Oh seat of my bike:
Touched with my hand, you feel soft;
My butt disagrees.
Lean forward, lean back:
No position is comfy.
I ride home in pain.
Thanks to the seat nose
all chance of reproduction*
is lost to me now.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_saddle#Crotch_pressure
Monday, 22 June 2009
Wednesday, 17 June 2009
Bill 44
Oh, God love Alberta. Alberta, like my sister and her country music, "brings the hick" to this place.
So, after staying up, like, WAY past their bedtime, the members of the Alberta legislature voted in, by a wide majority, Bill 44. Its mandate? To require teachers to notify parents, in writing, of upcoming lessons that will involve information about sex, sexual orientation, or religion. Then, if parents feel the content is objectionable, they are free to withdraw their children from that lesson.
...What the hell?
And, as a real kicker, this was all done under the auspices of the provincial charter of Human Rights. As in, parents have a human right to pull their kid from school. What kind of human right is that?
It was the Conservatives (big shocker right there) who pushed the bill through, so, naturally, it's the right-wing Christians who are largely its backer. They're afraid of controversy, of new information diluting their children's beliefs; their solution is to remove controversy from the curriculum by ensuring their precious children never have to hear anything that might shake the foundations of what "universal truths" mommy and daddy have already sown in their fertile young minds.
This is ridiculous, and I say that as a Christian. Christians have never been shy about controversy. The man we follow and call Saviour was nailed to a cross! Our whole religion is founded on controversy, so what's with the sudden revolt against it?
Some parents are happy about the bill for reasons other than their religious beliefs. They believe it is their responsibility to teach kids about sex, morality, etc. Frankly, they're wrong:
Teachers are held accountable for what they say. They follow a series of guiding principles, created by the Board, detailing what is and is not appropriate to say. If they do say something inappropriate, they say it to twenty-five sets of little ears, and you can bet some of those kids go home and yell, "Mom, guess what the teacher said today!" That's why teachers who want to keep their jobs can't say things like, "Jewish people are bad" or "Gays should burn in hell" or "All Christians are right-wing nutjobs". Parents, on the other hand, have no such check or balance in place against them. They may say even, fair-minded things to their kids anyway, but for the sake of children whose parents might tell them things I can't even say in a public forum, let's leave some of the teaching of these touchy subjects to a civil servant who won't be instructing their children on picketing funerals or denying the Holocaust.
Ignorance--it's the gift that keeps on giving!
So, after staying up, like, WAY past their bedtime, the members of the Alberta legislature voted in, by a wide majority, Bill 44. Its mandate? To require teachers to notify parents, in writing, of upcoming lessons that will involve information about sex, sexual orientation, or religion. Then, if parents feel the content is objectionable, they are free to withdraw their children from that lesson.
...What the hell?
And, as a real kicker, this was all done under the auspices of the provincial charter of Human Rights. As in, parents have a human right to pull their kid from school. What kind of human right is that?
It was the Conservatives (big shocker right there) who pushed the bill through, so, naturally, it's the right-wing Christians who are largely its backer. They're afraid of controversy, of new information diluting their children's beliefs; their solution is to remove controversy from the curriculum by ensuring their precious children never have to hear anything that might shake the foundations of what "universal truths" mommy and daddy have already sown in their fertile young minds.
This is ridiculous, and I say that as a Christian. Christians have never been shy about controversy. The man we follow and call Saviour was nailed to a cross! Our whole religion is founded on controversy, so what's with the sudden revolt against it?
Some parents are happy about the bill for reasons other than their religious beliefs. They believe it is their responsibility to teach kids about sex, morality, etc. Frankly, they're wrong:
Teachers are held accountable for what they say. They follow a series of guiding principles, created by the Board, detailing what is and is not appropriate to say. If they do say something inappropriate, they say it to twenty-five sets of little ears, and you can bet some of those kids go home and yell, "Mom, guess what the teacher said today!" That's why teachers who want to keep their jobs can't say things like, "Jewish people are bad" or "Gays should burn in hell" or "All Christians are right-wing nutjobs". Parents, on the other hand, have no such check or balance in place against them. They may say even, fair-minded things to their kids anyway, but for the sake of children whose parents might tell them things I can't even say in a public forum, let's leave some of the teaching of these touchy subjects to a civil servant who won't be instructing their children on picketing funerals or denying the Holocaust.
Ignorance--it's the gift that keeps on giving!
Sunday, 14 June 2009
The British National Party
Because I'm hopelessly nerdy and possibly English, I receive The Guardian in my feed reader (as opposed to, you know, any newspapers from the country in which I actually reside). I was listening to a Guardian podcast a few days ago, and heard that the British National Party, the far-far-far-right federal party, had captured a significant number of seats in some former Labour strongholds. Naturally, I decided to check out their website, and WOW am I glad I did.
To be honest, it's probably one of the best-designed party websites I've ever seen, British or Canadian. From the nav bar to the very clear platform policies, there is no mistaking who the party is or what they stand for. The problem is, what they stand for is, well, primarily the protection and preservation of "Britain's indigenous people" - aka, whites.
Then, of course, there's the push to bring back corporal punishment for "petty criminals and vandals". Really? Their solution to rising violence and civil mutiny is spankings, or a couple turns with the Strap?
Next, they turn to defence: apparently, the same nation who entered World War I in defense of Belgium, following Germany's broken promise not to invade the neutral country, now has much more important things to do than participate in "meddling ‘peace-keeping’ missions".
And did you know white Britons are "second-class citizens" in England? So who exactly constitutes the first class, then? Frankly, I can't think of any country where white people are treated as second-class citizens. White people the world over are treated to their own affirmative action or "positive discrimination" every day. That's why the average white still makes more money, lives in a better neighbourhood, has more education, and is better represented in the government than the average individual belonging to any other ethnic category.
I find it particularly interesting that the BNP refer several times in their policies to the removal of "politically correct" language and double-speak from schools, the workplace, and law enforcement. It seems to me that a political party based entirely on a thinly-veiled platform of xenophobia would, by necessity, have to use that kind of language to defend themselves.
But hey, we're talking about the fascists here, and we know what a history of good planning and political integrity the fascist movement has always maintained.
Oh, and check this out. I laughed.
For a very long time.
To be honest, it's probably one of the best-designed party websites I've ever seen, British or Canadian. From the nav bar to the very clear platform policies, there is no mistaking who the party is or what they stand for. The problem is, what they stand for is, well, primarily the protection and preservation of "Britain's indigenous people" - aka, whites.
Then, of course, there's the push to bring back corporal punishment for "petty criminals and vandals". Really? Their solution to rising violence and civil mutiny is spankings, or a couple turns with the Strap?
Next, they turn to defence: apparently, the same nation who entered World War I in defense of Belgium, following Germany's broken promise not to invade the neutral country, now has much more important things to do than participate in "meddling ‘peace-keeping’ missions".
And did you know white Britons are "second-class citizens" in England? So who exactly constitutes the first class, then? Frankly, I can't think of any country where white people are treated as second-class citizens. White people the world over are treated to their own affirmative action or "positive discrimination" every day. That's why the average white still makes more money, lives in a better neighbourhood, has more education, and is better represented in the government than the average individual belonging to any other ethnic category.
I find it particularly interesting that the BNP refer several times in their policies to the removal of "politically correct" language and double-speak from schools, the workplace, and law enforcement. It seems to me that a political party based entirely on a thinly-veiled platform of xenophobia would, by necessity, have to use that kind of language to defend themselves.
But hey, we're talking about the fascists here, and we know what a history of good planning and political integrity the fascist movement has always maintained.
Oh, and check this out. I laughed.
For a very long time.
Thursday, 11 June 2009
Great.
So, because the person who made me get this blog in the first place then announced that 95% of all blogs die within a year, or something like that, I've been guilted into firing this one up again.
The good news is, I have a list of topics I want to cover. So, I can promise at least one update per week. I can't promise it will be exciting or hilarious, but it will be written.
That is all.
Actually, on another note, I just attempted to download GoogleChrome. What I got was the BSoD. Another quality product from the Google family!
So, because the person who made me get this blog in the first place then announced that 95% of all blogs die within a year, or something like that, I've been guilted into firing this one up again.
The good news is, I have a list of topics I want to cover. So, I can promise at least one update per week. I can't promise it will be exciting or hilarious, but it will be written.
That is all.
Actually, on another note, I just attempted to download GoogleChrome. What I got was the BSoD. Another quality product from the Google family!
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
HARMONIZED SALES TAX
"Harmonized sales tax" is probably the most spectacular April Fool's Day prank I've seen in years...too bad it's an actual tax policy.
We started talking about it yesterday as part of a general discussion of Canadian politics. I wasn't sure what "harmonized" meant, but it sounded nice. Well, as it turns out, "harmonized" is just a weasel word for "tax grab"!
The province has taken the liberty of combining GST and PST into a single (therefore "harmonized") sales tax, claiming it will be simpler and lead to more tax rebates for the lowest-income families, blah blah blah.
What it really means is that we'll now be paying PST as well on everything we currently pay GST on. Because I'm a student, my two greatest purchases are food and books--neither of which I've previously ever had to pay PST on! (Admittedly, most of my groceries are zero-rated--that is, the taxes are applied at a rate of 0%, meaning I'll continue not paying tax on them.) But seriously! How did McGuilty get away with this?!
And the best part? The memorandum published to explain the tax rules for food under GST and HST includes the following policy statements:
Any government that has a policy statement about the supply of fondue chocolate is either brilliant or hopeless.
We started talking about it yesterday as part of a general discussion of Canadian politics. I wasn't sure what "harmonized" meant, but it sounded nice. Well, as it turns out, "harmonized" is just a weasel word for "tax grab"!
The province has taken the liberty of combining GST and PST into a single (therefore "harmonized") sales tax, claiming it will be simpler and lead to more tax rebates for the lowest-income families, blah blah blah.
What it really means is that we'll now be paying PST as well on everything we currently pay GST on. Because I'm a student, my two greatest purchases are food and books--neither of which I've previously ever had to pay PST on! (Admittedly, most of my groceries are zero-rated--that is, the taxes are applied at a rate of 0%, meaning I'll continue not paying tax on them.) But seriously! How did McGuilty get away with this?!
And the best part? The memorandum published to explain the tax rules for food under GST and HST includes the following policy statements:
P-79R The Supply of Fondue Chocolate, P-81R Tax Status of De-Alcoholized Wine, P-213 GST/HST Status of Certain Ice Cream, Ice Milk, Sherbet, Frozen Yoghurt, Frozen Pudding Products, P-224 Meaning of Catering Services, P-232 Meaning of "Other Arrangements of Prepared Food", P-240 Application of GST/HST to Products Commonly Described as "Dietary Supplements" and P-241 Meaning of "Other Similar Snack Food" Under Paragraph 1(f) of Part III of Schedule VI to the Excise Tax Act.
Any government that has a policy statement about the supply of fondue chocolate is either brilliant or hopeless.
MUSICIANS:
I am an artist who does not create art.
This is not my phrase, just a very good description of my life to date.
In fact, I may be worse than an artist: I am a musician.
Artists struggle to create something outside of themselves. But art is easier to recognize than music. Some pieces of art are derided as being "too abstract" or "too modern". But we can understand that colours on canvas, pencil on paper, metal or stone carved to shape, are kinds of art. We may think they're worthless, but we understand that they are art.
Music is not the same. Music that is not recognized as music is just noise. We struggle too, to create something outside of ourselves, and 99% of us will never succeed. Even a child can create art; it takes a gifted hand to create music. I have been a musician for fourteen years, and all I have to show of my own work is an eight-bar chord progression. Nothing else. Music is so hard to come by that we are forced to replicate the works of grand masters when our own efforts to create fail.
And though the music of our grand masters is indeed formidable, it is not our own. We cannot even make it our own when we play it: our interpretation is not judged by its own merits--it is determined to be successful or unsucessful depending on how faithful we were to the composer's intentions, on how well we emulated their style. Horowitz, Zimerman, Rubenstein, Yundi...everyone has their favourite, and their favourite is inevitably the performer they believe has most closely presented the piece "the way it was meant to be played".
Painters do not spend their lives reproducing Mona Lisas and water lilies, and being praised for their adherence to the original. They strike out on their own, experimenting, showing the world what they see. But our lives are much worse as musicians, because we overwhelmingly cannot show the world what we hear.
This is not my phrase, just a very good description of my life to date.
In fact, I may be worse than an artist: I am a musician.
Artists struggle to create something outside of themselves. But art is easier to recognize than music. Some pieces of art are derided as being "too abstract" or "too modern". But we can understand that colours on canvas, pencil on paper, metal or stone carved to shape, are kinds of art. We may think they're worthless, but we understand that they are art.
Music is not the same. Music that is not recognized as music is just noise. We struggle too, to create something outside of ourselves, and 99% of us will never succeed. Even a child can create art; it takes a gifted hand to create music. I have been a musician for fourteen years, and all I have to show of my own work is an eight-bar chord progression. Nothing else. Music is so hard to come by that we are forced to replicate the works of grand masters when our own efforts to create fail.
And though the music of our grand masters is indeed formidable, it is not our own. We cannot even make it our own when we play it: our interpretation is not judged by its own merits--it is determined to be successful or unsucessful depending on how faithful we were to the composer's intentions, on how well we emulated their style. Horowitz, Zimerman, Rubenstein, Yundi...everyone has their favourite, and their favourite is inevitably the performer they believe has most closely presented the piece "the way it was meant to be played".
Painters do not spend their lives reproducing Mona Lisas and water lilies, and being praised for their adherence to the original. They strike out on their own, experimenting, showing the world what they see. But our lives are much worse as musicians, because we overwhelmingly cannot show the world what we hear.
Thursday, 19 March 2009
THE VIOLIN:
Ryan Mills' thoughts on violins:
Do you have a Stradivarius? No. Oh. So does it even have those S-shaped holes?
--Those are F-holes, Mills.
Really? They look like "S"s to me. Doesn't S stand for Stradivarius? You know, his name used to be Tadivarius. He changed it to Stradivarius because of the holes. The S-holes.
Do you have a Stradivarius? No. Oh. So does it even have those S-shaped holes?
--Those are F-holes, Mills.
Really? They look like "S"s to me. Doesn't S stand for Stradivarius? You know, his name used to be Tadivarius. He changed it to Stradivarius because of the holes. The S-holes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)