wednes: (Eclipse)
Weather wise, in-between seasons are my most hated times of year. It's hot in here, 76 degrees in fact--with the door wall slightly open (we can't open it a lot, because JoJo goes through screens like I go through Nature Valley cashew bars). I turned the fan on (the one that connects through the heat/air) and it's still 76 friggin degrees in here. Plus it's humid. I loathe humidity.

I ordered us a fan from Amazon. Amazon Prime used to offer overnight shipping for $5 more. Now it's $7 more. Not only that, but Saturday used to count as a business day. But today, I ordered a fan and with two-day shipping, I won't have it until Tuesday. Still, it's cheaper than getting a cab to the store and back. That would actually cost more than the fan itself.

So, whine whine, complain complain...because my brain refuses to function when it's this hot.
wednes: (Colbert Rage)
People who know us know that H is a wicked talented graphic designer. I love his work, but obvs I'm biased. He's made many cards and gifts for people--lots of posters, printed scripts with cool covers, etc. He designs all my marketing stuff, and created the logos for Under the Bed magazine and The Horror Within, among other things. He's designed some awesome book covers and more marketing stuff for friends, family, and clients.

I'd been pestering him to put a portfolio together, so he could make more money doing something he loves and is awesome at. He didn't. A year ago I figured, screw it. We'll start a business together. I can do book layout and editing, he can do cover and internal graphics. Together, we could help people self-publish their books, and maybe even publish some people outside what I already did with the magazine (except with better communication and more money), and what I do with the site now (again, with more money). So we've had a few clients and done some good work. of our clients took some of H's designs to H's day-job for printing. I'm not saying the name of H's work here, and if you know it, please refrain from saying so in the comments. Anyway, this led to questions that then led to H's work informing him that he is not allowed to perform, for profit, any service that his company offers. Even if it's to people who were not customers already. Even if it's something he doesn't actually do for this company, and therefore doesn't involve poaching customers. Even though it doesn't involve using his work's equipment or resources, or wouldn't impact his job function in any way. Even though he's been with the company for almost 20 years and has never been reprimanded in any capacity. He isn't allowed to use his skills to make money on his own time, because employees of his company in another facility H has never even been to, do something similar to what he does--design graphics.

I can't even put into words how sad and angry I am about this.
Our new business was going really well. We had annoying clients who paid us a good wage, and let us work together to do great things for a variety of projects. It was great and promised to only get more awesome as time went on.

Now it's over.
Sure, I can still take on clients for layout and editing. But I don't have H's skills backing me up. We can't offer cover design services or marketing support that requires the use of graphics (ie: most of it). We'd never be a full-service company for people who want to publish books. All because an obscenely profitable and absurdly huge company thinks they have a right to tell H what to do in his own time, with his own computers and talent. And being H, he's not even going to argue with them. Because that's the kind of employee he is.
I can't even let H know the full extent of my disappointment and anger, because he already feels really bad about it.

So long, [name of company redacted].
You were a good dream.
wednes: (Hazel 2)
I was watching That 70's Show recently because TVLand or whoever started them over from the beginning. Before Eric and Donna got together, Hyde made a pretty serious play for Donna. He even learned how to dance so he could dance with her when they skipped town to go to a disco. Her response? "Shut up and dance." Here's what Hyde did:
Kept dancing.
Maintained a respectful distance.
Was happy for his best friend when he got together with her.
Let it go.

What didn't Hyde do?
Kiss her anyway.
Call her a bitch/tease/whore/slut/dyke/etc.
Tell her how sorry she'd be some day.
Shoot up a women's studies class.
Keep pestering her in the hopes that she'd change her mind.
Remind her and everyone else what a Nice Guy (TM) he was.
Develop a disturbing and ever-growing hatred of women.

Even though Hyde is considered less than a moral ideal on that show, he was totally cool about the things that matter. Steven Hyde teaches us that you can drink underage, smoke pot, be lazy on occasion, reject the establishment, and come from a trashy family of terrible people--and still be a good person.

The concept of friend-zoning someone is still pretty hilarious to me. I suspect that teens have been subjected to such a glut of stupid romantic comedies and teen sex romp movies that boys think they have some sort of dramatic imperative to "fight for" and "win" the girl of their dreams. If they don't, they're either a complete loser or they "gave up too soon." That's a shame, because the idea of waiting around until She suddenly sees you as a sex god is about as silly as asking Elon Musk to turn you into Captain America.

I grew up as a fat teenager in the 80's. Back in the day, the concept of "friend zoning" did not exist. If you liked someone and they didn't like you that way you were supposed to get the hell over it and move on. Hanging around with them in the hopes that they'd change their mind about you was considered pathetic. Trust me, I know of whence I speak on this. Never, at no time, EVER was the object of your affection considered an asshole for the mere "crime" of not finding you attractive. Why? Because that would be stupid. That's not how attraction works. And yeah, those unrequited teenage crushes can hurt like hell, I know that too. But your pain doesn't mean anyone owes you anything.

As far as I've seen women never expect someone who doesn't find them attractive to suddenly do so after they're nice for a long time or whatever. But somehow, lots of men do. What's more--these men are often the last ones who would consider dating a fat chick or someone considered not stereotypically beautiful. I'm reminded of the American Dad episode where Francine "lets herself go" to prove that Stan loves her for her true self, and he ends up putting his own eyes out because she's so ugly to him that he can't look at her. He says something like 'Francine, I want a beautiful wife. If marriage was about connection, I'd have married that fat girl I had all those great conversations with.'

This philosophy basically boils down to, "Why don't any really HOT girls realize that beauty is only skin deep?" Because life is not a beer commercial, you assholes. And hanging around waiting for your "nice" friendship to morph into a sex parade is not what a "nice guy" would do.
It's what predators do.
wednes: (Doctor Literally Too Stupid)
Remember last summer when Facebook decided I was a liar with a fake name? I had to go through all this bullshit of sending IDs, having them ask for more, sending more, having them tell me they couldn't read what I've sent (despite it being perfectly legible). Eventually, they told me everything was fine. It wasn't. I notice too that Photobucket deleted my screencaps of my Emails with Facebook people. I presume they're in cahoots. Days later, I was again told that this was all fine. Apparently, it still isn't.
Woke up last night to find myself locked out of Facebook AGAIN. The message? "Please change your name. It looks like the name on your Facebook account may not be your authentic name. We ask everyone to use the name they go by in real life so friends know who they're connecting with."
I could count on my fingers the number of people who know me by my legal name, which is Wednesday Lee [H's last name, which I took legally when I got married]. So much foolishness. How many IDs do I need to show Facebook in order to keep arguing politics with strangers and looking at pictures of cats and dinners? Seriously.

It occurs to me, that I won't be able to log into Photobucket for this week's reviews since my login has always been via Facebook. So, if they don't fix this shit by Sunday, this foolishness will start costing me real jobs and actual money.
EDIT: Looks like I can log in via Twitter, who appears to be the lesser asshole in this situation. It's generally the users on Twitter who suck, not Twitter itself.

I wish there was a way to do what I normally do on the Internets without having to bow and scrape to a company that only uses us as marketing chattel in the first place, gives no control over content, and then occasionally accuses us of not knowing our own names. WTF. #Annoyance


Feb. 8th, 2016 11:21 am
wednes: (Elephant on Trampoline)
I haven't posted at all in February yet. So I feel like I should even though I don't have much to say. Oh wait, there is one thing.

If you're voting for Hillary Clinton solely because you think "it's about time for a woman president," you should shut your face. Sure, it would be nice if gender was less an issue when we choose politicians. But gender isn't relevant to whether or not someone is right for the job, would do a good job, or is the strongest choice for the position at hand.

Me, I don't find Hillary to be trustworthy. She always seems fake and forced, plus she loves big banks. I get that she's experienced and strong-willed, but if she's not strong-willed about stuff I think is important (single payer health care, $15 or higher minimum wage, less war), why the hell should I support her?


Jan. 28th, 2016 03:19 am
wednes: (Farnsworth/zombie jesus)
I'm trying to say as little as possible about Trump, while still not ignoring his more vile tendencies. I can't imagine that he could ever actually win the presidency. The primaries are mostly wank for the majority of candidates. I'm honestly not sure Trump wants to be POTUS in the first place. But since he's never done anything with skill, honesty, or integrity, I wouldn't expect him to be honest about his true intentions.

I'm not surprised that Republicans and "undecided" voters gravitate toward a showman who lives to shock people with the asinine things he says. I should think the main reason other Republicans don't like Trump is that it's highly possible that he'll get the GOP nomination. And that there's no way in hell that he can win.

It's also looking like Hilldog is not gonna get her wish this time around either. Bernie would have to fall seriously ill (or worse) to lose this thing to her. Yeah, she has a ton of experience and would do a passable job. But she's not really going to do shit about income inequality, the minimum wage, veterans affairs, campaign finance, and a lot of other shit that's fucking things up for everyone who isn't upper-middle class or above.

Honestly, I think what I hate most about Trump this week is that he actually makes me want to defend Megyn Kelly. But dammit, the enemy of my enemy can't always be my friend. She truly is a vile woman.


Jan. 19th, 2016 01:12 pm
wednes: (Homer/Stones)
Am I the only one who remembers that Glenn Frey was kind of an asshole? Not quite as bad as Don Henley though.

Both of those dudes were bitter jags when the Beavis and Butthead album knocked Eagles Greatest Hits off the charts. "I guess we'll all get together in 20 years for the Beavis and Butthead reunion."

And then we did.

Because Beavis and Butthead are hilarious.
wednes: (Snakes on a Plane)
OMFG, I hate everything today.

The washer in our building has been broken since well before Christmas. Once it had been broken for two weeks, they magnanimously decided to allow H a key to a different building to use their washer. Alas, they kept his driver's license (they claim they gave it back, but it's fucking nowhere to be found) so now we can't do any more laundry until H gets a new one from secretary of state--or they actually fix the goddamn thing.

See, our lease says we live in a building with a washer and dryer. They don't give a shit. When I call to say "What's the holdup, it's been over a month," they also don't care. There's no recognition that "Oh, that's gotta suck for people who don't drive to not be able to do their laundry." Nope. It's like they've never worked a customer service gig before, and have no idea that sometimes--people just want to know that you give a rat's ass about fixing their problem. I shouldn't have to explain, for example, that if they don't have an answer for me, they need to call me back when they get one.

Also, I had to buy more socks.

I also have a client driving me insane, and who honestly seems to think that I'm sitting around doing nothing any time I'm not doing work for him. He knows very little about the book market or the industry in general--but refuses to take the advice of those who do. I foresee that he's going to pay me to handle his marketing, then blame me when the book doesn't sell--even though the reason it won't sell is that nobody is going to pay $20 for an eBook by someone they've never heard of, on a topic that's on its way out. Cripes!
The AHS finale tonight (which I'm SURE will disappoint), and the general tenor of the internet being...well, it's the internet. I imagine I don't have to explain.

I'm not gonna go on and on about this, but if you think that within 48-hours of David Bowie's death is a good time to call him a "kiddie rapist" because he may have had sex with an underage groupie in the 70's...fuck you. You couldn't possibly care about that or you'd have brought it up sometime in the 70's, or 80's, or 90's, etc. But no, you clickbaity sons of bitches can't wait to garner a few pennies per click off the not-yet-cold body of a man who--even after he knew he was dying, put together something amazing for his fans.
Let me just say that while there is certainly the potential for abuse when adults have sex with teenagers--not all teen/adult sex is rape (you'll notice that ages of consent vary from state to state) and that people don't magically go from frightened child-victims to fully competent, informed adults upon the occasion of their 18th birthday (or 17th, or 15th, depending on the state). Moreover, I'm tired of people dictating how other people's sexual experiences should be judged...or the idea that they should be judged at all. If an individual asks for your help or guidance, you should give it. If they haven't, stay the fuck out of it.
wednes: (TV!!!)
Every now and then, someone will express surprise to me that I have this person or that person as an online friend, despite them spouting unpopular views or having strong opinions I don't agree with, or even doing shitty things like posting spoilers on purpose. But people who know me well know that I enjoy dialoging about tough topics--especially among those with whom I disagree. I don't want my life to be an echo chamber of shit I already agree with. Plus, I don't know everything, and people I don't agree with are more likely to know shit that I don't know. Though they might still be bugfuck wrong. ;-)

Today I saw a post referencing Jessica Jones on Netflix. Someone else was basically saying that because in the first episode, there was a single joke they didn't like (a joke that was insensitive to, and at the expense of, fat people), they "had no interest in" the rest of the series. Now obviously, people can choose to watch whatever the hell they want. But I found it curious that this post came from a person who, every day, argues that people need to seek out information that conflicts with what they've been taught, and that they need to be more respectful of alternate/new viewpoints. I really can see both sides of this.

On the one hand, we can all choose only to expose ourselves to people, things, ideas, and speech that is to our liking. For most people, watching TV is a leisure time activity and is supposed to be fun. Plenty of people watch TV and movies to escape the bullshit they see out in the world--so the last friggin thing they need is to see mean shit on their down time.
Personally, I like my viewing material to be more challenging, so I often seek out things that will make me think, feel discomfort, ponder and debate, or get really, really scared as I wonder what I'd do if what was happening to the characters was happening to me. But that's me--overall, my life is pretty easy.

On the other hand, I think it's myopic and incredibly limiting to say "I don't like something this character said, so I'm not going to expose myself to any of this material." In this case, that means missing out on the entirety of Jessica Jones, which would be a bummer for anyone who appreciates complex characters, or in-depth discussion of issues like responsibility, trauma, control, and consent. Plus, it's an awesome cast in a well-plotted show that everyone can get something out of--you know, unless they bail after Ep1.
When I say, "It's only a show," I'm not saying that what happens in fiction doesn't matter because it's just pretend. But I *am* saying that fictional characters shouldn't have the same impact as real-life people doing and saying real-life things. If they do, you might need to step back.
The characters in the TV aren't your friends. The rules of interpersonal communication do not apply. Watching a program doesn't make you complicit in the actions of the fictional characters--not even the protagonists. The Godfather is one of the greatest films ever made. Yet most of us don't leave the theatre wishing we had Luca Brasi's job. It's possible to laugh at Three's Company (for lack of a better example) without actually thinking homophobia is hilarious or that gay people deserve to be mocked or belittled.
Surely we're not so fragile that we have to scurry away from any speech we don't like, or pretend that everyone who appears in fictional media has to conform to our personal standards of morality or interpersonal communication-- or we just can't bear to look?!? Or is it a question of feeling "disrespected" by jokes? It might bear keeping in mind that TV shows and movies aren't made with any 1 audience member in mind. If they were, we'd probably know that before tuning in. Why is it so easy for some of us to be offended by people who literally don't know we exist? I'm certainly guilty of this.

It's possible that I'm assigning emotions or motivations incorrectly to behaviors I don't like. It might be that I loathe the superior air with which people say "I don't watch THAT" as if not watching something is analogous to actually doing something that helps oppressed people. Maybe it's the idea that you really can't have dramatic conflict in a world where no one has a problem with women, or men, or rich people, or poor people, or racial minorities, or religious minorities, or fat people, trans people, gay people, people with disabilities, people with mental illness, or takes issue with how people dress, how they dance, who they date, where they come from, or whether or not they can grammar.
EVERYONE sees the world through their own filters. EVERYONE judges other people for reasons seen and unseen. If you think you don't, sorry--but you're a filthy liar.
The more types of people we expose ourselves to, the more we learn about our fellow humans. Obviously, there are valid reasons not to befriend a mafioso, or a gaggle of methheads, or a pray-the-gay-away commune in real-life. But in media? One of the best steps we can take toward understanding each other is to expose ourselves to as much varied media as we can--and do our best to understand what we see viscerally--not just turning our backs on new material one rough comment in. We can do better than that. And for most of us, our lives are comfortable enough that we can safely expose ourselves to a whole helluva lot via the media at our disposal without collapsing into a quivering puddle of sobs or annoying short-lived outrage that doesn't go anywhere.

So kids, watch what you like--or don't watch. But if I may personify Television for a moment: I promise that the mean old TV-box isn't going to hurt you unless you let it. It's just a box. I promise. And if you let fear and potential discomfort keep you from exploring all the box has to offer, the least you can do is not blame it on the box.
wednes: (OMG!!!)
As most of you know, my relationship with children is complex.
There are plenty of individual children that I enjoy very much. I like talking with them, buying them presents, hanging out, watching movies--a lot of the stuff I like to do anyway is more fun to do with an enthusiastic young kid.

Also...some kids are annoying little shits. It's usually not their fault, since they always have at least one parent who's also an annoying shit. But once a kid gets to be 12 or 13, they know damn well when they're being little assholes, and they need to stop that shit if they want an invite to my home.

There's a kid living in my building now. She screams at the top of her lungs on a regular basis, and for no apparent reason. Now, I expect this to happen at home--where I might occasionally hear it from my own apartment. If this was a sometime thing, it wouldn't be that annoying. But it happens at all hours (and this is ME, of no fixed schedule saying that). She screams in the hallway, while running up and down the stairs, and just outside our bedroom window. Okay, that's "outside" and kids should probably have outside places where they can scream--but dammit, there shouldn't be a kid screaming outside my bedroom window for hours at a time.
Worst part is? She's never alone. There's always a parent with her--one that doesn't seem to think that the screaming in the hall, up and down the stairs, whenever they enter or exit the building--is a problem.

I'm certainly petty and manic enough to want to place some speakers directly outside this family's door and treat them to some German industrial music when they least expect it. But it might also be nice if there was a way to say "Shut your kid up, why don't you," and not have it sound like "You are a terrible parent, and might should try doing better before I kick your ass." I'm told that my opinions on other people's parenting can seem judgy and rude. At the same time, I think parents only get shitty about my parenting observations when they know damn well that I'm right. *snerk*
wednes: (Santa?)
Have you seen this picture?
 photo 12316143_10206744484384965_2987863546914017243_n_zpsb7sc4orq.jpg
Some lady posted it on Facebook, saying how funny it was that her kid would probably never forgive her. The pic got tons of comments of people LOLing and guffawing over how knee-slappingly hysterical it is that the kid was so angry. People are sharing it all over as if this kid's pain and feelings of betrayal are the stuff of real comedy.

Not surprisingly, it makes me sick.
Look, I get that it's common for parents to collude to tell most American kids the same dumb lie about a jolly fat guy who breaks into their house and leaves gifts. Of course, people breaking into houses isn't funny, no, not even when it happens to little MacCauley Culkin.
Kids taking things from strangers used to also be strongly cautioned against--until we figured out that most kids are kidnapped or molested by people they already know. But yeah, I do understand that Santa is a fun thing for parents to do. Ditto that "there's a doll watching you at all times," elf thing. I get that many people think "pretending" is different from lying, and that this distinction is different in every household. When your teenager "pretends" that they were studying when they were actually out getting high and having sex--I doubt that it will be seen as "hilarious" or "just part of growing up" the way the Santa lie is. Even if "every kid goes through that."

Surely, once the kid actually asks whether Santa (or the Easter bunny, tooth fairy, Jesus) is real or made-up, a parent has an obligation to tell the truth? Everyone keeps telling me it's harmless, or even a good thing for parents to lie to kids. I'm just not seeing it. Of course, I have enough issues that my own life isn't a prime example of what any parent should or should not do. But I can't get my head around why you'd lie to a kid if you don't want them to lie to you.

Let's say though, that lying to kids is fine because they're just kids and kids should just shut up and do what they're told. It's not, but let's say that it is.
Once you realize that your lie has hurt and upset your child, that they don't believe they can trust you anymore and are devastated--why the fuck would you be laughing at that?
If I understand this right, the "joke" is that Santa isn't very important and that kids will "get over it." Maybe parents have forgotten that being a kid is not easy. You're little, you can't do all the things people around you can do. You're trying to figure everything out and find your place in the world you live in. Why the hell is it FUNNY for the people who are supposed to be helping you to a) lie to you, and b) laugh at the fact that their lies have compromised your relationship? Isn't laughing at pain you caused the action of a playground bully?

To a kid, Santa is a very, very big deal. Personally, I used to wish that Santa would find my real parents who were happy and successful and really wanted me around--but I digress. Santa is as important to a kid as your marriage is to you. If you got a divorce, would it be FUNNY for your ex to post a vid of you crying? After all, you'll "get over it," right? Maybe all his buddies can laugh at how upset you are--because thinking that marriage would last was (like Santa) utterly ridiculous, right? Sheesh.
wednes: (Go Crazy?)

Been thinking a lot about online trolls. The point of trolling, when it began, was what trolls used to call "causing emotion." Essentially, the "joke" was that people got mad at stuff that wasn't real. Why wasn't it real? Because it was on the internet.
When someone says something that isn't true, you weren't supposed to call them a liar anymore, according to trolls. Sure, they said something that was knowingly false, and for the purpose of making you believe it. But it was a prank, a TROLL. And hahaha, because by believing something that a person told you--you "fell for it." Yep, you've been trolled. Even in the early days of the internets, trolling was just lying and then pretending it was a joke. You know, because advancing the idea that no human should ever trust another is side-splittingly hilarious, or something.

Later, "troll" became a catch-all phrase for assholes who spread assholery online for their own assholish reasons. Women talking about their own rape trauma--troll trots over to a women's health forum to call other members "sluts and teases." Gay chatroom for suicidal kids is trolled by trolls that say "Do it, Fag, nobody cares about you anyway!" Hahahaha--TROLLING! Isn't that funny? *eyeroll* It's the internet version of a drive-by. No accountability, no real reason for it. Just fuckery for its own sake. Aside from the fact that I don't see the humor in being shitty to strangers for no reason--I have to wonder about the mental stability of a person who thinks such a thing is clever, chuckleworthy, or even a good use of their time.
Sure, misogyny, racism, sexism, homophobia are already huge issues in society, and would be even without the internet. Duh. But this sort of trolling smacks of nihilism that asserts that communication is useless, ideas are dumb, and all the good the internet can do should be interrupted by useless dickheads so desperate to create a ripple in the virtual water that they hurl not just stones--but intense hatred, vile threats, and general evil intent. But HAHAHA! Because "trolling!"

At one point, it seemed like clever people might take trolling back. There was a movement to troll in ways that were funny, witty, and not meant to terrorize anyone, or encourage any suicides. But alas, it didn't last.

From where I'm sitting, modern trolls can be translated thusly:
--You care about something, and that is dumb.
--I said something that wasn't true and you believed me, and that is dumb.
--I don't agree with you [vulgarities, threats, insanity], and that is dumb.
--People are enjoying something--we'll see about THAT.
--People are improving a situation--we'll see about THAT.
--Something terrible has happened, but I don't care because it wasn't me.
--Actually witty trolling that isn't meant to belittle or harm anyone.

Even trolling on behalf of outright anarchy would make more sense to me than trolling with the intent of hurting strangers on purpose. You know, people who basically say, "Hey, I'm a fucking asshole. If people are upset because of a fucking asshole, that's their problem." People who think that way should probably just commit themselves to a mental institution and not come out until they're better. But they won't, because they're assholes. Maybe a fun troll would be to SWAT them, except instead of a calling SWAT, call the nice young men in their clean white coats to come and take them Awaaaaaaay (to the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time).
No, that won't happen.
But it's a beautiful dream.
wednes: (Really?)
How much more disgusted is it possible to be with one's countrymen? Every time I think I've reached maximum disgust between the Tea Party and all their nonsense, in-your-face gun activists who can't go out to dinner without packing major heat, and Donald Trump being treated as if he's actually a viable presidential candidate--I get schooled on how cowardly and terrible Americans can be.

I know plenty of Christians online and in RL--of all stripes. I know Mormons who think it's their duty to keep having more children as long as they can, even though they aren't able to support them financially. I know Baptists who were taught, and still struggle with, slut-shaming being the duty of any good parent. I know Catholics who honestly believe that using birth control is a one-way ticket to damnation. I don't agree with these things. Frankly, I doubt the veracity of those who claim to honestly adopt these beliefs as part of their worship of a purportedly benevolent god.

But here's the thing: I've been hearing for years now about how we have to do everything the bible says, lest we be immoral. Of course the people who say this don't really mean it--because they wear glasses to church, eat shrimp, don poly-cotton blends, get haircuts, etc, etc, etc. They also don't own slaves or force rape victims to marry their attackers. But hey, we have to follow at least the spirit of the bible, right? For morality? That's why we're supposed to applaud people like Cliven whatever the fuck who trespassed to graze his cattle, or Kim Davis who "took a stand" against those awful gays with all that gayness. It's because of the bible that we have to refuse to make pizzas for gay weddings or rip our kids out of scouts because the leader is gay. It's why Planned Parenthood is getting ridden out of town on a rail despite a profound and immediate need for it. Because Jesus, because bible.

But now...that war orphans, widows, displaced families are desperately seeking asylum--what do we do? "Sorry, all full. Sorry (not sorry) but none of you can come here." Shit, this cowardly bullshit is even coming from the very people who wouldn't even fucking be here if it wasn't for the US taking in refugees. I'm looking at YOU, Ted Cruz, you shrewish sack of crap. And the Anne Frank thing? It's actually true. She might still be alive now if we hadn't wanted to "stay out of it."

If you have honestly informed yourself about the Paris attacks and the overall refugee situation caused by Daesh (which was, in fact, largely caused by the good ol' US of A), and your takeaway is that they're all Muslims which means all terrorists which means GTFO? You are a monster. You aren't living by traditional Christian morality, and you sure as fuck don't believe that #AllLivesMatter despite your insistence to the contrary. As many others have said better than I: By refusing refugees, we are giving in to terrorists. We're giving them exactly what they want.

The "that's too bad, but this isn't my problem" school of foreign policy has been our ugliest export for some time. We fuck with any country that has something we want, claiming it's about 'necessary regime change' or 'exporting democracy.' But we do fuckall in countries where abominations happen all the goddamn time. Why aren't we helping oppressed Chinese workers? Or any of the other non-Paris places that have been bombed by terrorists in the last few weeks? Because we don't actually care about the people in these places. As a nation, we only care about what we can get from them.

The United States of America has the biggest, baddest, most well-funded armed forces in the world. Yet we're cowering in fear at people running for their lives from the very people we profess to hate? Are we really that lily-livered? Where are all the gun-enthusiasts who need fucking rocket launchers and semi-auto machine guns to "protect their families?" Why aren't they standing by the borders, ushering refugees in and offering to dispatch anyone who tries any terrorist shit?
No, I don't think we are entirely cowardly. But I do think we're that hateful. I think we, as a people, are absolutely callous enough to hear about refugees and think "Well who the hell told them to live in [insert godforsaken hellhole here] in the first place?" You know, the same way people say "Hey, if you didn't want to be treated like shit for 50 hours a week and still not be able to afford a doctor, why'd you choose to work at [minimum wage shithole]?"

The response to this refugee crisis is another embarrassingly ugly case of demonizing victims because it's easier to hate than to help. It's simpler to say "Hey, they brought this on themselves," than to say "Holy shit, that's awful--what can I do to help." It may be true that taking in displaced people or donating $50 won't "solve" the problem of terrorism. There will always be disgruntled assholes who think hurting people is fun and use that excuse to advance some bugfuck ideology. But what there should never be, are people who see these atrocities and say "I'd like to help, but helping might make something go badly for me, so I don't think I'll even try."

I've seen the way some of you react when your basement floods. Now imagine that your house was blown up, half your family dead, your son stolen and forced to fight for terror, and you're literally running for your life. Now imagine a bunch of comfy AF Americans sitting amid central heating, watching Netflix and eating food they can drive to the store and get without anyone shooting at them--got it? Imagine them saying that you can't stay in an empty hotel and get a cold shower and decent sleep, because they're afraid you might be the people you're actually fleeing from.
Then tell me you wouldn't fucking hate the people who did that to you.

So if you're saying that, if you're saying anything like that--stop it.
Just fucking stop.


Nov. 16th, 2015 04:51 am
wednes: (Jack Mocks)
We finally broke down Friday night and turned the heat on. Obvs, heat is expensive and less necessary than air conditioning as far as we're concerned. Being cold merely means putting on more clothes. Being hot turns our home into a nightmarish hellscape in which no work can be done.

Joke's on us though, because our heat doesn't work. Some maintenance guy came by a few weeks ago. He looked at our thermostat, did nothing, then left saying all was well. I now suspect that his job was turning on the heat to make sure it worked. No dice. No heat is not considered an emergency unless you can see your breathe while inside. Dicks.

So hopefully today one of those dickheads will come out here and fix it. Let's hope he's able to do this without fucking with my toothbrush (again).

In the mean time, I'm wearing a jacket and hat inside. That means JoJo's usual trick of scratching the shit out of me to get my attention--doesn't work. Too much coat for his little claws to manage.

Currently, the temperature reads 61 degrees, but I think it's actually colder than that. I feel like I just bit into a York peppermint patty, and am now standing on a frozen mountain top.

Also, all you people who have already posted TWD spoilers are assholes. Seriously.


Oct. 26th, 2015 06:04 pm
wednes: (Zombie B&W)
It seems we need a reminder, so here's an updated list of things. What kind of things? Well, these are things which--if you do them--make it perfectly fine to label you as an asshole. Don't want to be an asshole? Start by not doing these things.

--Post spoilers. We're all glad that you have time to watch The Walking Dead as it airs. But for people with kids, jobs, lives, can't afford cable, etc--they have to watch later. Telling everyone what happens without giving a shit about their enjoyment of the show makes you an asshole. Stop being an asshole.

--Bullshit. Making ridiculous, bullshit assertions online probably already makes you an asshole. But if you're asked for facts to back up your buffoonery and reply "Hey, I'm not gonna do your research for you," you are an asshole. Don't make absurd statements if you can't back them up with facts. And by "facts," I don't mean FOX news, Brietbart, Blaze, or any other bullshit rag. Also, you're not being a "devil's advocate," nor are you "just sayin'." Stop being an asshole.

--Make fun of someone's shitty job. Everyone needs money to live (unless you're a rich asshole or someone else is paying your way). Mocking someone for the degrading job they have, the paltry money they receive, or the horrible treatment they get from customers or bosses is NOT funny. Don't make fun of people for working--especially if you're also the kind of asshole that talks shit about people who get SNAP, disability, or unemployment. Stop being an asshole.

--Turn every discussion into extremes. Gun control does not mean "take everyone's guns away and never let anyone have them again." Pro-choice doesn't mean "taxpayer funded abortions for everyone." Saying no subject is off limits for comedy doesn't mean it'll be a celebration of racism, sexism, transphobia, etc. Everyone you don't like isn't Hitler. Everyone who disagrees with you is not "oppressive." Stop being an asshole.

--Your kids. I like kids, honestly I do. But when you let them come into my house and trash the place because you'd rather smoke my pot than watch them--you're not just being an asshole. You're teaching assholery to a new generation. Sure, dropping something is an accident--which is why the kid was told not to pick it up in the first place. No, I don't expect a small child to know better. I expect you, the fucking parent, to know better and act accordingly. Stop being an asshole.

--Borrowing shit. Not everything I own is okay for borrowing. Stop making that face. We've probably all lost shit to "borrowing," and it sucks. It may not be personal that I'm not letting you borrow a signed, numbered copy of something. But even if it is, I'm under no obligation to let anyone take my shit out of my home. Stop being an asshole about it.

--Lying. I know a lot of the same people you know. So if you're out there spewing crap about people I love (or me), we'll all find out about it eventually. I'm genuinely sorry that the giant chip on your shoulder prevents you from being honest. But if you make it my problem, you may be shocked at how thoroughly I remove you from my life. And you have yourself to blame--because you were an asshole.

--"Sorry, not sorry." Fuck you. Just fuck you. Sorry, not sorry the current "I'm not racist but..." or "I'm not a complete asshole, but..." Sorry, not sorry to be the one to break it to you--but you ARE a complete asshole. Stop it.
wednes: (Wednes Poison)
It's always a drag when I try to have a civil disagreement with feminist-activists, and have to end up explaining that no, I'm not okay with racism, I'm not cool with sexism, but I do think it's okay to tackle these subjects via humor that is not always politically correct.

It's a bigger drag when I'm accused of being "part of the problem" because I disagree that artists are morally or ethically wrong because they approach subjects in a way that leaves a few individuals offended.

Comedy is supposed to be offensive at times. That's not to say that racist, homophobic, or other hateful humor should be celebrated. But the fact that a joke might make you wince, groan, or roll your eyes isn't necessarily indicative of an amoral comedian who thinks your pain is hilarious. If you're so offended that you can't stand to hear more--by all means, turn it off. Nobody is making you watch. Feel free to shout from the rooftops how offended you are. But, if you can, let's not leap to the conclusion that anyone who would dare offend you is a terrible person who doesn't deserve an audience...or oxygen.

Nobody has to find Amy Schumer funny if they don't want to, or Lena Dunham, or Daniel Tosh, or any other funny writer. I don't like Jeff Dunham; I think Larry the Cable Guy embodies much that is wrong with America, and that the best joke Jeff Foxworthy ever told is the one where he got famous. And yet, somehow, I'm able to live my life even knowing that these celebrations of stupidity exist.

Silencing artists is not the best, second best, or 53rd best way to end oppression, or hate, to give the disenfranchised a lift, or to improve anything ever. If fighting for social justice means so much to you (and it probably should), do something tangible about it rather than just tearing down artists because you're angry that people like them even after they've offended little ol' YOU. No artist is obligated to be all things to all people. You are not entitled to a world where no one is ever offended. Even if that could exist, it would be boring to the point of madness, and would likely never evolve or move forward. Discomfort spurs us to action. Being comfortable spurs us to apathy. If we didn't have air conditioners or TVs, I bet a lot more of us would be politically and socially engaged. But that's a topic for another day.

None of this is meant to say that people shouldn't complain when they're offended. They should if they want to. And just as everyone has the right to talk about being offended, so does everyone have the right to offend. I'm sick to fucking death of those who think any hint of offensiveness is morally and/or ethically wrong. Or worse, this idea that if someone is offended, that a) the speaker shouldn't get to speak anymore, and b) the intent of the speaker "doesn't matter." If someone has misinterpreted something, of course intent matters.

In the end, I think there really are people who complain just to demonstrate how very aware they are--even though said complaining is the kind of obstinate, accusatory pompousness that doesn't lead to a discussion or to the finding of common ground. It's not helpful to anyone, and should probably just stop. But it won't. Because the people who engage in it, for all their self-righteousness and feigned empathy, won't even consider examining their own behavior.
wednes: (Default)
On a huge "She Wants Revenge" kick after the Hunger-inspired killy group sex scene in the AHSH premiere last night. Not a bad ep, but as usual, seeing everyone complain about how much they dislike the show (that they somehow keep watching in the 5th year) is equally fun. I can't imagine hate-watching a show this fun, but to each their own, I suppose.

Was delighted to see that Kevin McCarthy (no, not the good one from Invasion of the Body Snatchers and UHF and such) is no longer trying to be Speaker of the House. Seems that if you hate gays, think women are stupid, and loathe the immigrants you hire to do the shit you think is beneath you, the only thing that can make the GOP hate you is you giving up their plan. So yeah, telling everyone that Benghazi was just a long con to discredit Hillary was never going to go his way. Even though most of us knew that already. Still, it's terrifying to think that John Boehner is the lesser of many evils in that instance.

BTW, I saw a few people making jokes about Boehner's orange face and not knowing what's up with that. Kids, Boehner is an alcoholic--the sort that drinks all day. When some people drink, they get red in the face. That makes it really obvious that they're stumbling around wasted, which is still considered unbecoming of a congressman--even on the right. Hence, the orange face that makes the red accents less obvious. You're welcome.
wednes: (Colbert Well Done)
Remember a few weeks, maybe a month ago, I found out H and I weren't getting the check from our 2013 income tax refile? I was super bummed because it was my fault and we sort of needed the money? Well, the check mysteriously arrived today, over a month after it was supposed to and after we were told it wasn't coming at all.


My back is still stiff and sore and terrible. Normally I'd do some stretches while lying on the floor. But the vacuum we bought last year is already broken and H doesn't want to buy one from Craigslist. So I'm not lying on a floor that hasn't been vacuumed in a month. No, not even when I'm in pain.

That bitch from Nerdly who talked shit about me in a review (and stole one of my pics, which has since been removed) is now attempting to justify her terrible behavior. Did you know that being transexual makes you the spokesperson for every transexual? I had no idea. Fascinating, right? Too bad I'm so "disrespectful" and need to "educate" myself. *shakes head*

Honestly, is there a difference between "she revealed herself to be a biological male" and "she revealed herself to be a transgendered woman" in terms of respect or dignity? If my phrasing (the first one) was honestly disrespectful, I do want to know about it. Though I maintain that calling me out publicly while lumping me in with people who made Crying Game jokes or used the term "He/She" is right out. The review was for Penny Dreadful, which is set in a time period before terms like transgendered or transexual were used, as far as I know. I find this annoying because a) I don't think I'm an ignorant or hateful person, and b) if my verbiage is off, I want to discuss it rather than fend off an accusation--especially from a total stranger. Gah.


Aug. 25th, 2015 01:14 pm
wednes: (Sow the Seed)
Been spending less time on the internets lately.
I hate people slightly less than I usually do.

Facebook does this weird thing now where it keeps automatically switching the feed I'm reading back to the "home" feed. The Home feed has the posts of every (according to FB's weird "we're hiding tons of random posts from people you've already said you want to read, because fuck you" matrix) person who I've friended back, and all their shitty ramblings. Whereas I read from a list called "Buddies," which is people and groups I'm genuinely interested in, and haven't hidden or blocked due to the barrage of misinformed, hateful, or churchy garbage that makes my blood boil. So when I'm reading my list and suddenly come across 5 "repost if you love Jesus" memes in a row followed by some hateful shit about fat people, welfare recipients, or Obama--I know FB has switched me back.

And yes, boiling blood is a major health issue for me.
Even worse than back pain.

That said, this Ashley Madison thing is bumming me out. Specifically, the glee with which people celebrate the doxxing and even subsequent suicides of people who were doing things that are, in short, none of anyone's goddamn business. Sure, if you're lying to your partner--you're probably an asshole. Though your partner might be a worse asshole. Or you might want to keep your family together for your kids. Or you might be in a place where you had little or no choice over who you'd marry. Or you might be somewhere you could be killed for being gay or trans. Or your partner might not care if you have affairs as long as they aren't humiliated publicly over it.
In short, if you think the Ashley Madison hackers are a benevolent group of justice-seekers standing up for marital fidelity, you're fucking kidding yourselves. At best, they are jaded asshats who've been hurt by a cheater and therefore don't care who else gets hurt as they punish a few strangers for things that are--again, none of their goddamn business.
If you're defending the shits who think doxxing is funny or "justice," I hope you take a long look at the way you live. Ask yourself if you do anything you wouldn't want splashed all over the alternative internet--and eventually the regular internet. Anything strangers would be thrilled to shame you for, that could potentially hurt your spouse, children, parents, friends, jobs, or anyone else you've dared to care about. Maybe ease up on the internet lynch mobs and concentrate on living your life as best you can. And stop being such self-righteous assholes.
wednes: (OMG!!!)
I'm doing a really, super good job of not freaking the hell out even though at least 3 hatchling centipedes have come out of our bathroom faucet in the last 2 days. I dismissed the first one as a random fluke--at H's behest. That's after screeching like a little girl, obviously.

I am most displeased.
H promises that he is taking care of it, which I guess means purification by fire (my idea) will be a backup plan.

Maintenance around here is usually hardcore weaksauce. But this time something will be done or we will move the hell out of here despite our intense poverty. I'd rather stay at the friggin shelter than deal with venomous insects breeding in our goddamn water supply.

As a horror writer, this is the sort of thing I would never include in a story because it seems cartoonishly horrific. Now that I'm living it though...I might have to.
In the mean time, I'm going to continue my quest for calm.


Aug. 5th, 2015 11:01 pm
wednes: (Pot meets Kettle)
Think I'll address some of the stupidity I'm seeing on the internets here. It allows me to get it off my ample chest without having to interact with idiots. Here goes:

--If you're opposed to abortion because you're "sick of women abdicating their responsibilities" you've just admitted that you think raising a child for 18 years is a suitable punishment for the terrible crime of having sex. Go fuck yourself.

--If you think that, and don't support harsh crimes (like jail and forfeiture) for men who sire children and then are not involved fathers who support their children financially, you've just admitted that you're punishing women for sex--but not men. Go fuck yourself.

--If you think women should be forced to bring embryos or foetuses to term, but then vote for people who slash education, SNAP, WIC, oppose the ACA, or accuse mothers of being "welfare queens," you are not pro-life. You're pro-foisting-your-hangups on others. Go fuck yourself.

--No one has suggested that gun control will end all gun crimes forever. Nobody is that stupid. If you have reduced the gun-control argument to that, you're purposely twisting the issue. Go fuck yourself.

--Guns are not a magical amulet that prevents harm from befalling you--which I'm sorry to say that people have essentially said to me. "I need guns, because only guns can defend blah blah blah." Statistically, having a gun makes you more likely to be shot...either by yourself or someone in your household. Still want one--be my guest. But let's not pretend that those who prefer not to are asking to have violence done to them.

--Guns can and do go off when dropped. Sorry gun fans, there are many documented cases. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but drop safety standards only apply to handguns anyway. Most rifles, shotguns, and the like are not subject to drop-tests as a matter of law.

--Jade Helm 15 is not a plot by the government to take over the South and institute martial law. But even if it were--aren't a lot of you pro-fire-power types longing for martial law anyway?

--Even if Jade Helm 15 was a plot to take over the south, you and a couple of buddies in camo pants aren't going to stop the US Army Special Forces, the Navy Seals, or any other specialized military group. You're kidding yourselves.

--Hitting your kid out of anger is indeed abusive. It's not "discipline" because it doesn't teach anything except 'watch out or you'll get hit again'. Discipline is teaching someone what acceptable behavior is. Hitting is punishment, which some do think is a valid parenting option, but it doesn't teach anyone a goddamn thing--except maybe "one or more of my parents is violent and unstable." Not sure if what you're doing to a kid is abuse? Ask yourself, "Would I do this to an adult in a public place? If I did, could I be arrested?" If you answered No to the first question and/or Yes to the second--that's abuse.

Wow, I feel so much better now.
wednes: (Handfasting)
I live a life rich in anxiety, which is not a surprise to anyone who knows me. My main way of dealing with anxiety is to stay the hell at home and not go out into the big, scary world unless I have to. So if you've seen me socially outside my home--that means that I probably love the hell out of you. It also means that if I've inexplicably dashed away from a planned gathering, that it has nothing to do with you.

Anxiety. One of the things I'm most anxious about is that something bad will happen to H. He walks a long way to take the bus to work, and has been hassled by cops as to why he is out at night, where he's going, etc. I used to stand outside the video store where I worked waiting for cabs for upwards of an hour without incident--but when H was waiting with me we'd be questioned regularly. We were even pulled over in a cab once.

So, I occasionally call H at work, just to say Hey and to quell my anxiety. I'm aware that this is lame, and could be perceived as needy and controlling. H is cool with it.

Last week, I called H after waking up from a dream that he was shot in a robbery at his work. Not out of the question--especially since he's there alone during the overnight shift. So yeah, I called just to make myself feel better. The phone rang and rang, but he didn't answer. Doing my best to stay calm, I waited three minutes and then called back. Again, no answer.

I wanted to call the cops, explain the situation (leaving out the dream and some of my own ridiculousness) and just ask them to check in and make sure everything was okay. But I didn't.
See, H is a black guy who stands over 6 feet tall. Statistically, this is the scariest type of person in America. I then envisioned multiple circumstances by which H could be "accidentally" shot by "helpful" cops who thought he was robbing the place. This week, we learned that some cops think it's okay to beat the shit out of people for being "arrogant," or not properly kissing the asses of cops as they hassle us. If anything bad happened to H because I asked the cops for help, I couldn't live with myself. Seriously. I'd have to be hospitalized to prevent my own suicide after something like that. No lie.

It occurs to me how incredibly fucked up it is that I should be afraid to call the cops, because it seems that being helped and being killed or beaten are roughly equally likely in some circumstances. People like to pretend that the cops only kill people who are criminals, or who are threatening their lives. But we know better now. The proliferation of cameras on phones, on dashes, or in businesses have clearly proven that you can be standing around near a slice of pizza, making a minor traffic error, or just walking down the street and be murdered for the crime of looking scary, making someone uncomfortable, or standing up for your own dignity.

Nutzo police are not the norm in Ann Arbor. But they did murder a mentally ill woman last summer when a relative called the cops to help calm her down. Apparently 2 (or 3, I forget now) grown men couldn't take down a mentally ill woman with a kitchen knife in any other way except shooting her in the head. So yeah, why take chances?

No point to this story, I guess.
H was actually vacuuming the floor and didn't hear the phone ring.
He was fine...probably because I didn't call the cops for help after all.
wednes: (Heart Horror)
 photo Screen Shot 2015-07-17 at 12.28.12 PM_zpsdds3ryh7.png

Good ol' Maude. If you know her in RL, tell her from me that she's awesome.
wednes: (Really?)
So, I got a reply from Facebook while I was sleeping.

FB Dicketry photo FB Dicketry_zpsp6bf7tni.png

Seems like that means their issues with me are over, right?
And yet, I still cannot log into my account.

I don't think I'll accept their apology for my inconvenience, since it has multiplied since the first time they called me a liar.

On the funny side, the Email makes me think of Peter Griffin watching TV:
"And then there's Maude..."
wednes: (Default)
I really wish I didn't have to use Facebook sometimes. They are such lame pains in the ass about this name business.

As you may know, they logged me out of my account last Thursday morning, telling me I had to prove to them that I was using my real name. Why they couldn't just google me, I do not know. Since I use that name on both of my own websites, plus every online account I've ever had, it seems like that would be the easiest way. But no, they gave me one week to get my documents in order.

The next day I sent them their required ID (my wedding certificate, and 2 pieces of mail from different senders--neither of which were hand written). After 6 days, I heard nothing. Suddenly today, I'm locked out again. I resent everything, and am still waiting to hear. Now not only can I not use my Facebook account--I can't use any account that I usually sign into via Facebook. So no YouTube, no commenting on various websites, all that annoying shit.

And like an idiot, I have business correspondences that happen through Facebook, so I can't do some of my regular work. I don't even know how long this bullshit will take.

Funny thing, when I was paying them for advertising, or back when I'd occasionally pay for game perks--they had no such desire to confirm my identity. Now suddenly it's some huge problem?

Keep in mind, that this is a site that says right in their TOS that they don't have the ability to keep our info safe. Yet they want a pic of my driver's license (even though I don't drive), my marriage certificate, and all this other shit? Just to prove that nobody is impersonating me? Fuck that shit, Facebook. Fuck it right in the ear.

Worst of all, they couch these intrusive requirements as a matter of safety for me, and truthiness for them. Bullshit. It's as much bullshit as when Google tells me that giving them my phone number makes me "safe" when all it really does is increase the amount of scam texts and calls I get. All this name bullshit combined with their facial recognition software makes this something downright Orwellian.

So why couldn't they look over my shit when I sent it 6 days ago? Nobody knows. You can't talk to or even Email an actual person. I have roughly a dozen bylines using this name on different sites: LJ, DW, Kinkly, ZZN, Associated Content, Geekbinge, Puckermob, Articlecats, Disqus, and a few more that are eluding me at the moment, plus my own pro website, Amazon, Under the Bed, and The Horror Within, not to mention the scads and oodles of fiction I've published.

What a fucking pain in the ass.

My name is Wednesday Lee Friday, and I despise Facebook's bullshit policies.
And we have always been at war with Eurasia.
wednes: (Farnsworth/zombie jesus)
I wasn't going to weigh in on Rachel Dolezal in any sort of public way. As a white chick, I don't feel like the issue in general is any of my business. But I also don't feel like all the hate ascribed to her motives is okay. I'm hearing people say she lied to "steal a job that should have gone to a person of color," and that she, "engaged in cultural appropriation in order to obtain privilege she didn't deserve." If Black Privilege is a thing, this is the first I've heard of it. Her actions have been called "insensitive, self-aggrandizing, hateful, hurtful," and the ever-popular PC standby "problematic."

To my mind, she wanted to change her identity to distance herself from truly horrible people that, sadly, she had a biological bond with. I relate to this fully. Yet, I hear people railing on about how "She lied, SHE LIED!!! OMG, how can you let it go that she LIIIIIEEEDDD?!?!?!11/11" For fuck's sake, if any of you try to tell me that you've never lied--or even that you've never lied about anything important, I'm gonna have to tell you that you're a goddamn liar. Yes, I realize that there are racial components to her lies, and that I'm skipping right over them in this post. I'm not going to argue with anyone who thinks the racial implications of Dolezal's actions make them unforgivable. That's none of my business.

I'd like to tell you all something. Given some of your reactions to Dolezal, this may come as a shock to you (though honestly, I bet it won't).

My legal last name is NOT Friday. That's right, I "lied." When I wanted to distance myself from a family that didn't give half a fuck about my well-being, I toyed with the idea of changing my last name to Friday, legally. This was around 1997, my lowest point of mental health crisis in my adult life (though I had suicidal ideation all through high school and most of college). I finally said to my family, "I don't want to have anything to do with any of you until you can treat me with some basic goddamn courtesy and respect." I never heard from my mother, or her husband (my adoptive "father") again.

To be extra clear, this was long before I started writing "A Stabbing for Sadie," my first published book, and the first time I used the Friday name on anything substantial. I continued to use the Friday name in my personal and professional life. I legally took H's last name when I married him, but continue to use the Friday name anywhere that isn't a bank, doctor's office, tax document, or other situation where it's illegal to use a false name.

I never changed it legally. That shit is expensive. Plus, my mom paid the state to falsify my birth certificate as a kid, so I don't even have a copy of one that says what my birth name is. I was told that it's perfectly fine to use whatever name I want so long as it's not for the purpose of committing fraud.

Let me ask, how many of you feel "lied to, deceived, taken advantage of?" Who thinks I should apologize to everyone I've "misled?" Who thinks the abuse I've endured has "nothing to do with the adult" I am today? Who thinks lies are NOT an integral part of growing up with a mentally ill parent with no clue about their own mental illness? If you really don't understand why abused children lie, and why the habit of lying is so hard to break--hit me up. I'll be happy to explain it to you--that is, if you think you can trust a liar like me.

God dammit

May. 11th, 2015 07:53 am
wednes: (Carrie & Mom)
I fucking hate Mother's Day.
I hate it.

And I hate it even worse when...
dammit, I can't even...

I'm fine now.
But it's just such a difficult goddamn day.

To be angry on top of it is almost too damn much.
Seriously. --the fuck.

And you know what's weird?
Mad Men was actually more depressing than Game of Thrones.
Isn't that weird?
PS. Don't fall for it, Trudy.
wednes: (Eclipse)
The news is making me hate everyone right now.
wednes: (Vyv ;-()
It appears that Trevor Noah is the latest comedian to face a shitstorm on the Twitters. Now that he's been announced as Jon Stewart's replacement on TDS, bloggers have taken the time to go through his previous years of tweets, searching for things to be outraged about. Of course, they found a few. Among other things, he made some fat jokes. I don't approve. But you know, Jon Stewart appeared on TDS in a fat suit and there was no steamrolling Twitter army calling for him to be fired for it.

As someone who often finds herself defending people like Seth MacFarlane or Lena Dunham, I have to say "What the fuck, Internets?" Are we really so lazy that we have to decide the totality of a person based on a single <140 character sentence? OMG, someone made a joke I don't immediately think is funny--let's get them fired! This has happened to a few people, and had been attempted many other times. Really? We really think if someone says something we don't like--that they should lose their livelihood? That sounds like the mindset of a petulant asshat resentful of the fact that people are legally allowed to disagree with them.

When Obama first got elected, I talked a lot about how people didn't "get" him because he speaks in paragraphs rather than slogans and zingers. Now that everybody and the Nerdist's mother is on Twitter, this problem has gotten much, much worse. It seems that people are so willing and ready to declare people as Hateful for using the wrong word, for a joke that falls flat, for anything outside the party line. Sadly, social progressives are just as likely to form these mobs as conservatives are--and just as likely to cloak themselves in self-righteousness while doing so.

Sorry, but if you really want to be a tolerant person, you can't lash out at everyone and everything who thinks differently than you do. If you don't like someone's joke, maybe complain a bit and then watch something else. Or consider making it a teaching moment. Assume that terrible statements are made out of ignorance, rather than hate. If it turns out to be hate after all, disengage. If you're only tolerant of shit you already like, you're not being tolerant at all.

To paraphrase Jurassic Park: The Internet is one of the most powerful forces on Earth, and people wield it like a kid who's found his dad's gun.
Sure, Twitter et al can be a force for change. That doesn't mean it has to be a hammer used by virtual lynch mobs to terrorize anyone who dares say something we don't agree with. No. not even if they're hateful. Not even if they're wrong, stupid, or think bad thoughts. No one should be threatened, doxxed, or have their web pages hacked for the terrible crime of being an idiot, or even an asshole. People don't deserve to be fired for things they say in private--even appalling things. That's one of the reasons I don't support Hate Crimes legislation. I prefer that we punish people for their actions, not their thoughts.
wednes: (Diamonds)
Still looking for work, and have a few leads.

Got hipped to a gig writing short SEO articles for a company servicing a variety of clients. Got approved right away, and found that for a chance to earn $8, all I'd have to do is:
--Research an entire industry to get a baseline of what that industry is, how the competition works, and why businesses or citizens totally need this.
--Research the types of articles this client likes, and what they don't.
--Write an article of about 400 words that is unlike anything they've received before, or like anything their competitors are doing.
--Learn the silly, non-intuitive interface that doesn't allow me to write with a real goddamn word processor and then cut/paste.
--Make edits to "fix" things the client forgot to mention they want/don't want.
If, after all that, the article gets accepted, I make $8 that I can get paid after I make enough $8's to achieve the minimum payout of $100.
Seriously? People actually work like that? And you can't just research one industry and write about it, because you can only submit one article to a client at a time.

Guess I didn't realize how lucky I was writing 4-12 articles per month for the same client who pays five cents a word and requires only minimal research after the baseline. Oh, to still have that terrible wallpaper client!!!

Was invited to write Marvel articles I am in no way qualified to write, because I stopped reading comic books in the 90's and only watch Marvel stuff now.

Was invited to appear on HuffPo live again. Declined. Not only do I have no interest in doing TV or vids (after that bullshit appearance on Thom Hartmann show), but HuffPo runs ads for fracking, and can therefore kiss my ass.

Was invited to do ghostwriting for eBooks. That's where you write an entire goddamn book, and someone else takes credit for it after giving you a minimum payment. The icing on that cake was that they wanted me to write diet books "because you know so much about them." Yeah, that's how I found out that they were bullshit.

Question: What kind of tablet is best for word processing, editing, and the like? I probably won't be typing drafts on it, but will want to do editing that way. I want to hear from people who actually do this. Is 7" too small? It seems like it would be. Is the Kindle fire fast and responsive enough for this? I need the wisdom of the experienced before I buy one.

With the extra time I've had on my hands, I've watched a few things:
Spiders (2013) Meh. This had better production values than I was expecting, and was pretty scary in parts. Ultimately though, the writing was lacking.
The Host (2012) Been meaning to watch this forever. Pretty good, but not great.
House of Cards (2013-present) Holy shit, this was awesome. I don't think I'd ever seen a Kevin Spacey sex scene before. Also, Princess Buttercup turned into a terrible person (except during the last moment of S3--WOW!!)
Dead Snow (2010) & Dead Snow 2 (2014). Enormous, tremendous fun.
Attack on Titan: Wow, this was gruesome as shit. Loved it.

Still reviewing Bates Motel, and it's still badass. Penny Dreadful and Game of Thrones are both coming up. Can you believe I almost ditched reviewing GoT so I'd have more time for Puckermob (those fuckers!). SO glad I procrastinated on that.
wednes: (The Horror Within)
Whelp, we didn't make our funding goal. I seem to have dramatically overestimated my own visibility and esteem in the horror community. So, we won't be having a print mag where we pay pro rates any time soon.


But you know, that doesn't mean we're all washed up. We have a sweet masthead, a cool logo, and a staff who seems to want to keep it going. I'm pondering doing a quarterly digital antho, or maybe running The Horror Within as a website (one of our feature writers came up with that idea). This is something we can probably afford if any one of the many gigs I'm working toward pans out. We can certainly post regular features a few times a month, and maybe showcase some novel chapters and reprint fiction that deserves more notice. And we can have a newsletter so people can sign up if they want. Our main expense there would be paying someone to build the Wordpress site. I already have hosting and stuff.

In the mean time, I'm working on getting some out of print lit back on sale. And yeah, I did pick out an unfinished manuscript that totally deserves to see the light of day. Who knows, maybe I'll actually finish the Millicent Mixter draft while I'm about it.

Even though this turns out to be a fail, I'm not feeling like a failure because of it. If you read my self-indulgent rantings often--you'll know that this is kind of a big deal.
wednes: (Homer/Stones)
Turned on the Daily Show tonight as I have for years--even when it involved some blonde guy and ended with Five Questions. The last time I watched, Jon confirmed the internet declarations (which I fervently hopes were merely rumors) that he is leaving TDS to do something he probably thinks is more important--though nobody seems to know what that is. Tonight, Jon jokingly asked "Did I die?" This was in response to the internet's reaction to his tragic announcement.

I realize that famous people owe us nothing. As Bart Simpson would say: They've given us countless hours of entertainment for free--so if anything, we owe them. But this isn't really about who owes who what. We can all agree that JS and TDS have given us much, while we offer little but ratings, adoration, and occasional internet mockery.

So what is it about?
Not to put too fine a point on it, but we need Jon Stewart. We need TDS to keep doing what it does. Less than 3 months after Colbert left us forever, we are terrified of what will happen without it.

Now I'm gonna speak directly to Jon Stewart, even though I don't know him and have never met him.


I've been watching you on TV since you were covering Mtv Spring Break as if it were actual news. I rejoiced with you when you got your first show, and sad when you lost it. I rejoiced again when you got your next show--sad and angry when you lost it. Every time you were in a movie--I paid good money to see it. Hell, I own a DVD of Death to Smoochy and am not remotely ashamed.

We Americans feel powerless in today's world. We work hard but barely scrape by. We hear all about how if we're not rich, it can only be because we're lazy. If we don't want Christianity foisted on us everywhere we turn, it's because we hate Jesus. If we don't support endless wars, we must love terrorism. Poor people, and the ever-shrinking middle class constantly hear that it's all our fault--for supporting the wrong candidate, for not having any guns, for not listening to nutjobs like Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney or John McCain (who actually used to seem sane to me). We don't have a voice, not really. OWS protestors were beaten and arrested despite committing no crimes. Unarmed citizens are gunned down by cops who aren't consequenced--or even facing trial. We post about it, argue about it online, we try in vain to convince older relatives that No, the days of lynchings and rampant sexual harassment weren't "the good ole days." But we don't feel heard.

Then we turn on The Daily Show, where a guy (You) we've known since high school tells us that yes--we're being lied to. We're getting hosed by a system that doesn't give a shit about us. Bad people have great lives thanks to the work we do, the taxes we pay, the things we buy (often because we can't afford real/good stuff). You help us laugh at the horrible things we must endure--and laughter is often the most powerful coping tool we have. You help us remember that our problems aren't all new--that people before us have survived, overcome--even thrived. TDS gives us more hope than Barack Obama and the Avengers 2 trailer put together.

In many ways, TDS speaks for us--people who read, who understand nuance, who prefer paragraphs to slogans. The difference between you and us is that you're "In" and we're wherever the hell we are. If we are the people, the future, the trees if you will. That makes you the Lorax. You speak for us because in the grand scheme of things, we might as well have no tongues.

And now you're leaving.

Honestly, nobody wants to make you feel bad or guilty or wrong for making this choice. We really do love and respect you, and want you to have a happy life with your family. But we're frightened. Not just of change, but of what will happen without you in the next election cycle. Who will hold people accountable? Who will demonstrate the foolishness, expose the chicanery, or help mitigate the ruthless lie machine we endure every election? I know we say this every time--but 2016 is gonna be a nasty one. We're afraid of what will happen, and how we will cope with it, if you are not doing what you do so well.

I hope that makes our collective response a little easier to understand.

--Wednes (a lifelong fan)

PS: Jon, if you respond, you better be nice. My review DVD of Rosewater is going to be here this week.
wednes: (Vyv ;-()
I've been thinking a lot about cops lately, and the problems many of us have with them. Aside from the multiple unpunished murders of unarmed civilians, I learned recently that in many places, cops are legally allowed to have sex with prostitutes before arresting them. This is, I am told, done in the name of "gathering evidence." When you read the article, you'll note that the cop who pointed out to the press that this is legal and "by the book" lost his job--while the one who fucks prostitutes while being paid by taxpayers did not.

Let's look at that. Prostitution is a crime. Paying a prostitute for sex is a crime. So this means it's okay for a cop to commit a crime in order to stop a "more serious" crime. How serious could the crime be if cops are legally allowed to commit it? How long does it take for a cop to find a prostitute, have sex with her, then arrest and book her for the crime of engaging in sex with him? How might that time be better allocated into things that actually help citizens?

Honestly, unless you have a spouse who cheats with pros, I defy anyone to explain to me a way in which their life has been adversely affected by prostitution. Aside from sex trafficking, abusive pimps, and other bi-products of the black market--I don't even know why prostitution is illegal in the first place.

The NYPD went on a half-assed work stoppage recently. It seems their widdle fewwings were hurt when the mayor said he has given his son tips on how not to be shot by police. This petulant tantrum of a work stoppage came in the form of--and I'm not kidding--only making arrests that were "necessary." Arrests went down 66%, leading some to conclude that well over half of all arrests made by the NYPD are total bullshit. Couple this with stop and frisk stats, and you've got a pretty ugly picture being painted. Remember, this work stoppage was intended to be a "screw you" to the mayor--and a tacit admission that the city budget relies heavily on fines levied on these bullshit "crimes" that cops have since admitted are Not Necessary.

I realize that the typical stereotype of any cop on the job more than say 5 years is that they're angry, racist, drunk, and if they're still married--that the marriage is hanging on by a thread. I bet there are things we can do to make things easier on cops that don't involve giving them a free pass to beat or kill civilians, or to get busy with hookers as part of the work day. I don't know what though. I confess, I'm ignorant of how most cops live each day. I'm also ignorant of the rules they follow in order to get the job done.

But I shouldn't be.

I think citizens should be able to get a copy of current police codes of conduct. I want to know what they're told during training, and what the specific rules of their jobs are. After all, cops are paid via tax dollars which come from citizens--even citizens who have at some point, broken a law. See, if you work, you pay taxes. That should give you a say in how you're governed and under what rules. Then we can know for sure whether using minority mug shots for target practice is something every cop supports. I bet it isn't.

Why don't we have access to a list of the rules cops are expected to follow? Some will no doubt argue that if we know the rules, criminals will find ways around them. Like maybe prostitutes will stop having sex with clients if they know one might be a cop, or something. But see, that would mean that cops rely on citizens not knowing the law in order to catch them committing crimes. How is that fair? How can there be secret laws and rules that citizens aren't aware of that can be used against us?

I'll ask again--why can't citizens have--for the asking--a copy of the rules that all police follow. Like the Freedom of Information Act, all we should have to do is ask, and we should be sent a copy of the rules governing cops in our city, county, and state. This should be current and unabridged.

What I don't know is how to go about making this happen.
Open to suggestions.
wednes: (Snakes on a Plane)

Seems I was slow on the draw with this article that I actually wrote to post someplace newsy.  I'm posting it here despite the fact that it's not the typical style for this blog.  

             I'm not ashamed to admit that I was looking forward to "The Interview," the new comedy from perennial stoners Seth Rogan and James Franco.  But I'm gonna have to make new plans for Christmas Day, since it will no longer be showing in American theatres.  Thanks Obama!  Oh, I mean Thanks Sony!

            What led up to this?  Well, "The Interview" reportedly angered North Koreans since it…you know, openly mocks their leader.  Kim Jong Un, of course, was rumored to have fed his own Uncle to wild dogs, has outlawed anyone having his name, and is generally a crazy cuckoo-pants.  He also seriously needs to fire his stylist.  Right before thanksgiving, it was believed that angry fans of "Dear Leader" hacked into Sony's most secure servers.  The hackers called themselves Guardians of Peace or "GOP."  Embarrassing exposures ranged from the new James Bond script, to tons of private Emails and some bullcrap about Alex Trebek not wanting to reshoot Jeopardy around a kid's temper tantrum.  The massive hack left Sony angry and embarrassed.  The FBI is still investigating.

            Cut to December 17th, and several major theatre chains refused to show the film after GOP released a warning that included the message: "Soon all the world will see what an awful movie Sony Pictures Entertainment has made…the world will be full of fear…remember the 11th of September 2001."  Sony has since decided to indefinitely postpone the release of "The Interview."  So I guess that means that the terrorists got exactly what they wanted.

            Theatre chains declining to show the film include Regal, AMC, Carmike, Cineplex, and Bowtie.  I imagine more would have joined this group if Sony had not decided to pull the film altogether.  The statements from the theatres and from Sony all lamented the decision, reiterated their commitment to artistic freedom, and then said that safety was the most important thing.  Odd, because usually when people talk about America, it's the freedom that takes center stage.  Would theatres or Sony Pictures be responsible for those hurt in a terrorist attack protesting "The Interview?"  Of course not.  The terrorists would be.  But Sony is responsible for giving in to those who would use fear to gain control over others. 

            In the immediate aftermath of the Sony hack, ponderings that it may have been North Korea were quickly shouted down by both Sony and the FBI.  In recent days, Gizmodo , CNN, and Kaspersky  have all asserted North Korean involvement according to their own sources.  Internet wags have wasted no time in pointing out other times American films have mocked world leaders.  Team America: World Police spoofed Kim Jong Il relentlessly, causing controversy—but nothing that delayed the film's release.  Trey Parker and Matt Stone have never been shy about ridiculing dictators from Osama Bin Laden, to Saddam Hussein, and even showing a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed back before people were routinely murdered for doing so.

            Cynics are wondering aloud whether this is all some giant publicity stunt.  I don't see how.  I also can't see how a decision that will surely lead to massive illegal pirating could possibly be helpful to Sony.  Does anybody honestly believe they'd allow the new James Bond script to be leaked to promote a Seth Rogan movie?  No offense to Mr Rogen, but I don't fucking think so. 

            Can a company truly support freedom of artistic expression if they're pulling films because people are upset by the content?  I don't see how.  Are we really a free society when humor is stifled at the behest of terrorists?  Freer than some, perhaps, but not as free as we claim to be.  I certainly hope Sony won't keep "The Interview" under wraps for much longer.  A Video-on-Demand release seems inevitable, yet no one has confirmed that anyone is even discussing it.

            To some, a stoner comedy like "The Interview" may not be vital or important enough to warrant this kind of attention.  But that's not the point.  It's also not about whether you like James Franco, think Seth Rogan has a dumb laugh, or believe that mocking people is mean.  If pioneering smut peddler Larry Flint has taught us anything, it's that every form of expression needs to be protected, even those we don't personally like—even under the threat of arrest, censure, or terrorist threat.  Otherwise, we're not protecting freedom.  We'd just be sticking up for things we already like. 


wednes: (Criminal Minds)
HBO, you are entirely too killy.
Game of Thrones isn't back until March.
So just calm the fuck down, why don't you.
Also, I wasn't actually ready for the series finale to be next week.

You are really trying my patience, HBO.
wednes: (Really?)
What do you do when you find out someone has been holding a grudge against you for months (or years even) and you don't even remember the incident they're talking about? I certainly won't deny that I can be hella sarcastic. When multiplied by the vagueness of typed correspondences, I'm sure that can come across as flippant, condescending, or even downright shitty.

This weekend, someone I only know from one social media site PM'd me to let me know they were unfriending me. Now, if I upset someone, I def want them to tell me about it. I want to make sure that there were no misunderstandings, and that whatever the issue is, that I've been clear and kind and all that there. IMO, telling someone you're unfriending them when you have no intention of discussing the issue is just lamesauce. I get it. You're taking your ball and going home for some terrible internet slight or disagreement.

I was informed by this person that I'm totally condescending (a critique that I accept for the reasons above), and that my skill with words makes me both awesome and prone to upsetting, or even hurting people. I don't doubt that this is true, and it made me pretty bummed to hear it.

But then...this person told me that they already knew I was mean and condescending because apparently they asked me to collaborate on a project with them. I have no memory of this, couldn't even narrow down when it might have happened. When I told this person I was "too busy," (they quoted me as saying exactly that) they took that to mean "I'm too good to work with you." To that, I say I dare you to knock this battery off my shoulder, by which I mean "Why don't you have a doctor look at that chip on your shoulder, seriously."

Overcompensating for abysmal self-esteem is something I'm pretty good at. So I get why some people think I have great self-image. I don't. If I did, I'd probably be much better at marketing my books. I'd also chase after big gigs instead of writing for one startup after another. (I admit, I do enjoy startups for a number of reasons) So yeah. Do I have an attitude problem? Probably. Do I come off as an asshole occasionally? I don't doubt it.
But do I go around declaring myself to be better than other people? Hells to the no. And if you ever think that's what I'm saying--for the love of Zod, tell me. Because that's some shit I want to know about.

While I'm here, True Blood finale was obscenely bad, even considering how bad the show had gotten since Season 4. My gods that was terrible. Horrible dialogue, convoluted and absurd plotting all dragged out to a ridiculous degree. Go home HBO, and make sure The Leftovers finale is better.
wednes: (Vyv ;-()
Been reading articles (and comments--oops!) about shelters for women and children. Apparently, some nobs think they're "sexist" because they only cater to women and children, when way more men are homeless blah blah blah.

For those who are blissfully ignorant as to how these shelters work, a women & children shelter with a secret location is for people who are fleeing from abuse. The secret location is so their abusers can't fucking find them, and therefore not abuse them and the children. It's emphatically NOT "a bunch of feminists who want to keep men out because they think we're all rape-happy." Though now that they bring it up, I can see why someone fleeing from abuse may not have to deal with strangers telling them how pretty they look when they cry. (I have seen this happen in a "regular" homeless shelter.)

If your #NotAllMen fixation is so keenly developed that you actually feel cheated that men aren't allowed in secret-location domestic violence shelters--my suggestion would be to keep spouting that bullshit. Once women everywhere want to smack the shit out of you, you might actually have a valid claim to stay at one of the shelters (and boy howdy, are they luxurious!) you lament.

I've mentioned before that I've given volunteer time and stuff to local shelters, both for the general homeless population, and in what we used to call "battered women's shelters." I don't tend to mention that I've actually stayed at a women's shelter, as a client, when my (now ex, obvs) boyfriend was too dangerously unstable and threatening even for me. I cannot overemphasize the fear, the feelings of failure and embarrassment, the complete and utter shame people feel when they have to turn to such a place. Wait, did I say "people," because I meant "me." I felt terrible fear, shame, humiliation, and as if I had failed everyone who ever believed in me. I can only imagine that it's 100x worse when children are involved.
In addition to that, shelter living is not sitting around all day "living off the government." People staying in any shelter are required to have, or be actively seeking (with proof) a job. They have to pitch in with cooking (try making spaghetti and salad for 50 people and tell me if it feels like work) and cleaning, and must work with a caseworker to get a safe housing plan in place. There are rules, regular drug screens, mandated counseling, and if you break those rules you have to leave no matter how dire your situation.

Women and children who need these shelters often have different needs than the homeless population at large. It is not hyperbole to say that some are fleeing for their lives. Check out the stats on how many women are killed by partners after leaving them. No, one group isn't "better" than another, nor are some "more deserving" of help than others. Every human being deserves a safe, warm place where they can sleep without fear of vermin or violence.
If you honestly have a problem with that, I'd suggest that rather than focusing on the "breaks" others get that you don't--that you take a good long look at whatever ugliness inside you makes you see victims of abuse and say "Damn, I wish I could live like those lazy bastards...seems like a sweet deal." Because while that hateful, misinformed gibberish may not make me want to hit you, it sort of makes me wish that somebody else would.
wednes: (Stabby Rage)
As many of you probably know, GRRM has give HBO the broad strokes of the A Song of Ice and Fire in case know, dies before he can finish writing it.

During Season 4, HBO decided to release a giant book spoiler on their website. I don't mean for something readers know about because they've read all the books. I mean things that haven't been put into the books yet--only hinted at. Want details? Clicky here!

With that in mind, you can imagine my dismay at the Game of Thrones spot HBO On Demand has been showing. It has Jon Snow sitting in the Iron Throne, juxtaposed with a shot of Daenerys looking all queenly. Of course, that is the dominant fan theory about how this thing is going to end. Was HBO really foolhardly enough to let that slip as well? Sure, it's possible that HBO is just playing into the fan hype. Honestly though, they aren't usually that witty about things. And in all frankness, I don't trust them anymore.
Have you seen True Blood since Alan Ball left? However much money he wanted, they should have just given it to him.
wednes: (Count Thumps Edward)
Actually, I want to talk about gun rights activists--the wacky kind.

Reasonable people can disagree on which gun regulations have the most effect, as well as on the percentage of gun owners who are careful, responsible, and compliant with the laws governing gun purchase, storage, and use. The two extremes of the gun argument seem to be "No one should have guns except soldiers and law enforcement," and "Everyone should have whatever gun they want, and carry it anyplace they want no matter what anyone else thinks."

Obviously, both of these are problematic.

The majority of outspoken gun rights activists are also socially and politically conservative. They use phrases like "take our country back," and espouse the virtues of smaller government and less regulation. Taking Our Country Back sounds inherently bigoted to me, not to mention scary. For me, I'm less unnerved by people wanting guns as I am about the reasons people cite for needing guns.
Defense and hunting are fine by me. Target practice in the middle of a city? No. Carrying large firearms (so large they must be strapped to your body and can still be easily seen from a distance) into a place where families are eating seems not just excessive, but willfully aggressive. Ever watch a movie where people rush into a space carrying huge guns? How many of them are "just exercising their rights?" I can't think of any. But yeah, if you think you need guns to take on the US government (insert Cliven Bundy comments here), our military, or your local police--you're clearly hoping for a scenario in which it's okay to shoot cops. That's a little unnerving too.

So okay, let's say you believe guns should be everywhere--schools, bars, churches, any business that's open to the public. Oh yeah, and the airports. Does this mean that we aren't even going to acknowledge the feelings of people who don't want guns around themselves, or their families? Are we really going to tell business owners that they must allow guns in their stores if they don't want them there? There are plenty of legal things people aren't allowed to do in stores. For example, I've worked several retail jobs where we did not serve any customer wearing a mask--even on Halloween. If a customer walked into a party store in a mask, they were told to remove it, or leave. Why? Because someone wearing a mask might be up to no good. Fucking is legal. Most stores don't let you fuck in them (so WHY do you have beds here, Mr Furniture store?!?) even if you're not showing anything. Taking a shit? Also legal, but try it on the pool table of your local tavern, and behold the annoyance.

What I'm wondering is if responsible gun owners are irritated at these lunatics who carry giant guns into a family restaurant and then act surprised that people respond with alarm. Seems they are. Seems that even Wayne LaPierre wants these assholes to stop acting like petulant children having a gun-fueled tantrum. So what happens now? Can we reach a consensus, or does it all just get crazier until we're literally shooting it out?

Story: When I went to Woodstock '94, the tenor was such that we could smoke pot out in the open and no one would do anything. Amazed, I raised my freak flag high and smoked as openly as I could. My friend pulled me aside and said "Wad," (people called me Wad then) "Just because you can smoke out in the open and announce every exhale, doesn't mean you have to." I looked around at all the families and random strangers, wondering if my friend was right. I didn't admit it immediately, being a dumbass 20-something. But he was. This rings the same way to me. Yeah, you can have your stupid gun. Do you really have to brandish it around in public rubbing everyone's nose in how little you care about their comfort and safety? Apparently so.

See, if you know someone has a fear of snakes and you throw a snake at them, you're an asshole. You can say it's a joke, or it's your right, or that it's legal, but you're still an inconsiderate, selfish, slightly sadistic asshole.
Don't be an asshole. Every single part of life is easier that way.
wednes: (Doctor Literally Too Stupid)
If I'm trying to be more positive, going on the internet after a polarizing news event is something best avoided. But no...I read all the stories including a transcript of that absurd manifesto. I read all through the #YesAllWoman tag on Twitter until it was hijacked by ugly haters. I fully expect all the pro-control v anti-control BS whenever there's a shooting. It often boils down to "Let's get guns out of the hands of criminals and crazy people" versus "Nobody and nothing has a right to get between me and mah gunz." I hear people fearing that someone will come take their guns away, but I've never heard anyone in authority actually say they wanted to do this.
Please correct me if I'm wrong--but there has been no restrictive gun legislation passed since Obama became president. We've done more to stop the scourge of baggy pants than that of gun violence. I don't know anyone personally who thinks no one should have guns, ever. Most people are more reasonable than that.

However, this latest massacre is more about men versus women. Or rather, who owes what to whom and what the unhappy party has a right to do when their needs aren't met. A few weeks ago, I was unfriended by someone who posted a friend-zone comic. The punchline indicated that the girl (who asked an angel for a nice guy to fall in love with) was called a bitch and told that she "friendzoned" him. I suggested that this "joke" was hateful and sexist, and was told in return that friendzoning works both ways and that it's nothing against women.

As a fat chick, I have to laugh. As a person who grew up with appallingly low self esteem, I had lots of crushes and came to think that I'd like myself better if a cool guy liked me. In my defense, I was a young stupid kid--sort of like this guy. I was also mentally ill, like this guy. But nobody ever tells guys who reject fat girls how "mean and shallow" they're being. Nor did anyone suggest that I "keep at him" or try to "wear him down" or "show him how amazing I really am."
No...I was told to lose weight, get nicer clothes, all manner of shallow shit. The point was that if men didn't like me, I was supposed to change myself rather than blaming the men. Of course, I didn't blame the men, I blamed my own perceived ugliness. But if chicks don't like a "nice" guy (never mind that nice guys aren't pro-torture and don't generally murder people in drive-bys) then they are bitches. And bitches deserve what they get. The internet aftermath and the teenage girl with a FB shooter fan page are evidence that plenty of people still have whacked views on male-female-relationships.

Like most of you, I expect a certain level of stupidity whenever I go online. What I don't expect to see are grown-ass men who say asinine things like "Men and Women have it equally bad." Speaking for myself, I literally do not know a woman who hasn't been raped, stalked, menaced, manhandled, or experienced other physical attempts to sexually control or manipulate them. I would be very surprised to learn that this is true of all men. Personally, I've been hit by several times as many men as I've actually taken a swing at.
It baffles me that there are men, even men who call themselves feminists, who honestly don't see that women have things foisted on them daily that men don't have to deal with. As a fat chick, I'm not sexually harassed often, but it's not like it doesn't happen. More often though, I'm treated as a non-entity because I have the audacity to present myself in such a way that strangers don't immediately want to fuck me at first glance. The nerve of that woman, not being sexy. Duh, being sexy is what women are FOR.

So yeah, agree or disagree about gun control, or mental illness. But to pretend that women aren't on the receiving end of a tidal wave of aggressive inappropriateness, or that we're often dismissed or laughed off when we call people out on it--? C'mon. If you really don't think that happens on a daily basis, you need to open your fucking eyes.
wednes: (Default)
Have you heard? Racism is over! Hurrah!
I heard a while back that there was no more racism, because they changed the voting laws to make it easier to pass racist (anti)voting laws...which of course no one would pass, because there's no more racism.
Except...within hours of hearing that racism was over, a bunch of racists passed a bunch of racist bills to prove how unracist they are now that there's no more racism. Get it?

In my home state of Michigan, we learned recently that no matter what happens in the rest of the country, Michigan is racism free. That's why Affirmative Action is no longer needed at U of M, which must mean that college admissions are more or less evenly split among the races, or directly proportional to the racial makeup of the applicants. Wait, what? They aren't? Gosh...who could have ever foreseen that?
Except, you know, everyone.

I admit freely that I'm not 100% on Affirmative Action. I'm not sure counting and quotas is the best way to go about achieving social justice. Despite the douchebaggery of the speaker--I do think placing more focus on class than on race makes a lot of sense. Plenty of studies exist that show that the number 1 and 2 indicators of a child's educational success are the education of the mother, and poverty.
What is it about being underfed, getting poor nutrition, and having parents who are always tired, worried, stressed, or not home at all that keeps these kids from excelling in school? They must just be lazy, amirite? *eyeroll*

Moving on, The Internets are a great thing, because they get information to The People. Social networking has been a force for social change and even political upheaval. But see, the Internets also give a voice to the most hateful sort of paranoid dickbags. Sure, free speech means avoid the comments at all costs. It means that Nazi sympathizers, holocaust deniers, pedophiles, and Glade-huffers can find kindred spirits and know they aren't alone. Free speech means everybody gets to talk, even if ultimately we have to scour every news story for hints of satire--because gag news looks and sounds so much like the preposterous REAL news that it's hard to tell them apart. Hunger strikes against gay marriage, pro-slavery cattle ranchers, and anti-black-guy basketball profiteers sound like they should be made up.
They aren't.

So...we've got an internet where anyone can say anything, and any opinion no matter how destructive or horrible can be found and read by anyone who wants to find it. No type of legal consequences for willfully spreading lies, even with the express intent to cause anger, injury, whatevs. Amid all of that, we have the impending demise of Net Neutrality. I maintain that Net Neutrality is about a lot more than who'll get the fastest Netflix streaming.

Notice how the same half-dozen people own almost all the newspapers and TV networks? How long before those same assholes are controlling the entire internet? Cutting access to sites that check facts, point out lies, or present alternate points of view? What if FOX "news" loaded in seconds but CNN (or maybe a good news network) took 3 minutes. What if we had to pay extra to get BBC news or anything outside the US?

We like to pretend we're so awesome with our technology and our freedom. We aren't. Our crushing economy is well, crushing us. Many people are using all their energy just to keep their families fed and housed while others are amassing insane amounts of wealth on our backs.
I think it's awesome that rich people tried to buy Mitt Romney an election and weren't able to. But how long is that gonna last? Our current oligarchy is far worse than if we had elected a true despot. Even Kim Jong Un doesn't want his entire country to be 99% slaves to industries who continually fight for the right to not pay a living wage.

This Conservative Cabal is clearly plotting to slowly remove the laws that protect the weak and disenfranchised. They're doing their damndest to cut education and welfare so kids will grow up sick and stupid. They abhor family planning, and while they say they don't approve of working moms--they've cleverly arranged an economy where it's damn difficult to raise kids on a single salary--and it often means going without owning a home. The Conservative Cabal fights for the right to pay paltry wages while raking in billions in profits, all the while pretending that they hire workers based on what they can afford--rather than on what they need. Then they get angry and accusatory when someone is smart or brave, or fed-up enough to call them out on it.

Girl-H's (H's sister) food stamps were taken away this week. Budget cuts. She works part-time, but can't be on her feet for more than a few minutes due to an injury she can no longer afford to treat or medicate. Her ACA application was "lost" so she had no healthcare at present. We found all that out last night. I was saving up to take H to see Godzilla but now it looks like we're going to send that money to her so she can eat. Because 'Murica & Freedumz.


Apr. 5th, 2014 08:00 pm
wednes: (Diamonds)
If there's one thing that sucks about being a freelancer, it's figuring out your taxes. I have waiting until the last minute again, thinking I could just spend a few hours with Turbo Tax and it would all be jake. No dice.

Last year, I claimed a bunch of expenses: advertising, website costs, cable and internet bill, office supplies. Plus we had plenty of medical expenses since I was still paying off the CPAP and getting prescriptions and stuff. State-wise, I was due for a phat refund. But when I told TurboTax that H was probably going to claim me, the refund vanished.

When I later learned that H did not claim me, (or any of our expenses) I was pretty bummed. I had no idea you could go back later and make changes. This year, I vowed to go back to TurboTax and amend my previous return before working on this years. But wait--in order to amend last year's return, the site said I had to download a program (some 2012 version of their site) and install it. That sounded punk as fuck, but whatever, it was a big refund and I really need a new computer.

But wait--what's this?
It seems the program is ONLY available for Windows. So now if I want to amend my return, I'd have to partition my hard drive, score a copy of Windows, and install it before I could even get started. Bullshit. I'm not doing it.

So...I made an appointment at HR Block even though they'll probably be more expensive. But if I go there, I also have to have print outs of receipts for everything. But it's all online or in a folder on my computer. So I'd have to go to Kinkos (paying for another cab) just to print everything out. It's all an enormous pain in my ass.

I complained on Turbo Tax Facebook page, since that generally gets me better results than contacting customer service (and because the comments on my page just annoyed me further), and someone said they want to help. I PM'd them, and am waiting to hear back. Like I said...annoyance!
wednes: (Zombie B&W)
I'd be willing to bet my last $5 that the chick at Terminus is a cannibal--or possibly the leader of a cannibal cabal.
That's why she's inviting people to go there. That's why she was grilling meat when they arrived. That's why she's played by Denise Crosby--because as far as I know, she's only played one non-asshatted character ever.

In other news, I'll be really happy when people stop trying to get Stephen Colbert fired. If one tweet by someone who isn't even him as convinced you that he's nothing more than a hateful bigot who deserves to have his platform taken away, I daresay that you could stand to clean your loop a bit better before turning on your TV. And if you haven't even seen the episode, kindly STFU until you do. No uninformed opinions plz.

Yes, people have a right to be offended at things they don't like. When shit offends me I usually have plenty to say about it. Nobody is being "too sensitive," IMO, and people trying to silence this woman are being just as myopic as she is.
But--not only was the tweet a reference to earlier mocking of racial insensitivity, but it wasn't even written by SC himself. Sure, people have every right to be offended, even outraged, if that's what their misunderstanding of the situation leads them to believe. That doesn't make it true, or reflective of Colbert's intentions.
A few people have explained to me that intentions don't matter if people('s feelings) are being hurt. This is where you lose me. If everyone who uses a certain word is always a certain way--aren't George Carlin and Lenny Bruce also total racists who "don't care about the pain they inflict?" If intentions don't matter, why do people want hate crime laws. NOTE: I do not support hate crimes legislation--not because I think hate crime is awesome, but because I think we should punish people for their actions, not their thoughts.

Hurt feelings necessitate an apology, and perhaps further discussion that leads to greater understanding on both sides. Trying to silence those with whom you disagree--instead of making your case and engaging in fair discussion--is just pointless posturing, just competing to be the Decider.

Maybe we could entertain the idea that we don't necessarily have to get people fired every time they do or say something we don't like. I've worked enough fast food and customer service jobs to know first-hand how much people LOVE to get others fired or reprimanded for doing something they don't like--whether it's not giving away free food undeservedly, saying a word that makes us cringe, or the terrible crime of not smiling. Wanting swift and crippling revenge against people we disagree with is petty, malicious, and an ineffective way to manage hurt or bring about social change. Do we really think all of TV would be better without Stephen Colbert? I don't see how...


Mar. 13th, 2014 10:27 am
wednes: (Pot meets Kettle)
I've had a low grade flu since the weekend. You'd think it would be gone by now. Or maybe I caught it on Monday since I spent the day with a kid. Kids are little sickness factories, especially since they spend so much time with other kids. Anyway, not feeling so hot.

Been trying to get up at a more reasonable hour, lay off that stuff I like, and just generally be less of a recluse. But people suck. I mean, I believe that people are basically good, and that if we take the time to get to know most people--we'll have more understanding and all that there. Internet-wise though, people are assholes. I got so annoyed with someone this morning I told them they had sand in their vagina. Not something I would normally do.

I've always been more of a night person than a day person, and I'm wondering if it might be because day people are jerks.

Was gonna watch Those Who Kill since I still have the first 2 eps on my DVR. Alas, it's already been pulled from the schedule. Sorry, Chloe.

Been waiting for a phone call about a job for the last hour and a half. They gave me a 1-hour window, so I'm irked that I'm still waiting. Plus, I have to call Uverse. Curious to find out why they think we should pay them $193 a month for slow internet and sub-par cable. At least Comcast has an awesome product to go with their awesomely huge rates.

The mag now has a movie reviewer and a book reviewer. Hoping to find a video game writer. You'd think it would be easy, given how many gamers I know. It's not though. *sigh*
wednes: (Stabby Rage)
Been engaging in a bunch of discussions about a new online trend. People are complaining about, of all things, Trigger Warnings. If you're not familiar, a "Trigger Warning" is a single sentence before an article, a TV show, vid, or podcast that contain subject matter known to be triggering--that is to say, can cause profound discomfort or distress to someone. TW's cover things like sexual assaults, child or animal abuse, eating disorders, abusive or hateful language--that sort of thing. Trigger Warnings are also used in the creation of "safe spaces" online (or in RL, I suppose) so people can go to a given forum or chatroom and know that certain topics won't come up or that specific types of asshattery won't be tolerated.

So yeah, there's a backlash now. Apparently, there are "too many" trigger warnings. All this compassion is getting "ridiculous," and the "whole thing has gone too far," say pundits and bloggers everywhere. I can't help but translate this as "Okay ladies, we've acknowledged your feelings, now please stop bitching about X, Y, and Z. Being respectful to your hangups is getting old, and some of your fears and issues are dumb IMO."

I very rarely bust out the "P" word, but people who don't have to give a single thought about Triggering do have a kind of Privilege. I couldn't imagine what it would be like to live a life free of anxiety or without fear of some kind of embarrassing or debilitating reaction to something. If this is your life, that's awesome for you. You should be able to develop some friggin compassion for people who were not so lucky.

I don't doubt that there are writers or publications that are overzealous about their Trigger Warnings. I agree that there are more Trigger Warnings around than there used to be. Some drivers don't know how to use their blinkers--it doesn't mean that blinkers have "gone too far." What the fuck does "gone too far" even mean anyway? Anyway, more Trigger Warnings doesn't necessarily mean they need to be curtailed. It might just mean that we're learning to care more about how our words affect others. Wouldn't that be neat?

When people complain about Trigger Warnings, one of the slippery slope fears is that it creates a fantasy world where people can hide from reality. This is so dumb, I can't imagine that people actually believe it when they say it. If you skip an article about rape, you might just forget that rape exists? Not bloody likely. Maybe you're reading the news on your break at work and just don't want to be thinking about rape for the rest of the day.

Underlying it all, I think, is a contempt for feelings by people (who should goddamn well know better) who confuse emotion for weakness. And boy, do we hate other people asking us to accommodate "weakness." I don't expect to hear that nonsense outside of FOX "news" or Dr Drew. Just as food stamps don't make people dependent on food or whatever, Trigger Warnings don't make people forget that there is bad in the world. If anything, people who appreciate and utilize Trigger Warnings know first-hand about the evils of the world, and just need (and fucking deserve, goddammit) a break from it every now and again. How about not giving them shit for it?

Ultimately, it's a single goddamn sentence. If it doesn't apply to you, by all means, scroll right on past it. I know people are in the habit of skimming most of what they read online. Why else would people send me links to my own articles saying "Saw this and thought of you..." ???
wednes: (Default)
So Harold Ramis died.

No, wait...he didn't.

Actually yeah, he did.

What the fucking hell, man? I know that troll levels on the Internets can be both plentiful and passionate about fucking with people anonymously for no damn reason. It's like an entire counter culture made up of sociopaths who lie for fun. They couldn't ALL be abused children in denial--surely some of these trolls are just assholes at heart, right?

Seriously though, some of these trolls are like yelling FIRE in a Trolls of this type make people jaded, cynical, and angry. It's the kind of shit that desensitizes us and makes people unwilling to care about others. And before anybody gives me that "People shouldn't take the internet so seriously..." or "People shouldn't believe anything/everything they hear on the Internets" shit--let me remind you that the Internets are where most people get their news, do their socializing, and even work. Whether or not you think that's a good thing or a bad thing--people shouldn't be fucking around with that for "fun." If you think upsetting complete strangers with made-up bullshit is fun--get thee to a psychiatrist poste haste! Seriously.

Entire websites that are nothing but troll? Who thinks it's a good idea to build, fund, and maintain such a thing? What kind of sick mind thinks posting nothing but deceitful clickbait is a good use of time and energy?!? I really don't understand the mindset behind this sort of thing...other than general sociopathy. Really--what the fuck is wrong with people.

I have fucking had it with this shit.
wednes: (Doctor Literally Too Stupid)
Hey Internets, I see enough of this crap around that I'm just gonna correct everyone at once.

1. It's possible to drive a Prius and not be gay, a wimp, a liberal, or a self-righteous asshole. Also, judging someone by their car makes you lazy and dumb.

2. Chris Christie's biggest and most mockable problem isn't his weight. It's that he's another GOP asshole who doesn't give a rat's ass about the poor, and thinks "the gays" don't deserve "special rights."

3. Obama didn't lie about people keeping their old plans. What he was saying is that there's nothing in Obamacare that forces people to vacate their own plans, providers, or doctors.
Follow Up: Why are so many people upset about not having a shitty plan anymore?

4. Nobody is staging a "war" on Christmas. We're still having Christmas. We always have it. You can still camp out for shitty presents at the lowest price, greet people however the hell you want, and drink spiked eggnog to your hearts content all while pretending you live like Jesus.

5. There are not "plenty of reasons" it's okay to shoot someone for knocking on your door. That said, if everyone did that, there might be a lot less religious zealots bothering people at home.

6. Mom and Pop stores are just as capable of racism, homophobia, and shitty treatment of employees as big stores.

7. Expecting a reasonable amount of dignity and respect on the job is not "whiny pussy crybaby crap" even if the job pays disproportionately well.

8. It's none of your business how many children other people have.
wednes: (Wednes Logo)
My website is revamped.
I think it's nice.


In other news, I'm beyond stressed at how hard it is to convert my beautiful magazine layouts to epubs and mobi. Apparently, Adobe thinks a Page Break command would make exporting far too easy.
Hell, I'd pay their stupid monthly fee if it meant I could just tell it where to break the page by drawing a line with the stupid arrow.



Oct. 25th, 2013 10:36 pm
wednes: (Wednes Logo)
I am told that my new website will be Up and Atom on Saturday, which is tomorrow. It's a Wordpress site, which is the same kind of site roughly 3/4 of the writers I know have. Except this one will be about good ol' me.
You'll be able to find it the same place as ever:

In addition to hyping the books, it will feature the old podcast eps, the comics I did for Resilient Brainforest, and the various mags and anthologies I may be found in. Then it will talk about the mag, the audiobooks, and all that there.

I'm starting a newsgroup where I'll send out a weekly (or so, I've not decided yet) bulletin rounding up all the places I've been online that week. So it will include my Kinkly articles and GeekBinge stuff, as well as anyplace I've been interviewed or featured. If I do anything else for ZZN, I'll include that as well.
So it'll be crazy comprehensive and informative for anyone with an interest in me and what I've been up to.

NaNoWriMo starts soon. I've carved out some time so I can work on my SyFy script, which I'm pretty excited about getting done. It might also be fun to see how badly it can be fucked up by a terrible director and some godawful acting. I really hope I get to find out.

In worse news, I'm still very far away from being able to convert mag issues to epub and mobi formats. Even worse, I'm not exactly sure how much of this is due to my computer being too old to run the current version of Nook. The mobi files so far are just a big jumble of text I can't make heads or tails of.
So dang and fie on all that.
wednes: (Static)
Big political news means that, if I remain on social media, that I'll be reminded over and over which people I went to school with/used to work with/am peripherally related to are fucking batshit insane.

I have a cousin who supported Citizens United because she honestly believes that money and speech are the same thing. That if we limit the businesses right to give unlimited money to politicians--that we're taking away their right to free speech. I...I still have no words for this, and it still happens.

I went to high school with dozens of people who think the ACA literally has death panels and that insurance companies' top concern is taking care of patients. I also went to school with lots of middle class people who think everyone on welfare (even though many of them got Free Lunch back in the day) is lazy and "refuses" to work. Honestly, how can you live in a poor city like Hazel Park and honestly think it's not possible to work and still be poor? It's fucking delusional.

This is not old news. I know this. But I hate being reminded of how many of these utter loons stumble through life with this crazy idea that no one is working as hard as them, no one deserves the same things they have, and no one deserves any help at all until utter loons like them personally vet their situation and decide that they're not "at fault." Because if you've ever made a bad decision, fuck you--starve!

Now I'm hearing how it's "Not our problem" that war widows aren't getting their death benefits, or kids aren't no longer able to eat the meager crap their parents used to be able to afford. But heaven for-fucking-fend that a monument be closed. *shakes fist* Obaaaaah-maaaaah!!!

May 2016

123456 7
891011 121314


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 27th, 2016 10:11 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios