Twitter users know that if you don’t protect your account (i.e. restrict who can see the contents), any other user can see your tweets. I tweet a fair amount of news, current events, and political stuff, so it isn’t unusual that someone I don’t know will like/retweet/reply to one of my tweets or even follow me. But I can’t figure out why, yesterday afternoon, I was followed by the verified account of Toronto Blue Jays outfielder Jose Bautista.
Granted, he isn’t the most discriminating Twitter user when it comes to following people. But that doesn’t explain why he added me to the 774,000 other people whose tweets litter his timeline. Nor does it make it any less fun to be able to say that Jose Bautista follows me on Twitter.
I haven’t been this excited since I got a follow from Wayne Rogers, the (now deceased) actor-turned-investment-strategist who played Trapper John McIntyre on the M*A*S*H TV series.
It’s only day 2 of the XXXI Olympiad in Rio de Janeiro, but we already have a winner for The Den Mother’s Olympic Boyfriend of 2016.
French gymnast Samir Ait Saif gets the nod not only because he’s gorgeous, but also because this happened to him and he didn’t throw up on international television. He didn’t even yell. (WARNING: Disturbing video at the link.)
If you’re squeamish and would rather not watch the video, here’s USA Today‘s description of the incident:
Ait Said’s left leg snapped on his vault landing, the sharp crack heard throughout the arena. As he rolled over, clutching his leg just below the knee, his foot and the lower half of his shin dangled in the opposite direction of the rest of his leg.
It was not a compound fracture (in other words, the bone did not puncture the skin), but there might still be internal soft tissue damage.
The Den Mother joins many others around the world who send Ait Said heartfelt wishes for a fast and full recovery.
With the Olympics coming up, I got thinking about all the flags we’ll see in the opening ceremony, among spectators cheering on their teams, and at medal ceremonies. Did you know that the colors of the Olympic rings—blue, yellow, black, green, and red—were chosen because every national flag on the planet contains at least one of those colors. (That factoid prompted the Den Son to state that he’d love to start his own country and give it a solid purple flag. But I digress.)
It has always fascinated me how many flags resemble others in some way. There are very few—the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the former Soviet Union come to mind—that are (or were) almost universally recognized. But what about the tri-color flags? There are tons of those, some vertical stripes, some horizontal stripes, that can be confusing to those who aren’t already familiar with them.
How similar are some national flags? Let’s take a look.
Liberia, Malaysia, and the U.S.A.
Liberia, being a nation founded for the resettlement of freed American and Caribbean slaves, deliberately adopted a flag similar to that of the United States, but with very different symbolism. The Malaysian flag is unrelated to both.
Australia and New Zealand
The principle differences (though there are others) are that the Australian flag has what’s called the Commonwealth star under the union flag and an extra, smaller star in the Southern Cross.
Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Argentina
The three Central American countries’ flags are based on the the flag of the former Federal Republic of Central America, which was itself inspired by the Argentine flag.
France, Ireland, and Italy
Tricolors are abundant across the globe, as with these three European flags that all have white in the middle.
Ireland and Ivory Coast
I’m showing the Irish flag again to compare it to the flag of the Ivory Coast, which is merely a differently proportioned mirror image of the other.
Guinea and Mali
Two more vertical tricolors that also mirror each other vertically.
Indonesia, Monaco, and Poland
Yes, those really are three different flags. The only differences are the proportion and orientation.
Luxembourg and the Netherlands
And just to mix things up, here are similar flags that differ only in their shades of blue.
Costa Rica and Thailand
Some flags are virtually identical, but with colors reversed. The Costa Rican flag predates the Thai flag by almost 11 years, so somebody in Thai government was a copycat.
Cuba and Puerto Rico
Something I once learned: Don’t ever confuse these two flags when talking to a Puerto Rican.
Iceland and Norway
Iceland was governed by Norway for many centuries, so it isn’t a surprise that its flag was based on Norway’s.
Denmark, Finland, and Sweden
Like Iceland and Norway, these Scandinavian countries do love their Nordic cross. I can easily identify the Danish and Swedish flags, but for some reason the Finnish flag always stumps me.
Bahrain and Qatar
Prior to 2002, when Bahrain reduced the number of points on its flag, it looked even more like the Qatari flag.
Russia, Slovakia, and Slovenia
Then there are countries whose flags look look like someone else’s, with something new dropped onto the middle, as appears to be the case with Slovakia and Slovenia. For the record, I always get those two confused just because of their names; the flags don’t help.
Mali and Senegal
I’m pointing out Mali again to show it next to Senegal. These countries were both part of the short-lived Mali Federation, whose flag was a version of French Sudan’s, but using the colors of the Pan-Africanist movement.
Romania and Moldova
These two nations share cultural, historical, and geo-political ties, so it isn’t surprising that the Moldovan flag is based on that of Romania.
Italy and Mexico
There are no similar ties, however, between Italy and Mexico.
The Netherlands and Paraguay
Nor are there between the Netherlands and Paraguay. In fact, the latter’s flag was based on the colors of the French flag.
I could go on and on, but I got tired of downloading flag images. Can you find similarities in other national flags?
According to the United States Drought Monitor—a joint program of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the National Drought Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln— I live in an area that is currently under moderate to severe drought conditions. The portions of my lawn that lack drought-resistant grass are brown and crunchy, and the rest of it hasn’t grown much in the last month. While most of the other plantings are hanging in there, the moneywort in one of my garden beds is almost dead, which is a surprise because it’s supposed to be drought-tolerant. The plants that really thrive in these conditions are the weeds.
This afternoon, I attended a party about 50 miles to the north, in Dunstable, Massachusetts, a town just across the state line from New Hampshire. On the way to my friend’s house, I drove past the town common, which looks about how you’d expect given the lack of precipitation over the last several months:
To add insult to injury, Mother Nature has taken to teasing us. Every time the forecast calls for rain and we all breathe a collective sigh of relief because we really, really need it, the promised precipitation never comes. I’ve lost track of the number of times I have watched a large area of rain on the weather radar heading our way, only to dissipate as it approaches.
That’s all I came here to say. Thank you for letting me vent. Carry on.
Last month’s terrorist attack at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, was universally believed to have been a hate crime targeting the club’s gay patrons. At the time, it made sense; if the attacker had intended to perpetrate a garden-variety assault on a large group of people, he wouldn’t have ended up at a gay establishment purely by chance.
It turns out that assumption might have been incorrect. The FBI has found no evidence that the terrorist chose the Pulse because it catered to a gay clientele. In fact, several of the earliest reports—that the shooter was himself gay, or that he was in the closet—have not been substantiated by any evidence uncovered by law enforcement officials.
Which isn’t to say that he did not deliberately kill dozens of gay people. He just didn’t leave behind any evidence of such intentions. But as the saying goes, absence of evidence isn’t necessarily evidence of absence.
We know that Islamic terrorists, extremists, and theocrats around the world aren’t known for being gay-friendly. In at least ten Muslim countries, homosexual acts are punishable by death. In other places, private citizens who kill gays go unpunished. I’ve never heard an interpretation of Islam that was pro-gay.
In all likelihood, the Orlando killer was anti-gay in the same way that Islamic terrorists are anti-Christian, anti-Jew, and anti-Western: they see it as their duty to Allah to kill “infidels” and “kafir“.
Long-time regular readers of this blog might be aware that I have an ex-boyfriend whom I’ve never quite been able to put behind me. I learned several years back that he wasn’t able to put me behind him, either. Without going into details, he isn’t available. Nonetheless, we have maintained a very occasional communication, more or less limited to major holidays and each other’s birthdays, usually a text message, very rarely a phone call.
I told him a while back that such an arrangement wasn’t acceptable to me. I also told him that he had to be the one to end it because I did so 30 years ago and have regretted it ever since. I’ve tried to be patient while he comes to terms with what he has to do.
Yesterday was my 52nd birthday. For the first time since we reconnected in 2009, I didn’t hear from him. I can think of a few possible reasons:
- He is dead or otherwise incapacitated,
- Some other grave matter has kept him from communicating,
- He is somewhere without cell service, or
- He just decided not to call.
I pray it isn’t 1 or 2. I would understand 3. But my fear is that it’s 4. Our situation is such that I have decided not to initiate direct contact right now.
Once, he read this blog regularly. I don’t think he has for quite some time. But just in case he’s reading now, here’s a message:
LOML, don’t be this cruel. Please contact me, if only to let me know you’re OK.
One of my Facebook friends posted today about the case of the Stanford University student who was convicted of rape and got a ridiculously short sentence. The rapist’s father complained he shouldn’t get anything because he was actually a great person, except for that little rape thing that only lasted for 20 minutes. To my friend, this case proves that “rape culture is real and it’s present and if you refuse to acknowledge it, you’re perpetuating it.”
Her view isn’t uncommon. But it’s actually dangerous to women.
When I was a kid, parents taught their children to take care of themselves by not putting themselves in unsafe situations. They weren’t telling us that it would be our fault if something happened to us, they were telling us that they didn’t want something to happen to us. Be careful on the monkey bars. Don’t talk to strangers. If you’re home alone and you get a phone call, tell the caller that your parents can’t come to the phone, not that they aren’t there. It was advice intended to keep us safe from bad people.
Today’s parents give similar advice for 21st century situations, such as not posting personal information on the internet that might help predators find you. Now as then, such instruction is given because we live in a world where people do things they shouldn’t. We can’t convince them all to stop, so we make it harder for them to do those things to us and those we love. People who are more careful are less likely to be hurt by bad people.
Now imagine for a minute that a group of parents got together and decided that they weren’t going to teach their kids how to stay safe. Instead, they were going to insist that kids should be able to go online and give unknown individuals their full names, addresses, phone numbers, and youth soccer game schedules. Oh, and if you try to tell those parents that they are putting their children at risk, they protest that you’re blaming the victim and their kids shouldn’t have to be careful and if you think they should, you’re part of the problem.
Most of us, I hope, would call them out for stupidity, if not negligence. Yet we accept such attitudes from people who invoke “rape culture” as a reason for why women shouldn’t be encouraged to avoid situations that make them vulnerable to being raped.
I posted this reply to my friend:
I disagree that “rape culture” exists. There are many more thefts in this country than rapes, yet it isn’t because of “theft culture.” There are lots of homicides, but it isn’t because of “murder culture.” Same with reckless driving, kidnapping, drug dealing, and child abuse. The very fact that we have laws against these things, and that people go to jail for them (even though the sentences are sometimes lighter than we think they should be) is proof that there is no “culture,” except among the criminals.
After my house was burglarized, I didn’t defiantly refuse to lock my doors and complain that we need to teach people not to steal. I installed better locks. I wasn’t blaming myself for becoming a victim, I just took some simple steps to minimize the chance that it would happen again. That made more sense to me than waiting for the coming of an imaginary utopia in which unicorns roam freely and nobody does anything wrong.
Do you lock your doors? Not leave your pocketbook lying open at a bar while you go to the rest room? Look both ways before you cross the street? That doesn’t mean you’re perpetuating “[insert crime here] culture.” It means you’re using common sense to protect yourself from thieves and dangerous drivers. Please, please, please, use the same common sense to protect yourself from rapists.
I can only hope she takes my advice.
So I was wandering around the internet, just minding my own business, and I ran across this at the San Diego Union-Tribune site:
Study: Legos are becoming more weaponized
[…] Since the first Lego weapons came out in 1978, the percentage of sets including weapon pieces has grown from 1 percent of sets released that year to 29 percent of sets released in 2014, according to a study last month from the University of Canterbury in Christchurch.
The article has a catchy graphic showing the “percentage of individual bricks released that year that were weaponized.”
What the article’s author, someone named Kate Morrissey, meant to say is that Legos now have more pieces made to look like little Lego weapons. What she actually said is that Lego sets contain actual weapons, and that the toy blocks themselves are now being used as weapons. No, really. That’s what she said.
From Merriam-Webster online:
noun | weap·on | \ˈwe-pən\
: something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy
verb | weap·on·ize | \ˈwe-pə-ˌnīz\
: to adapt for use as a weapon of war
Such is the lack of intelligence that emerges whenever some people are confronted by anything that can in any way be construed as even slightly resembling a gun. Remember the story about the little boy who was suspended from school for nibbling a Pop Tart into a vague gun shape? Or the even littler girl who was suspended from kindergarten for having a bubble-blowing toy?
I’m all for prohibiting kids from using weapons. I also have enough common sense to know that bubble blowers and pop tarts and tiny plastic toy pieces aren’t weapons. And I’m so old that I remember when journalists knew that, too.
No really, I got a dollar in the mail today. Cash money. A 2003 $1 United States Federal Reserve Note, legal tender across this great nation and on the black markets of several lesser nations whose own currencies are next to worthless.
Now if you were raised like I was, your mama probably told you never to send cash through the mail. That’s because in the unlikely event that the envelope is lost or stolen, there is no way to stop payment or track it the way you can with a check. So naturally, I was curious about the sender whose own mama apparently didn’t care enough to give him/her the same wise advice.
The sender is some entity called Scarborough, and along with the $1 bill they sent a letter (English on one side, Spanish on the other, because evidently every other immigrant group that ever came to America doesn’t count, but don’t get me started on that), a short survey, and a postage-paid return envelope. The letter informed me that if I simply completed said survey and sent it back to them in said envelope, they would send me $5.
I’ll take scams for $1000, Alex.
A quick internet search reveals that Scarborough Research of Coral Springs, Florida, and business addresses, has been a complaint magnet for some time because of their aggressive telephone practices and refusal to honor people’s requests to stop calling. The Better Business Bureau of West Florida has handled 166 such complaints in the last 3 years, 74 of those in the last 12 months (yet it still manages to give the company an A+ rating, apparently because all those complaints were “closed,” i.e. resolved). Others have made their feelings known via web sites like Complaints.com, ReviewsTalk, and Complaints Board. A 2011 Chicago Tribune article addresses the company’s annoying practices. And that was just on the first page of search results.
Apparently, if I were to fill out this company’s survey (which includes giving them my home address and phone number), not only would I get $5, but I would also “agree that Scarborough may contact [me] about future surveys and other research opportunities.”
In other words, for the cost of a coffee and doughnut, I would be selling my right to be free of the persistent and intrusive rudeness described in all those links above. So it isn’t a scam. It’s just unethical business practice, which can feel just as bad to the victims.
Obviously, plenty of people take the bait, having no idea what they’re getting themselves into. Why else would a company send thousands of dollar bills to complete strangers (mine was addressed to “Resident”) if it didn’t get the attention of enough people to make it worth their while? And that’s not including the additional $5 for each sucker who signs up. You would think that wouldn’t be enough compensation for someone to give up his or her privacy, but the truth is that all of us give it up all the time for nothing.
- Have you ever used a web site that required you to agree to receive email solicitations as a condition of proceeding?
- Have you ever installed a smartphone app that required permission to access your contacts, calendar, or other information stored on the device?
- Have you ever signed up for a store rewards or frequent shopper program whose terms included collecting data about your shopping habits and purchase history?
Those are just three ways you forfeit your privacy, but there are many more. We go along with it because we want the benefits that come with that web site or app or rewards program. Those of us who are more careful and agree to such terms only if we believe the company to be reputable are deluding ourselves that our information is guaranteed never to be abused by them or someone else. If you don’t believe me, refresh your memory about the antics of the ironically named National Security Agency.
Is it possible to fully participate in today’s society without giving up our privacy? Probably not, unless tens of millions of people decide to stop availing themselves of 21st century conveniences that an entire generation has never lived without. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t avoid other intrusions. I’m willing to give up something for the safety and convenience of a GPS app when I’m far from home, but not for a lousy $5.
If you want to pay off my mortgage, then we’ll talk.
Geez, I leave you people alone for not even five months, and all hell breaks loose. Clearly my presence is needed. Not to mention my commentary about it all.
For those who don’t know anything about Vladimir Putin, let me clue you in: He’s an old Soviet KGB guy who masturbates to a picture of Stalin. OK, I don’t actually know about that last part, though I wouldn’t be surprised. I do know that he is philosophically much closer to most leaders of the former Soviet Union—save Gorbachev—than any Russian leader since the collapse of the old communist empire.
Thus, no one should be surprised that he has invaded what in his dreams is still called the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Sure, he insists that it isn’t really an invasion, just the action of unaffiliated rebels, because he is counting on the rest of the world not noticing that those rebels are all wearing Russian military uniforms and driving Russian military vehicles and packing Russian military-issue heat. Indeed, the only thing that should surprise anyone is that it took him this long. Make no mistake, Vlad has designs on Ukraine—and several other nations.
Take your pick on which name to use. You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to. In fact, you can call it Al Qaeda or Hezbollah or Black September for all I care. It’s yet another Islamic terrorist group with an odd affinity for killing people who don’t toe their religious/political line. Remember after the September 11 attacks, when George W. Bush and assorted celebrities tied themselves in knots to assure Muslims that we weren’t at war against Islam? It turns out that Islam, or at least a segment of it that enjoys a disturbing amount of support from Muslims around the world, was at war against us, and still is. ISIS has vowed to destroy the United States and fly their flag over the White House. All I can say to that is, over my dead body, and I mean that literally.
One aspect of the news coverage that bothers me is all the attention given to the beheadings of two American journalists. Not that those weren’t awful, but ISIS has been doing this for months, and many of their victims have been Christians, particularly children. I’ve seen a fair amount of coverage in the alternative media and a few conservative news sites, but the mainstream media has been more lax—until their own were the targets.
If media outlets give disproportionate coverage to journalists killed by terrorists, they also give disproportionate coverage to black men killed by police. Again, it isn’t that such cases shouldn’t be investigated; I’ve seen and heard enough about over-zealous cops on power trips to appreciate the possibility that the shooting of an unarmed civilian is indeed unwarranted. And in the interest of full disclosure, I was one of the people who jumped on the bandwagon denouncing the shooting death of Michael Brown in Missouri. But as is the case so often, it turns out that initial reports—and my initial reaction—might not have been entirely accurate.
I consider heavy-handedness by law enforcement to be a significant threat to liberty. At the same time, it isn’t heavy-handed for an officer who believes he or she is in danger to exercise self-defense, which is the right of civilians as well. Let’s just say that I am no longer convinced that the Ferguson officer didn’t have a legitimate reason to feel threatened. Besides, if the killing of an unarmed black man by a white police officer is by definition a big news story, then the killing of an unarmed white man by a black police officer (yes, it happens more than you would think) should be as well. That there is disparate treatment says more about the racist attitudes of the media and many observers than about alleged racism by police.
It isn’t a new idea, but the neo-feminist insistence of societal misogyny so pervasive as to indicate the widespread cultural acceptance of rape is getting a lot more attention lately. It’s bullshit. Seriously, if encouraging women to take simple steps to keep themselves safe is sexist—and the reasoning (I use the term loosely) goes that men shouldn’t rape, so women shouldn’t have to protect themselves from it, and suggesting they do is akin to blaming the victim—then it isn’t just rape that our society supposedly accepts.
I have a home security system because my house was broken into a couple of years ago and I don’t want it to happen again. But really, it wasn’t my fault that I was robbed; I should be able to feel secure in my own home. So what if I refused, as a protest against “theft culture,” even to lock my doors and windows? Or what if I failed to safeguard my personal information—social security number, online passwords, credit card numbers, and the like—as a protest against identity thieves and a statement of empowerment? I would be out of my mind, that’s what. Because in the real world in which I live, there are those who break into houses, steal people’s identities, and yes, even rape women. I can stomp my feet and bitch about it, or I can be a grown-up and protect myself against it.
And having thus vented, I feel better now. I’ll be back soon with more of the insightful opinions you have come to expect from me and have, no doubt, missed terribly.