for themselves as to what religion they buy into.
the "my momma says..." reminded me of the water boy, who is ALSO A JEW! lol
BTW: rednecks, no matter where, say and ask the most retarded Q's about Judaism. Why they dont simply google it .....
GJ
Agree wholeheartedly with your gender/television theory.
It's nice to read. It's hard to find a place to really dialogue about things like this, because you're so often written off as 'OMGFEMINISMNAZI.'
Le sigh.
Yeah! Nice long post :) Thanks!
Reese
Great post. Keep them coming! And during the search and seizure topic did you also discuss the guy in CO who got busted because a drug dog walked around the car?
It's tough for most people to keep an open mind and really listen to other's point of view and beliefs, instead of just thinking "wow, that's wrong and here's what I'm about to tell her once she shuts up."
Or, some people just don't know much about religion at all. Take a boy in my daughter's 8th grade class who recently made a comment about "The Pope being he head of the Jewish religion". Uh huh.
First comment for me, great blog, Waitress. Looking forward to more stories :)
Great post - I just finished reading all your archives. You write very well and have an extremely entertaining blog! I can't wait to read more!
i have been out of the loop, but knowing that you offered a pic...i would've picked that too!
although your day is interesting - in a "that isn't MY [skippymom] sort of way"
i like pics .... of anything...heee...glad you are okay.
hugs!
I'm another person who is "unequally yoked" in marriage whoh is also study to be a sociology professor and who will, incidentally, probably be teaching soc of religion classes - My big pet peeve is people who turn scientific studies of religion into a "lets debate the merits of my reigion vs your religion" (like anyone is going to win that one).
I did have the awsome experience of shutting down one of those conversations, though - It was in a anthro class devoted to indigenous religions of north and south america where I heard again and again "why do we have to learn this guy levi strauss, what's the deal with the phenomonology texts we're readging."
The comment that made me hit the wall was was some mdiv guy stated, "I'm trying to figure out how what I'm learning relates to me..." At that point, to the joy of the other anthropologists in the room I lost it.
"This class is not about learning how native american beliefs relate to you, this is an anthropology class. We are learning how anthropologist interpret the rites and beliefs of native american religion! Our professor is a phenomenologist who studied under [famous guy] [then I inserted thumbnail sketch of what phenomonology was]. Many of these religions are religions you have to be born into, or inducted into, or go through rites and ceremonies to get into... [talk about cultural appropriation].. I kept going, and you get the gist -
the TA was shocked (as useless as he was) because he was one of those guys who wanted to discuss "how my belief varies from your belief" (I was a bit mad at him because the idiot dinged me for using words like "liminality" on the midterm, thankfully the prof graded my final) and my fellow anthropologists sat cheering (hey, I was an anthropologist back then). I got congratulated afterwards, but I felt horrible for shutting down the section that day....
Anyways I really really really feel your pain.
-evilbunnytoo (http://evilbunnytoo.livejournal.com/)
What about House MD as far as women in power positions go?
what's a nice Jewish girl like you doing in the South?
from old jewish man who's kids turned me on to you.
I enjoy ur read... thanks...
It is great to have you back to writing, but if you do not finish out the second half of your day soon, you will owe us a finished story and a pic.
You're the best.
What about Hello Larry, Give me a Break, Blossom,and,My Two Dads?
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
I really think that college degrees and such are overvalued. Just how many actual intelligent thinking people have you met so far? How many stupid people graduate?
Exactly.
tv show centred around single dad: arrested development.
sigh.
shame it was taken off the air.
...
man. i come to this site to get away from the insanity of upper year university. i forget sometimes just how busy everyone gets when they say 'i'm in school'.
best of luck.
I have to agree with your subject on television, but it can also pertain to movies as well. I just watched This Film Is Not Yet Rated last night. AMAZING, but very, very, very graphic. However, one point is that the MPAA raters seem to have a real problem with any showing of a woman enjoying sex. I had noticed that years ago and pointed it out to my hubby. Oh, what a lovely nation we have that glorifies violence, but can't show the most natural act between a man and woman in any kind of reality.
Glad you are back.
Cool post. Though I'd hesitate to apply the "Lolita" label, mainly because having recently read the book, I get the feeling that Lolita is more the victem of a crazy delusional pedophile rather than the young seductive nymphette.
RE: your hypothesis, I recall that there's quite a lot of literature that suggests you're probably on the money. I imagine you're already finding a lot in your lit review.
Wonderful blog, btw you have a great voice.
Boo school. Yay more posts! Please keep them coming!
Waitress, I'm loving this blog!!! Keep up the fun and poignent stories!!
you should get your boyfriend to a Dr, usually all those starnge noises are indicitave of sleep apnea or another disorder. This may explain why he is incapable of forming the brain funtion to wake you up instead of hitting snooze.
Sleep apnea is VERY bad, the sufferer stops breathing up to several HUNDRED times per night, that leads to undue strain upon the heart, as well as a very disturbed and un-rewarding sleep.
Just thought I should share.
i would do almost anything to read your thesis. it sounds fascinating. and what up with someone in the latter years of their college education, in a sociology of religion class no less, NOT knowing what jewish is. wtf? i mean, WTF?
waitress,
you are killing me slowly. what happened at work that night? hmmm?
You're a better person then me. I grew up in the south, went to college in the south and now thankfully am back in the south. but one day in a philosophy class the same idea (pretty much, slightly different) was espoused by some inbred redneck and I couldn't stop myself. I turned around and told him that we're living in the 20th century (back in the 1990's) and that he was a complete idiot. I suggested that maybe he should try reading something other then the King James version of the Bible. Fricking morons.
Hope the bar isn't killing, I bartended my way though grad school at a couple of titty bars so I know what it's like in there.
Glad to read a new post,
Former Tender
Great post. Funny, as always.
Just to answer your academic question to Jason academically: my thought on that is because the prohibition on homosexuality was affirmed in the New Testament, and the dietary laws weren't. Simple answer, I know it's more complicated than that.
You have quite a day!
prob a little late but just some interesting info u prob arent aware of-
in blues clues-blue (the blue dog) is a girl and her friend magenta (pink dog) is a boy....
Quite seriously, if your boyfriend is snoring that badly, you may want to see if you can get him checked for sleep apnea. Sleep apnea is not only hard on you as a cosleeper, but it's hard on his body and can take years off his life. He'll sleep way better if he starts doing something about it.
All the best!
Alexandra
OOgh.
You hit a big topic with me dealing with Leviticus.
Some Jewish people even argue that it has nothing to do with general homosexuality. At worst it applys only to Jewish people, at best it only applies to the preist class or possibly first born sons and no one else.
Odd site for it but if you go about 4 posts down the quote by "ty_ping" is me writing about the hebrew involved in Leviticus
http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/extended-discussion/homosexuality-is-not-a-sin-what-christ-said-and-more/t.22055569/
It details what the anon poster was writing as well, only from the opposite point of view.
Anyway, still interesting reading your stuff ^_^
Post a Comment
<< Home