Last year, I met a man on OKCupid. I like OKCupid, and I don't really understand the taboo against dating websites. I am a beautiful woman who has never had a problem finding men to date, but OKCupid can make things very easy. And easy is always a good thing in today's fast paced society - especially in law school.
Anyways, back to the dating/breakup story. Let's call the man Eagle because he was working for the White House at the time. Eagle and I didn't date for very long. He was very sweet, but ultimately wasn't what I was looking for.
On our - I don't know - maybe fourth date, I had already realized that although I enjoyed dating him, I didn't see him as ever being a long term option. It was Halloween, and I dressed up as a dominatrix - big surprise, I know. We went out dancing in Adam's Morgan, and it was hot and heavy on the dance floor. I drank a lot, and I was horny. We went back to my place and had sex.
Afterwards, I went out on the porch for a cigarette in my robe, and he kept me company. He said something - I can't remember exactly what - suggesting that he was a little uncomfortable with us having sex so soon.
I took affront and asked him if he was judging me for having sex with him so soon. My feminist sense was tingling with outrage. And he responded that this was absolutely not what he meant. Instead, he wanted to make sure that it had meant something. He liked me and didn't want the sex to have been meaningless.
I was dumbfounded because it took me out of right field, and I felt ever so guilty because I knew, in my heart, that I hadn't waited for very long because I truly didn't see us as having long term potential.
Perhaps, my lesson to take from this was not to be so assuming upfront and also that on occasion I too make the mistake of being careless with others' emotions. It's easy to see the many times where my girlfriends have been hurt by men who are looking more for sex than for a relationship. The media so often focuses on the ridiculous notion that men want sex and that women want relationships. I've always known this to be faulty, but society affects us all in many ways, and it's important to be aware of society's impact on even feminists.
This post was not meant to discourage women from having sex too soon. As a matter of fact I completely disagree with this notion. We should all have sex whenever the hell we feel like it. But I have found that, personally, when I meet a man who I want to seriously date I tend to wait longer to have sex.
In my mind, sex for the sake of sex and sex in a relationship can be two entirely different things. When I have sex for the sake of sex, it's all about me and my instant gratification. When I have sex for the first time in a new relationship, it's an incredibly intimate thing where I can be emotionally vulnerable.
Anyways, I'm signing off for now, but stay tuned because I'm planning on following this post up with "The Most Awkward Breakup Ever" with Eagle.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Monday, August 29, 2011
An Ending and A Beginning
Today is a very bittersweet day for me. I started this blog with an intention to chronicle a few ridiculous dating stories and some of my thoughts. However, unexpectedly, I met a boy on the metro within a month or so of getting to D.C., and I fell deeply in love. We had about 10 months of beautiful contentment and happiness, until he left for a new job in San Francisco. This morning, we said goodbye for the last time.
It wasn't everything I wanted, but dating and loving MetroBoy was something I can never regret. And yet, I saw a part of him this weekend that opened my eyes a little and told me that where he is right now is somewhere that I can't be, in more ways than one. I learned that, as much as I love him, he can't be the man I need and the man I deserve, at least not right now.
MetroBoy's not particularly introspective or self-aware, and he said that, at the end, there's been a build up of resentment for us. He couldn't think why or what was behind it, but it resulted from him being incapable of expressing his feelings. Well, for me, at the end, I thought of the beginning. I remembered our first date when we carved pumpkins and walked and talked for hours. The nights he would watch me study and bring me little things to lift up my spirits. When he took me to a midnight showing of Harry Potter at the Smithsonian imax after my last final. This Fourth of July when we set off illegal fireworks at the park and went out to watch a firework's show. I remembered the times when he was so head-over-heels in love that he did everything just to be around me.
The last month has been difficult. I've had to come to the realization that he wasn't going to step up the plate and be the man I needed him to be. And then, of course, were the difficulties of attempting to transition to being just friends. But, mostly, it's been hard counting down the days until he left and knowing that I may never see him again, or that if I do, it will never be the same.
But ending things when he left for San Francisco was the right thing to do. He simply couldn't be the man I needed him to be. And it taught me a great deal about what I want and what I don't want in a man. There was the obvious deal-breaker, which was that he never saw himself getting married and having children, but it was so much more than that. It's difficult to be with someone who, in spite of having five years on you, is entirely unaware of who he is and what he wants in life. Our relationship was lacking in communication, something neither of us are particularly good at. But more than that, MetroBoy couldn't grow up enough to deal with his own emotions, thoughts, and feelings. MetroBoy runs away from his problems because he is unable to face them. He is entirely unable to commit to something or someone fully because he lives in fear of becoming like his father. Like many fears, this fear and others control him. He avoids things for as long as he possibly can and is unable to truly appreciate anything in his life until he loses it. And because he bottles things up and is entirely unable to deal with his emotions, he can sometimes be unintentionally cruel. It was this that I had the most trouble realizing. A part of me always knew and recognized that he had a mean streak somewhere buried behind his kindness and compassion, and though I knew it, I never thought that it would be directed at me. He wasn't intentionally hurtful, but it stemmed from his avoidance and fears. Ultimately, he couldn't fight for me or for us. Coming from a broken home has left him unable to comprehend some of the most basic necessities of commitment. My biggest regret was that he couldn't be there for me when I needed him.
But loving MetroBoy was worth it. He is a good man who always made me smile. He has this understated passion and love for life and a positivity hidden, a bit, by his sarcasm and critical nature. He treated me as well as he was able, and I loved his humor, silliness, adventurousness, motivation, and intelligence.
So, saying goodbye wasn't easy or happy, but it had to happen. Besides, there are more than enough gentleman vying for my attentions. I'm not really thrilled to be back in the dating arena, but it's alright. I have another chance to find someone who I want to spend the rest of my life with. So, it's onward and upward, and who know, but hopefully I'll have some new fun and entertaining stories to add to the story of my love life. Furthermore, you never really know what will happen in life. Perhaps, as unlikely as it is, I'll someday be in San Francisco, and MetroBoy will have grown into the type of man that I need him to be.
It wasn't everything I wanted, but dating and loving MetroBoy was something I can never regret. And yet, I saw a part of him this weekend that opened my eyes a little and told me that where he is right now is somewhere that I can't be, in more ways than one. I learned that, as much as I love him, he can't be the man I need and the man I deserve, at least not right now.
MetroBoy's not particularly introspective or self-aware, and he said that, at the end, there's been a build up of resentment for us. He couldn't think why or what was behind it, but it resulted from him being incapable of expressing his feelings. Well, for me, at the end, I thought of the beginning. I remembered our first date when we carved pumpkins and walked and talked for hours. The nights he would watch me study and bring me little things to lift up my spirits. When he took me to a midnight showing of Harry Potter at the Smithsonian imax after my last final. This Fourth of July when we set off illegal fireworks at the park and went out to watch a firework's show. I remembered the times when he was so head-over-heels in love that he did everything just to be around me.
The last month has been difficult. I've had to come to the realization that he wasn't going to step up the plate and be the man I needed him to be. And then, of course, were the difficulties of attempting to transition to being just friends. But, mostly, it's been hard counting down the days until he left and knowing that I may never see him again, or that if I do, it will never be the same.
But ending things when he left for San Francisco was the right thing to do. He simply couldn't be the man I needed him to be. And it taught me a great deal about what I want and what I don't want in a man. There was the obvious deal-breaker, which was that he never saw himself getting married and having children, but it was so much more than that. It's difficult to be with someone who, in spite of having five years on you, is entirely unaware of who he is and what he wants in life. Our relationship was lacking in communication, something neither of us are particularly good at. But more than that, MetroBoy couldn't grow up enough to deal with his own emotions, thoughts, and feelings. MetroBoy runs away from his problems because he is unable to face them. He is entirely unable to commit to something or someone fully because he lives in fear of becoming like his father. Like many fears, this fear and others control him. He avoids things for as long as he possibly can and is unable to truly appreciate anything in his life until he loses it. And because he bottles things up and is entirely unable to deal with his emotions, he can sometimes be unintentionally cruel. It was this that I had the most trouble realizing. A part of me always knew and recognized that he had a mean streak somewhere buried behind his kindness and compassion, and though I knew it, I never thought that it would be directed at me. He wasn't intentionally hurtful, but it stemmed from his avoidance and fears. Ultimately, he couldn't fight for me or for us. Coming from a broken home has left him unable to comprehend some of the most basic necessities of commitment. My biggest regret was that he couldn't be there for me when I needed him.
But loving MetroBoy was worth it. He is a good man who always made me smile. He has this understated passion and love for life and a positivity hidden, a bit, by his sarcasm and critical nature. He treated me as well as he was able, and I loved his humor, silliness, adventurousness, motivation, and intelligence.
So, saying goodbye wasn't easy or happy, but it had to happen. Besides, there are more than enough gentleman vying for my attentions. I'm not really thrilled to be back in the dating arena, but it's alright. I have another chance to find someone who I want to spend the rest of my life with. So, it's onward and upward, and who know, but hopefully I'll have some new fun and entertaining stories to add to the story of my love life. Furthermore, you never really know what will happen in life. Perhaps, as unlikely as it is, I'll someday be in San Francisco, and MetroBoy will have grown into the type of man that I need him to be.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Why I regret going to law school
It's not because I don't like the law because I do. It's not because I don't like to work hard because I do (within certain limits). It's because I don't want to spend the rest of my life around a bunch of misogynist assholes.
To any woman considering a legal career,
Read the comments to AbovetheLaw for a couple months. If you can handle the disgusting, blatant sexism and racism, then maybe you'll be able to handle spending 90 hours a week, every week for the rest of your life in the company of the scum of the earth. Otherwise, do reconsider.
Sincerely,
Societal Deviant
Most recent inspiration for this post: http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/fame-brief-naomi-campbell-may-sue-cadbury%E2%80%99s-over-%E2%80%98racist%E2%80%99-ad/#disqus_thread
To any woman considering a legal career,
Read the comments to AbovetheLaw for a couple months. If you can handle the disgusting, blatant sexism and racism, then maybe you'll be able to handle spending 90 hours a week, every week for the rest of your life in the company of the scum of the earth. Otherwise, do reconsider.
Sincerely,
Societal Deviant
Most recent inspiration for this post: http://abovethelaw.com/2011/06/fame-brief-naomi-campbell-may-sue-cadbury%E2%80%99s-over-%E2%80%98racist%E2%80%99-ad/#disqus_thread
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Understanding and Enlightenment Without Judgment
I think it's interesting and a little sad that Osama Bin Ladin's death has become yet another divisive issue eliciting scorn and judgment of those who don't agree with us.
I will continue to assert that my full intentions with citing the corrected versions of the "MLK quote" were, truly, a mixture of finals insanity and annoyance at a tendency we all (including, me) have to believe things that are on facebook and continue falsities, some of them derogatory, hurtful, or blatantly sexist or racist. (If you weren't a party to my late night procrastination and sleep deprivation-induced spamming, see here.) But, I also kept feeling as there was something distasteful about the way the "MLK quote" was used, and I couldn't put my finger on why I would feel this way about something I, more or less, agreed with.
When I found out that Osama Bin Ladin was dead, rather than jubilation, I, personally felt a solemn sense of satisfaction and, perhaps, a little vindication. Because of this, I thoroughly identified with many of the similar quotes before the "MLK quote" erupted. I felt ill-at-ease and a little uncomfortable with the celebratory, back-patting response Osama's death elicited and, more so, with the over-broad, ill-supported assertions that our wars in the Middle East were winding up in response.
After a little thought, I decided that I felt this way because, the way the quote was used seemed, to me, to contain undertones of derision, judgement and condemnation.
Now, don't get me wrong, there is no way I am claiming to be any less judgmental than others. For that matter, I think that it's appropriate to judge a person's character by their actions and, perhaps, on rare occasion, even their beliefs. But judging someone's emotional response to the catching the perpetrator of an unimaginable tragedy bothers me intensely.
I've watched those I love and care for deal with tragedy in whatever way was easiest for them. I've also seen others judge them for either not being demonstrative enough in their grief, being too demonstrative and whatever other ways people come up with to judge others in an attempt to feel morally superior. I think there is something outright unkind and a little cruel in attempting to quantify, contain and control someone's demonstrations of grief.
Clearly, there is some difference between the grief of us who have been luck not to have a loved one die in 9/11 or in our wars abroad. I couldn't begin to fathom the pain and reactions I would have. Who know, but that, I would become that which I can't help but despise and begin shouting out for more war. While I think that this might be a bit of a stretch, I really can't understand what some go through. But even if I and many others are not qualified to speak of the agony of losing a loved one to terrorism or our wars, 9/11 was a strange event that touched the deepest part of many of us. It would be a lie to say that I didn't feel incredible grief and loss after 9/11 or that I don't still feel that whenever I hear of a promising youth die as a consequence, whether directly or indirectly, of terrorism.
I do think that the goals of the 99% of the expressions of distaste at the celebrations going on are to attempt to be more saint-like, Christ-like, Muhammad-like (though I will never see him being a polygamist as God's intention), God-like, or just good, in general. And I think this is an absolutely wonderful thing. I truly applaud those who work towards this every day. I just think that taking this a step further to condemning those whose reactions differ from yours (even if it does make them less like MLK or what you see God to be) is not pursuing spiritual enlightenment, but rather an self-aggrandizing gesture at moral superiority.
Besides, aren't there more productive things to disagree about and judge each other about. I mean, I don't know about you, but I still haven't seen Osama Bin Ladin's death certificate.
Anyways, I should probably get back to the final I'm going to fail in 5 hours.
I will continue to assert that my full intentions with citing the corrected versions of the "MLK quote" were, truly, a mixture of finals insanity and annoyance at a tendency we all (including, me) have to believe things that are on facebook and continue falsities, some of them derogatory, hurtful, or blatantly sexist or racist. (If you weren't a party to my late night procrastination and sleep deprivation-induced spamming, see here.) But, I also kept feeling as there was something distasteful about the way the "MLK quote" was used, and I couldn't put my finger on why I would feel this way about something I, more or less, agreed with.
When I found out that Osama Bin Ladin was dead, rather than jubilation, I, personally felt a solemn sense of satisfaction and, perhaps, a little vindication. Because of this, I thoroughly identified with many of the similar quotes before the "MLK quote" erupted. I felt ill-at-ease and a little uncomfortable with the celebratory, back-patting response Osama's death elicited and, more so, with the over-broad, ill-supported assertions that our wars in the Middle East were winding up in response.
After a little thought, I decided that I felt this way because, the way the quote was used seemed, to me, to contain undertones of derision, judgement and condemnation.
Now, don't get me wrong, there is no way I am claiming to be any less judgmental than others. For that matter, I think that it's appropriate to judge a person's character by their actions and, perhaps, on rare occasion, even their beliefs. But judging someone's emotional response to the catching the perpetrator of an unimaginable tragedy bothers me intensely.
I've watched those I love and care for deal with tragedy in whatever way was easiest for them. I've also seen others judge them for either not being demonstrative enough in their grief, being too demonstrative and whatever other ways people come up with to judge others in an attempt to feel morally superior. I think there is something outright unkind and a little cruel in attempting to quantify, contain and control someone's demonstrations of grief.
Clearly, there is some difference between the grief of us who have been luck not to have a loved one die in 9/11 or in our wars abroad. I couldn't begin to fathom the pain and reactions I would have. Who know, but that, I would become that which I can't help but despise and begin shouting out for more war. While I think that this might be a bit of a stretch, I really can't understand what some go through. But even if I and many others are not qualified to speak of the agony of losing a loved one to terrorism or our wars, 9/11 was a strange event that touched the deepest part of many of us. It would be a lie to say that I didn't feel incredible grief and loss after 9/11 or that I don't still feel that whenever I hear of a promising youth die as a consequence, whether directly or indirectly, of terrorism.
I do think that the goals of the 99% of the expressions of distaste at the celebrations going on are to attempt to be more saint-like, Christ-like, Muhammad-like (though I will never see him being a polygamist as God's intention), God-like, or just good, in general. And I think this is an absolutely wonderful thing. I truly applaud those who work towards this every day. I just think that taking this a step further to condemning those whose reactions differ from yours (even if it does make them less like MLK or what you see God to be) is not pursuing spiritual enlightenment, but rather an self-aggrandizing gesture at moral superiority.
Besides, aren't there more productive things to disagree about and judge each other about. I mean, I don't know about you, but I still haven't seen Osama Bin Ladin's death certificate.
Anyways, I should probably get back to the final I'm going to fail in 5 hours.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Sex, feminism, and sexism
So, this blog started with the intent of chronicling entertaining dating experiences in a new city. However, somehow I actually ended up in a relationship that, for the first time, I'm entirely content to be in. I've also realized that I'm not fabulous at being intentionally funny. Thus, I figured I'd start writing about things that are often on my mind and that I love thinking/writing/talking about.
This blog will now feature articles about sex, sexism and feminism and, of course, other random thoughts that pop into my head. I'm currently planning out and starting writing on a few articles, including why I am a feminist, thoughts on pornography and feminism, and my friends' and my sexual (mis)adventures.
More to come ... when my finals are over.
This blog will now feature articles about sex, sexism and feminism and, of course, other random thoughts that pop into my head. I'm currently planning out and starting writing on a few articles, including why I am a feminist, thoughts on pornography and feminism, and my friends' and my sexual (mis)adventures.
More to come ... when my finals are over.
Monday, October 25, 2010
California Propositions 2010
I am of the opinion, however egotistical, that because I've actually read the full text of the propositions, I have a pretty good idea of the way everyone should vote. =) But I can't help thinking I'm right; don't we all think that?
Read the full text of the propositions here.
Proposition 19 - Yes
Anyways, so I voted yes on Proposition 19 about making marijuana legal. Overall, I'm not a big fan of the bill itself because it makes each local government make up their own rules about marijuana's legality, but you can't have it all. I think it's somewhat absurd to allow every community to have their own laws because people won't know what they can or can't do. Plus, I think the state govt needs money more than the local government. Mostly, I voted for it as a symbol. I think that it's important to let our legislature know that we no longer believe their propaganda that pot is evil and a "gate-way drug." It's a shame that fact and medical research are approached as myth by our government. Plus, I think that legalizing and regulating drugs would help contain a great deal of the violence that has been infiltrating our society both internally and from drug cartels migrating across the borders. Not that I think legalizing marijuana will do a lot on this front because the drug trade in harder drugs will just have more people vying for jobs as scumbags. But, hopefully, it will free up our jails just a little bit and end some of the draconian harsh penalties for marijuana users. There's my say. Besides, I did go to Berkeley. Did you expect anything else?
Proposition 20 - A Shaky No
So, I read this bill and wasn't impressed. First off, the ballot lies. We already have a redistricting committee. All this bill does is remove some of the legislative oversight of the committee. While, I'm all for not having politicians redistrict, they already don't and I think that removing the oversight from an unelected body whose members are probably bought off by the richest politicians doesn't help any.
I did like that this bill had a couple wording changes making the law clearer, but overall, these minor changes weren't enough to change my mind.
However, I'm not really confident that I know a whole lot about the consequences of this bill. I just figure if I'm not sure, I'll vote no because the whole proposition system is absurd anyways. But that's another subject I could spend ages on...
Proposition 21 - Surprisingly a Strong No
I am very supportive of the main idea of this bill that is represented in its brief description. The reason I'm voting no on this is the fact that the bill also (read it) takes almost all entrance fees to state parks. I wish I could just take that part out of the bill. Then I would vote for. While, I think it's a wonderful idea in theory, in reality, I think that taking away entrance fees will only encourage obnoxious underage teen drinkers and other troublemakers to use the parks as their partying grounds and their trash cans.
Not that I'm against drinking ... actually my law school inspired alcoholism is very near and dear to my heart, but I think it's much better if people make a commitment to go (the fees at most places are already incredibly affordable) say hiking or BBQing etc. than have people stop by every time they want to party away from public places where police officers can show up anytime.
Proposition 22 - No
The fact of the matter is that most of our highway upkeep, education system, and so many other programs that everyone enjoys the use of come from the state government rather than local governments. Of course our state government has a terrible name, pretty rightly so in most situations, but, for example, our UCs need funding a heck of a lot more than local community centers that no one will ever use.
Proposition 23 - A Very Very STRONG NO
I really hope that this needs no explanation. If any of you have been in L.A. during smog season, I'm pretty sure you'll understand the necessity of keeping air pollution control laws! Besides for anyone who thinks that this may save them money, "major sources of emissions" = big businesses. But really it comes down to if you give a damn about our planet, and if you don't my opinion surely won't change that.
Proposition 24 - A Strong No
This is another bill whose description is incredibly misleading. This bill is about a particular type of tax deduction called specific net operating loss. This is a classic tax deduction allowed by the IRS, as well, and reflects deductions that individual people can take. If a person has net losses in one year, they can usually use these losses to counteract the gains they have in a following year in order to reduce their taxes for that second year. This bill takes away similar allowable deductions for corporations, including small businesses. Furthermore and very importantly, we have already almost eliminated this type of deduction which should be allowed to businesses like it is individuals. The current law already only allows specific net operating loss deductions for one year in, I think it was every three years. I don't remember exactly (I read all these bills about a week ago, so I've forgotten the details.)
From the description on the ballot, I bet this will pass, but I think it will have a tremendously negative effect on the attractiveness of California for business (and thus employment opportunities), including small businesses.
Proposition 25 - Yes
While I'm generally pretty hesitant to vote for constitutional amendments, this one seems like a necessity, particularly at the moment. I saw this fabulous article in the Wall Street Journal that made fun of the California legislature for passing massive amounts of ridiculously minor bills while it still can't agree on a budget. Besides, my mom's voting for it, and that's pretty convincing in my book.
Proposition 26 - A Strong No
This is pretty absurd. First off, it's a constitutional amendment, a fact that I wish would make people immediately skeptical. No one wants to pay taxes, but this could be disastrous. We're already in a financial crisis and Proposition 22 will probably pass preventing the state from getting money from local governments. Where do people think the money for our world-renowned universities comes from? Our highway repairs? And so much more. We need to deal with our budget deficit and, lets face it, to do that certain taxes are necessary. Otherwise, there will be a heck of a lot more people fleeing California, like me, and an ever increasing percentage of unemployment. Nothing sums up my opinion on this matter like this amazing Berkeley professor's "Letter to [his] students."
Proposition 27 - I have no idea, but possibly no
At first I wanted to vote yes on this because I'm not convinced that a redistricting committee won't become the property of the wealthy. But ... really, I think in theory a redistricting committee is a good idea, and I have absolutely no idea the effect of this. Besides, I got burnt out before I could read the full text of this bill, and reading the bill probably won't tell me anything about its possible consequences. Who know, maybe I'll resort to a coin toss on this one. Heads or tails anyone?
So, there you have it. My opinion, with the disclaimer that, in spite of wasting far too much of my ever limited studying time, I didn't delve into the propositions as much as I could have.
Read the full text of the propositions here.
Proposition 19 - Yes
Anyways, so I voted yes on Proposition 19 about making marijuana legal. Overall, I'm not a big fan of the bill itself because it makes each local government make up their own rules about marijuana's legality, but you can't have it all. I think it's somewhat absurd to allow every community to have their own laws because people won't know what they can or can't do. Plus, I think the state govt needs money more than the local government. Mostly, I voted for it as a symbol. I think that it's important to let our legislature know that we no longer believe their propaganda that pot is evil and a "gate-way drug." It's a shame that fact and medical research are approached as myth by our government. Plus, I think that legalizing and regulating drugs would help contain a great deal of the violence that has been infiltrating our society both internally and from drug cartels migrating across the borders. Not that I think legalizing marijuana will do a lot on this front because the drug trade in harder drugs will just have more people vying for jobs as scumbags. But, hopefully, it will free up our jails just a little bit and end some of the draconian harsh penalties for marijuana users. There's my say. Besides, I did go to Berkeley. Did you expect anything else?
Proposition 20 - A Shaky No
So, I read this bill and wasn't impressed. First off, the ballot lies. We already have a redistricting committee. All this bill does is remove some of the legislative oversight of the committee. While, I'm all for not having politicians redistrict, they already don't and I think that removing the oversight from an unelected body whose members are probably bought off by the richest politicians doesn't help any. I did like that this bill had a couple wording changes making the law clearer, but overall, these minor changes weren't enough to change my mind.
However, I'm not really confident that I know a whole lot about the consequences of this bill. I just figure if I'm not sure, I'll vote no because the whole proposition system is absurd anyways. But that's another subject I could spend ages on...
Proposition 21 - Surprisingly a Strong No
I am very supportive of the main idea of this bill that is represented in its brief description. The reason I'm voting no on this is the fact that the bill also (read it) takes almost all entrance fees to state parks. I wish I could just take that part out of the bill. Then I would vote for. While, I think it's a wonderful idea in theory, in reality, I think that taking away entrance fees will only encourage obnoxious underage teen drinkers and other troublemakers to use the parks as their partying grounds and their trash cans.
Proposition 22 - No
The fact of the matter is that most of our highway upkeep, education system, and so many other programs that everyone enjoys the use of come from the state government rather than local governments. Of course our state government has a terrible name, pretty rightly so in most situations, but, for example, our UCs need funding a heck of a lot more than local community centers that no one will ever use.
Proposition 23 - A Very Very STRONG NO
I really hope that this needs no explanation. If any of you have been in L.A. during smog season, I'm pretty sure you'll understand the necessity of keeping air pollution control laws! Besides for anyone who thinks that this may save them money, "major sources of emissions" = big businesses. But really it comes down to if you give a damn about our planet, and if you don't my opinion surely won't change that.
Proposition 24 - A Strong No
This is another bill whose description is incredibly misleading. This bill is about a particular type of tax deduction called specific net operating loss. This is a classic tax deduction allowed by the IRS, as well, and reflects deductions that individual people can take. If a person has net losses in one year, they can usually use these losses to counteract the gains they have in a following year in order to reduce their taxes for that second year. This bill takes away similar allowable deductions for corporations, including small businesses. Furthermore and very importantly, we have already almost eliminated this type of deduction which should be allowed to businesses like it is individuals. The current law already only allows specific net operating loss deductions for one year in, I think it was every three years. I don't remember exactly (I read all these bills about a week ago, so I've forgotten the details.)
From the description on the ballot, I bet this will pass, but I think it will have a tremendously negative effect on the attractiveness of California for business (and thus employment opportunities), including small businesses.
Proposition 25 - Yes
While I'm generally pretty hesitant to vote for constitutional amendments, this one seems like a necessity, particularly at the moment. I saw this fabulous article in the Wall Street Journal that made fun of the California legislature for passing massive amounts of ridiculously minor bills while it still can't agree on a budget. Besides, my mom's voting for it, and that's pretty convincing in my book.
Proposition 26 - A Strong No
This is pretty absurd. First off, it's a constitutional amendment, a fact that I wish would make people immediately skeptical. No one wants to pay taxes, but this could be disastrous. We're already in a financial crisis and Proposition 22 will probably pass preventing the state from getting money from local governments. Where do people think the money for our world-renowned universities comes from? Our highway repairs? And so much more. We need to deal with our budget deficit and, lets face it, to do that certain taxes are necessary. Otherwise, there will be a heck of a lot more people fleeing California, like me, and an ever increasing percentage of unemployment. Nothing sums up my opinion on this matter like this amazing Berkeley professor's "Letter to [his] students."
Proposition 27 - I have no idea, but possibly no
At first I wanted to vote yes on this because I'm not convinced that a redistricting committee won't become the property of the wealthy. But ... really, I think in theory a redistricting committee is a good idea, and I have absolutely no idea the effect of this. Besides, I got burnt out before I could read the full text of this bill, and reading the bill probably won't tell me anything about its possible consequences. Who know, maybe I'll resort to a coin toss on this one. Heads or tails anyone?
So, there you have it. My opinion, with the disclaimer that, in spite of wasting far too much of my ever limited studying time, I didn't delve into the propositions as much as I could have.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
On a Poetry Stint When I Really Should Sleep!
I find Kipling's "If" more inspiring than all the self help books in the world. I like to read this from time to time and remind me of areas where I can be more of a Woman. Hence, I've also edited the last three lines to direct the poem to a woman. My version of the last three lines follows the original.
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!
And not give way to useless fodder
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And – moreover - you’ll be a Woman, my daughter!
And – moreover - you’ll be a Woman, my daughter!
(There's not a lot that rhymes with daughter.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)