September 9, 2014


Filed under: Science,Think About It!,What the hell? — Katrina @ 9:21 pm

Why the hell do we say “a thousand kilometers”? Why don’t we say “one megameter”? Because it sounds weird? It only sounds weird because it’s not in common use. The metric system comes with all these lovely prefixes for whichever power of ten off the basic unit you’re using, but for some reason we limit ourselves roughly to kilo and milli, if that. Centi only gets to shine when followed by meter. I see 10 milliliter containers and such quite a bit, but never once is it called “one centiliter”. Why not? That’s what it is, isn’t it? Even considering the circumstantial necessity of keeping decimal places constant, you’d think it might show up at least sometimes. And I never see any big vats of things labeled as “one kiloliter”.

Distance from Earth to the Sun? About 150 million kilometers? Pfft. What do you need all them extra decimal places for? Try 150 gigameters!

Why should bytes have all the fun?

Don’t even get me started on the sheer neglect suffered by all 10 centimeters of the decimeter. Or of all 100 meters of the hectometer, who only seems to show up when squared. You know, it’s a hectometer and it’s a square so it’s a… wait for it… hectare! I totally get it! ๐Ÿ˜€

Although metric ton does sound more badass than megagram. Metric ton is also the basis of the fun-to-say metric fuckton. Does megafuckgram have the same ring to it? These are the important questions.

Isn’t this fun? Hell, I haven’t even gotten to our lovely little friends micro and nano, who make some tiny scientific appearances, such as the ever-present 200ยตL (that’s right, mu not u!) pipette tips. But these prefixes get their attention where warranted. They just don’t come up often in common use because things tend to be bigger than that. They’re just hiding out at the cellular and molecular levels. Biding their time.

So, yeah, that’s the beauty of the metric system. For the super super super big and the super super super small, there’s a prefix to fit your measuring needs! Yay metrication!

Now if only we could go the whole nine ya- er, the whole 823 centimeters, and give some of these prefixes more attention.

Failing that, might as well be using imperial! Maybe I’ll start referring to a thousand inches as a kiloinch… :cute:

July 4, 2014

7 Incredibly Stupid Criticisms of the United States

Filed under: 100 Days of Summer,Assorted Politics,What the hell? — Katrina @ 2:13 pm

The USA has a lot of problems. Dear sweet God, are there a lot of problems! And that’s just what we know about. There’s also problems and major flaws we don’t even know about, and others we just don’t know the extent. So many many flaws this country of ours has!

These are not among them…

“When are you going to switch to the metric system like the rest of the world?”

We’ll switch to the metric system (which we learned in school alongside imperial measurements, by the way) when the UK, Ireland, Japan, India, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand start driving on the correct side of the road “like the rest of the world”.

“The national anthem mentions war and bombs! It’s the only one in the world that does!”

First of all, do you think Canada is the only other country in the world with a national anthem? Because it’s not, and plenty of national anthems are pretty bloody and belligerent. Also, have you actually listened to the Star Spangled Banner? It’s about our flag not getting torn to shreds in a battle. It’s about surviving being attacked, not us doing the attacking.

May 7, 2014

It’s Not for Believing In

Filed under: Decrees!,Science,The Occasional Godliness,What the hell? — Katrina @ 9:59 pm

I hereby decree…

Anyone who says they “believe in science” needs to be slapped.

Let me explain.

Specifically, I’m referring to when people declare this belief in place of a religious belief. Such as when asked what their religious beliefs are or to describe their secular humanism, they might say something like, “No, I don’t believe in any all-powerful gods. I believe in science.”

And it’s annoying because this person who thinks they’re affirming science so strongly is actually greatly misunderstanding a most basic thing about it. Which is… science isn’t something you “believe” in. Science just is. It is fact. It’s like saying you believe in the existence of Canada or horses or diabetes. You just sound silly saying you believe in something that’s pretty undeniably real. As if a diabetic Canadian equestrian were standing right in front of you.

Furthermore, when reducing science to a mere “belief”, you’re playing the ignorant religious fundamentalists’ game and slightly validating their beliefs in unprovable divine things (or disproved things they stubbornly cling to), allowing them to deliberately deny real scientifically proven things as just some other belief they personally don’t hold, or to just insist their actual beliefs should be given the same credence.

April 29, 2014

Paglia on the Drinking Age

Filed under: Check It Out,What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 10:53 pm

While it’s always nice to see articles in favor of lowering the drinking age, I’ve learned not to get too excited right away. The other day, a TIME article by Camille Paglia came out in favor of lowering the drinking age. Let’s have a look…

The National Minimum Drinking Age Act, passed by Congress 30 years ago this July, is a gross violation of civil liberties and must be repealed. It is absurd and unjust that young Americans can vote, marry, enter contracts and serve in the military at 18 but cannot buy an alcoholic drink in a bar or restaurant. The age-21 rule sets the U.S. apart from all advanced Western nations and lumps it with small or repressive countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Indonesia, Qatar, Oman and the United Arab Emirates.

While I don’t care for the “it makes us similar to these piece of shit countries” argument, since its entire basis is “ewww… THOSE countries… THOSE people…”, the rest is right on. The drinking age is a violation of young people’s civil liberties and carries with it some nasty repercussions.

She goes on to briefly compare MADD with 19th century temperance activists (which seems a little unfair to the temperance activists :P). Then she mentions the marijuana legalization and uses that as a jumping point for lowering the drinking age, citing also that “The decrease in drunk-driving deaths in recent decades is at least partly attributable to more uniform seat-belt use and a strengthening of DWI penalties.” Which is the general argument against the pro-21 side’s “Raising the drinking age saved ALL OF THE LIVES!!!!”

March 28, 2014

You Just Don’t Get It

Filed under: What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 10:48 pm

I find myself thinking this in exasperation in youth rights spaces sometimes, whether on NYRA’s Facebook page or elsewhere. Someone seems to agree with most that is posted or discussed. And sooner or later there’s a post that makes them flip their lid.

It goes something like this: “Ah, lowering the voting age to 17? Cool, neat… Ugh! What that school did to that girl was awful! They should be stopped!… … Wait, what? Lower the drinking age? Are you crazy? Teen brains are still developing!!!!111!!1!!”

You know, there can certainly be some leeway when it comes to people relatively new to the cause. I know when I was first getting involved some issues made me wary until I had the chance to think about and discuss them some more. But some people are determined to be intransigent on some irrational blind spots in their youth rights view. There’s a guy who has been with the movement for years and supports abolishing the voting age but for some reason supports corporal punishment.

I’m all for a “big tent” in the youth rights movement, since it’s a huge subject matter and so a big tent is just good sense. But someone whose support for lowering the voting age is based on believing it will get more Democrats elected is not a youth rights supporter. Someone whose support for homeschooling or unschooling is based on protecting parents’ rights is not a youth rights supporter. Someone who supports lowering the drinking age only in order to “stop unsafe drinking” is not a youth rights supporter.

Such people are certainly useful allies in specific campaigns, of course. And they could easily become youth rights supporters if we play our cards right and if it turns out they are so inclined after all. But they aren’t there yet.

February 14, 2014

Mmmm, Candy Hearts 9

Filed under: Foodz,What the hell? — Katrina @ 8:53 pm

Huh? Does this heart say “Just Meh”? Wow, these things have lost their luster.

Oh, wait. It says “Just Me + U”. Was a little faded. That makes more sense.

*picks out another heart*

“Hold hands”. Aww, how cute. I suppose.

Anyway, wow, the ninth installment of this crap. What’s annoying around love and relationships now on this Valentine’s Day? I don’t know. What haven’t I covered? It’s just about some people having strong if irrational feelings for one another and acting incredibly silly about it, while their friends and relatives tease them to no end…

Aha! Teasing. What the hell?

Okay, last year I was sort of teasing those who have crushes because of all the stupid questions and worries. But that behavior kind of deserves it, even if understandable to those of us who have been there. That’s just it, though. It is understandable, and one can only blame these people so much. Simply having the feelings in the first place is fine, even if a special kind of hell.

It happens at any stage, whether just a crush or an actual relationship. We’ve all heard it: “Oooh, someone has a boyfriend/girlfriend!”

Seriously? I mean, plenty of people have insecurities around these feelings or the stability of new relationships, and your response is to make them even more self-conscious? I remember reading Jane Austen’s Sense and Sensibility a couple years ago, and the annoying old woman in it, Mrs. Jennings, is teasing some minor character about her interest in some guy, and she comments to someone else “Young people love being teased about their crushes!” And all I could think was, umm, NO, young people do not like being teased about that or anything for that matter, even two hundred years ago, you’re a bitch, shut up. :irked:

And about 15 years ago or so, my cousin, who’s a year older than me, was getting ready for prom or otherwise about to meet up with some guy she was into (okay, I forget the exact circumstances but the point is there was a guy). My mom teased her endlessly about it, until I finally said, “Mom, leave her alone.” And my mom replied with something like “I’m her aunt, I get to tease her about these things!” She’d have done the same to me at some point, except I have yet to actually subject any friends to her presence since then, a decision I made at that time. ๐Ÿ˜›

I mean, a simple “congratulations!” or at least “okay, that’s cool” upon hearing about someone’s new relationship is perfectly fine. More than that, unless explicitly allowed, is just asinine.

Just like the messages on these hearts.

“ALL MINE”. Possessive much? “COOL DUDE”. Ah, there you go, what guy doesn’t get an immediate erection from being told that? “U R GR8”. Thanks, text messaging heart! “HEY BABE”. Hmmm, those movies were a while ago, so I’m pretty sure that pig is long dead. That’s kind of a downer.

December 13, 2013

Responses Again

Filed under: Christmas Time!,In the News,What the hell? — Katrina @ 11:45 pm

Oh, crimony, another damn school shooting, because Colorado is the shooting state apparently.

Just a day shy of the anniversary of Sandy Hook.

Uh oh, not again

“This is why guns should be illegal!”
“This is why we all need guns!”
“This is why young people need to be locked up until they’re 30!”
“This is why public schools must be abolished!”
“This is why we need more services for the mentally ill!”
“This is why we must do away with violent media!”
“JESUS! We all must accept JESUS!”

December 8, 2013


Filed under: Christmas Time!,Idiot Box,What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 8:31 pm

I’m increasingly believing that advertising executives have no souls. Certainly they have no shame about the mass genocide of brain cells they commit, hoping enough brain cells will die in any given individuals that they’d want to buy whatever they are selling. The makers of Fiat commercials certainly come to mind, but that’s not the topic at the moment, and the stupidity of those speaks for itself anyway.

I have a special loathing for the commercials running these days in which someone or some people want a newer version of their gadget and make this happen by… intentionally destroying or losing their current one. There’s one ad with a bunch of people dropping their phones in blenders or leaving them in microwaves or bathrooms, after finding out about a newer one they’d rather have. In another, a guy wants his employer to give him a new laptop so he intentionally spills coffee on his so they’d have to.

The loathing reaches a new level when I realize that the main words that come to mind about these people is “spoiled brats”. Because there’s certainly the trope about kids and teens wanting some new toy or bike or clothes or something, perhaps losing or destroying the current ones. There was even a Simpsons episode where Bart intentionally destroyed his bike so Homer would buy him a nice new one. Or the stereotypically rich teenage girl who gets a new Ferrari for her birthday but screams and cries because it’s blue instead of red. When it’s young people, such behavior is (rightly) seen as distasteful. But when it’s adults, apparently something we’re supposed to identify with?

Seriously, fuck ageism, because I want to call these people spoiled brats but that term is very ageist, but I can’t think of another term that means the same basic thing without implying anything about age. Grrr. :doitnow:

December 7, 2013

You Don’t Serve Me

Filed under: Christmas Time!,Foodz,What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 1:19 pm

Some nearby pizza place decided they didn’t want to serve me the other day. Only they didn’t know they said this. I hadn’t even walked in the door yet.

They had one of them “we don’t serve teens” stickers on the window, announcing that the drinking age is 21, this is law, and that they follow it. Which worries me, because since the drinking age is an actual law, one would presume already that they follow it. So since I didn’t see any other stickers, I’m guessing that’s the only law they care to enforce. Maybe I should have robbed the place, since they’re indicating they wouldn’t be too bothered, just so long as I’m not drinking their alcohol ten years in the past.

So, yeah, despite not having been a teen for quite a while, I took this to mean they didn’t want to serve me, because when I can help it I don’t visit ageist businesses. I expect businesses to enforce the drinking age as it is an actual law, but rubbing it in people’s faces, without having a sticker saying they don’t tolerate aggravated assault on their premises, implies this particular law is super important to them. Well, youth rights is super important to ME, so I turned right around and returned to my car.

And found another pizza place across the street. They’re rather plentiful. Mmmm… pizza.

December 6, 2013

The Prime Directive

Filed under: Christmas Time!,Decrees!,Idiot Box,What the hell? — Katrina @ 2:28 pm

I hereby decree…

Screw the Prime Directive.

Been watching a lot of Star Trek: The Next Generation lately. I like it, but one thing that just keeps pissing me off is the Prime Directive, that Starfleet may not interfere with another planet’s way of life, must not reveal themselves before that planet is “ready”, even when a situation is life-threatening to one individual or to the whole damn society.

Yeah, seriously, even where the whole planet is in danger. In one episode, Worf’s human brother saved a society whose planet was about to be destroyed by stashing them in the holodeck until they could get them to another planet, all without them knowing what’s actually happening because they don’t know about space yet and can’t know because Prime Directive. And the Enterprise crew was all pissed at Worf’s brother because of this, that he didn’t just let them all die, because Prime Directive.

Then there’s when Deanna Troi’s usually-nonsensical mother Lwaxana is the only one making any damn sense when a man she meets is about to turn 60 and thus according to his planet’s culture, he was celebrate his life and then kill himself because they’re all like “eww, old people!” And Lwaxana is the only one who rightly calls this shit out for being despicable, while her daughter and everyone else is all like “it’s their culture, it’s not our place, I’m sure our traditions look just as weird, PRIME DIRECTIVE!”

I’m thinking of the popular image of Picard facepalming, except he’s on the receiving end of this one.

Cultural relativism is one thing. Yeah, people have their different celebrations and symbols and whatnot, and that’s where such open-mindedness makes sense. But then there’s moral relativism, as if this tolerance must carry over even to things that are actually heinous and wrong, and that is not okay. If the best its adherents can come up with is “you’re not one of us, this is our culture, don’t criticize our beliefs!” Go to hell. Your beliefs are stupid and are maiming and/or killing people.

And even beyond that, the Prime Directive forbids interacting too much with planets that haven’t ventured into space yet. There are episodes where the people on such a planet find out about the Enterprise and that there’s life beyond their planet, and their society is then somehow damaged over it, whether their top scientists want to leave and explore the galaxy or they just plain go ape shit over it in some way. So, basically, leaving some planet to live under the delusion there’s nothing beyond their society and thus missing out on greater knowledge is the right thing to do? These are questions brought up in such episodes, yet there’s still Picard and others so sure they “ruined” the society by arriving there.

Maybe what is ruined by mere knowledge deserve to be ruined.

December 5, 2013

Minimum Wage

Filed under: Christmas Time!,What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 8:26 pm

This graphic has been floating around online.

It’s pointing out that most minimum wage earners are not teenagers as per an apparently common assumption, that in fact 88% are 20 or older, plus another large percentage being over 40, how many are parents, etc.

In other words, the main argument for not thinking little of minimum wage earners and that they ought to earn more is… They aren’t teenagers!

Because teenagers don’t deserve decent wages as they are living at home and just using that money to go to the movies or buy video games or get high, an assertion whose chief basis is… they’re teenagers.



I mean, do people seriously think Every Teenager In The World is living a comfortable suburban white upper-middle-class life and has their every need met by underappreciated parents? I just don’t understand the need to cling to this ridiculous assumption. Or that any teens whose lives aren’t that great are in such a situation because they did something “wrong”, like run away or get pregnant or drop out of school.

Believe it or not, “spending money” is hardly the only reason a teenager might want or need a job. Sometimes their minimum-wage-earning parents (represented in that graphic) just aren’t earning enough to support the family, so the teenager looks to contribute to the family by getting her own job. Maybe their parents have refused to pay for college, or are just incapable of paying, and they need to work to fund it themselves. Maybe they’ve been kicked out of or emancipated from their homes and need to support themselves so they don’t starve.

In fact, it’s a travesty that their earnings would even need to be justified like this. Who cares why they need to earn money? That’s really nobody’s business but theirs. Just like with everyone else.

December 3, 2013

It’s Always Going Around

Filed under: Christmas Time!,Decrees!,What the hell? — Katrina @ 11:35 pm

I hereby decree…

There’s always something going around.

I’ve noticed that literally every single time I have a cold and tell someone about it, I get this same canned response: “Yeah, you and everyone else. Something must be going around.”

When is a cold ever not going around? At any given time, any time of year, a bunch of people have a cold. Not to mention that when I’ve been told this, I couldn’t think of anyone I knew that also had one or had one recently. Maybe I just grabbed the wrong can at the grocery store or played with the wrong gadget at Best Buy or something. But other than that, didn’t seem to be “going around” any more than usual.

You know, I probably shouldn’t talk, as I’m painfully terrible at small talk and surely say thoughtless quips often. And maybe nobody is good at it and yet feels the need to say something, anything, lest they look rude or stupid. Maybe the latter can’t usually be helped.

December 2, 2013

Who’s the Bully?

Filed under: Christmas Time!,What the hell? — Katrina @ 9:10 pm

In March of last year, I wrote about bullying, and mentioned it again just over a month ago. It’s a thing that must be stopped, the victims defended, the perpetrators punished severely, the bystanders prodded to action.

However, there’s a little complication that becomes obvious to anyone who has dealt with people ever. And that is… what if it just isn’t clear which one is the bully and which is the victim?

In many cases, two people are engaging in abusive or harassing behavior toward each other and are both miserable over it. I’ve seen a number of these situations over the past couple of years, and I’ve wanted to defend one against the other, only to see the other is in the same situation. It simply isn’t so clear cut.

And that’s another reason it annoys me that adults take such a simplistic view of bullying among kids and teens. Yes, even among young people, these things can be and often are rather complicated. The bully you’re coming down hard on is probably being harassed by the supposed victim that you’re fawning over. Not to mention that, in encouraging other kids to step in, it’s then up to them to not only muster the courage to insert themselves in a clearly hostile situation that has nothing to do with them but to try to determine just which one is the villain here. They may just be seeing this one altercation and know nothing about a bigger picture. True, if anyone is being outright violent or threatening, yeah, try to diffuse the immediate situation if you can. But the bigger issue may be a lot more complicated, at any age.

Just look at basically any arguing couple to see a perfect example! ๐Ÿ˜†

November 29, 2013

The PC-Word

Filed under: Christmas Time!,Shut the Hell Up!,Sports!,What the hell? — Katrina @ 10:51 pm

Now for an inoffensively offensive edition of…


I am so sick of people complaining about political correctness. No, I don’t mean the people trying to make things more PC. They’re often annoying, sure. I’m talking about the people who are complaining about them, who whine that the slightest suggestion of better word choice is “help, the PC police are attacking!”

I saw this article in Reason a few weeks ago about the recent push for the Washington Redskins to change their name, and it’s not exactly their best work. Throughout the article it’s PC-this, PC-that, PC brigade, blah blah blah. Compared to most libertarian sources I see or read, Reason is usually the most, well, reasonable, in that they tend to do well arguing the libertarian standpoint on things without outright mocking or denying some of the real social issues going on behind their opponents’ arguments. This article is not an example of this.

The article mentions not only the push for the Redskins name change, but also a nickname for a British team (as in, not actually the team’s name) that is also an anti-Jewish slur. In the case of that one, there are cases of legal restrictions on using the term and people being ejected from games for it. In other words, that one is a pretty clear free speech violation. And yet it is talked about in the same “oh noes teh PC police” way as the push for the Redskins name change. The thing is, almost no one is suggesting anyone be arrested or punished in any way for the Redskins team name. It’s simply a matter of strong suggestion. They are requesting they CHOOSE to change the name. At the end of the day, the people in charge of the team and name still have the final say on that, and the people can do the libertarian thing of voting with their wallets on it. Why is this being framed in the same way as another team having their fans and athletes facing real penalties (assuming the above article wasn’t exaggerating this, which wouldn’t surprise me) for continued use of the name?

October 26, 2013

Going Public

Filed under: Think About It!,What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 4:09 pm

Just a little while ago, I posted something to I Support Youth Rights, a short tumblr post about some Australian mother who sold her daughter’s One Direction concert tickets as punishment, complete with bragging about it on the sale page. Honestly, I hesitated before sharing, despite the piece explaining why this mother is a pile of shit being a good one. Why? Because asshat parents like these get enough attention as it is.

In fact, the more attention we give them, the more this will happen.

And it happens so so much. That mother who sold her son’s car. That father who shot his daughter’s laptop. I can’t even count how many times now some parent had made their child stand on the side of the road with a sign detailing their transgression, whether lying or bullying or dressing like a tramp or some stupid crap. There was a coach in Utah who suspended the entire football team because some of the players were apparently cyberbullying someone. Setting aside the question of whether cyberbullying is really any of the school’s business (that and the nature of the cyberbullying was never specified), why is the entire team being punished for what only some of the players are doing? No matter. The coach has been applauded for this.

For taking a stand against bullying.

September 29, 2013

Something that Matters

Filed under: Shut the Hell Up!,What the hell? — Katrina @ 9:43 pm

Now for a snarky, judgmental edition of…


Every once in a while, I see this image floating around online. It’s a photo of some people at a stadium cheering for their team. And the caption? “Imagine if they were this excited over something that actually matters.”


Perhaps one reason it’s so mind-numbing is that you hear this said to or about kids so often. There was a radio ad several years back that began with several children talking excitedly about aliens. After a little bit of this, a woman’s voice then asks “Wouldn’t it be nice if they were this excited about math?”

It takes me a second to even come up with any words of response to either of these hypotheticals other than “Go to hell”. It’s just another version of “why are people interested in things that don’t interest me?”

Actually, it’s more than that. After all, these aren’t being said to the people but about them to others who presumably are to just agree right along that said thing-that-doesn’t-matter merits no attention and such attention should be redirected to other matters. Things the speaker personally decides are important. In other words, “don’t be interested in the things you are interested in; be interested in the things I want you to be interested in!”

The thing about the stadium cheering and the discussion about aliens was that those engaging in it were having fun. I don’t really see how the mere act of having fun with these things means completely eschewing anything more serious. How do you know none of the people in that stadium biting their nails as the kicker makes a game winning field goal attempt is also planning to attend a pro-choice rally next week? Or write their Congressperson about climate change legislation tomorrow? Or are volunteering to assist LGBT youth? Believe it or not, people can be passionate about multiple things!

Not that I particularly care even if the game is the only thing some of them care that much about.

And I hope I don’t need to point out the idiocy of whining about kids having interests outside of schoolwork!

July 25, 2013

Estimating Earth

Filed under: 100 Days of Summer,Check It Out,Teh Interwebs,What the hell? — Katrina @ 9:14 pm

I hate this fucking game.


Go ahead. Give it a try.

I’m awesome at it. I think my highest score was up over 28,000. I often get over 25,000 anyway and seldom lower than 20,000. I’ve mastered the art of pinpointing the exact spot to within meters. I very rarely check Wikipedia or the like, and when I do, usually it’s a matter of “okay, I know the name of the town and what country it’s in, I’ve just been panning all over the country’s map looking for it and am getting impatient.”

And oh dear God, the constant panning! Dear Lord at the long barren usually-Australian roads. Yeah, I can pinpoint exact locations within meters after a LOT of panning and clicking down a road, hoping that there will be a sign showing the name of a nearby city or at least telling me what language is spoken in this place. Or the number of the road.

Only twice have I screwed up so badly that I didn’t even pick the right continent. Once wasn’t too long ago. A lot of locations in the game are in Brazil, and usually a sign or something in Portuguese can be spotted before too long telling this, along with rather obviously tropical scenery. Well, sure enough, at one point when I couldn’t identify any town names, was on some endless forest road, and saw some signs in Portuguese and finally guessed a random spot in Brazil and hoped it was close… it was in Portugal! :irked:

May 31, 2013

Microwave Cookery

Filed under: 100 Days of Summer,Foodz,What the hell? — Katrina @ 5:24 pm

It occurred to me recently the way people use microwave ovens. How different they can be. How just plain weird and wrong they can be! :doitnow:

You see, when I’m microwaving something, I set the timer to something sensible depending on the item, very rarely more than two minutes for anything unless it’s frozen solid.

And yet, now and then, whether at work or elsewhere with a shared microwave, I see people just heating up some lukewarm soup or chicken or something and setting the timer to something like three minutes! True, the cans and packages sometimes say to microwave for that long, but it’s sort of a general rule that the amount of time they give is more than you need, unless your particular microwave sucks. Then again, packages also give stove top or conventional oven instructions, which nobody who isn’t my mother is dumb enough to pay any attention to.

Hell, I had a burrito once whose conventional oven instructions said to cook for 65 minutes. Not sure if trolling or really fucking crazy.

Anyway, as it sometimes turns out, the people setting their three ounces of clam chowder to microwave for four minutes don’t actually leave it in there the whole time. Oftentimes not even a minute has passed and they decide to stop it and remove their food. Which sort of boggles me further. If the time didn’t even matter, why not, you know, just set the time lower? And, of course, they take the food out and away, and the stupid timer is still blinking with the remaining time. Which the next person has to clear off.

Okay, it makes some sense if they pull it out early to see if it’s warm enough yet, so they could just pop it right back in if it isn’t without having to reset the timer. But they don’t even do that. And why such a ridiculously high time, heating something for four minutes that would be plenty hot in 45 seconds? Is your tongue made of asbestos?

Meh. I don’t know why anybody does anything. ๐Ÿ˜†

This has been Day 8 of the 100 Days of Summer, Round 13.

April 12, 2013

Pet Peeve

Filed under: Decrees!,What the hell?,Youth Rights — Katrina @ 8:06 pm

I hereby decree…

Your pets are not your children!

And as such, you are not your pets’ parent.

Now I’ll admit I’ve never liked the term “owner” for the person in that position, since the idea of ownership of an animal just sounds icky. I don’t care for “master” either. I like to just refer to the human as the, well, human. But referring to these people as the pets’ parents or guardians is just way too far in the other direction.

You know whose parents you actually are? Your children! Your human children, born out of a human woman’s womb, whether yours or your partner’s or someone else’s. The dog? Not your child.

I have nothing against elevating the status of one’s pets to “member of the family” consideration. But they are still their own category. The actual children are the HUMAN family, moreso than the pets. Equating the kids to the dog just dehumanizes the kids. And it outrageously ignores the VERY different needs that actual human children and the dogs or cats you call “children” have.

I mean, aren’t there enough people out there who have children with this idea of having a permanent baby or toddler? Completely forgetting they are bringing forth a person with their own mind? Treating their children like their sole purpose in life is to obey their parents and live as their parents dictate and to their parents’ pleasure?

You see, those are the reasons one should get a dog or cat! Dogs and cats aren’t going to grow up to be members of your own society. They’ll go their whole lives wanting your affection and, while not necessarily obeying you, being around when you want them. You don’t have to worry about differences of opinion since they don’t (usually) tend to have that many.

Granted, the idea of seeing pets as children is out of affection, yes. Not intending to make any statement either way about the status of the actual children. But if the pets are being elevated to the status of children, where does that leave the actual children?

Or is it the idea that the pets, like the children, are those within your home that you are obligated to serve? Yeah… I don’t think I need to get into everything that’s wrong there!

March 14, 2013

Sacked the Gunman

Now for a quick-thinking, death-stopping edition of…

Here’s to You!!!!

So I raise my glass and say, “Here’s to you, Cypress Lake hero!”

I don’t actually know his name. Very few people do. But he’s a high school student who, when another student on his school bus pointed a gun at someone else and threatened to kill, he and two others leapt up and tackled him, likely saving one or more lives. Yay! They’re heroes!

So they went to school where they got awards and medals not unlike the final scene from Star Wars…

Oh, no, wait, actually he got suspended. For being involved in an incident “where a weapon was present”.

Well, NYRA and others are on it! My always awesome fellow board member Jeffrey Nadel is on the case and has appeared on a couple of news spots and radio shows talking all about it.

Also, here:

Go there, watch the video, and sign the petition. And get others to do the same.

Seriously, that principal just isn’t backing down on this, insisting that she “knows the full story”. After the original suspension, they made up some junk about the heroic student being insubordinate and uncooperative, something they added after this story got media attention and they wanted to cover their tracks. Yeah, sure, okay. ๐Ÿ™„

Because the student should totally have instead done nothing like a good little boy and watched his fellow students get killed. And because he didn’t allow people to die in front of him, he now has this suspension blemish on his record because “only I know the full story, he was uncooperative! uncooperative!” Genius!

Come on. Expunge the suspension and move on. The school fighting this is nonsense, even by school administrator standards.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Powered by WordPress