Recommended Books (with ongoing updates)

"A Peoples' History of the United States" by Howard Zinn
"We Don't Need Another Wave: Dispatches from the Next Generation of Feminists" edited by Melody Berger
"Johnny Got His Gun" by Dalton Trumbo
"Shooting War" by Anthony Lappe
"V for Vendetta" by Alan Moore
"Minimum Security" by Stephani McMillan

As Gas Goes Up, Driving Goes Down--From CNN.com

(CNN) -- At a time when gas prices are at an all-time high, Americans have curtailed their driving at a historic rate.

Americans are not driving as much as they did a year ago as gas prices skyrocket.

The Department of Transportation said figures from March show the steepest decrease in driving ever recorded.

Compared with March a year earlier, Americans drove an estimated 4.3 percent less -- that's 11 billion fewer miles, the DOT's Federal Highway Administration said Monday, calling it "the sharpest yearly drop for any month in FHWA history." Records have been kept since 1942.

According to AAA, for the first time since 2002, Americans said they were planning to drive less over the Memorial Day weekend than they did the year before.

Tracy and Adam Crews posted on iReport that their annual Memorial Day weekend has traditionally involved camping and fishing.

"Well, due to the continual rise in gas, we felt our only recourse was to nix the idea this year and stay home" in Jacksonville, Florida, they wrote.

Instead, the couple said they "decided to camp out in the backyard. We set the tent up, just finished installing our above ground pool, and cleaned up the grill. ... We have ourselves a campsite! It's been a blast!"

Nakeisha Easterwood of Smyrna, Georgia, said with gas prices on the rise, she sometimes catches rides with friends, and doesn't drive into town more than once a day. "It's crazy," she said.

According to AAA, the national average price for a gallon of regular gas rose to a record $3.936. That compares with an average price per gallon of $3.23 last Memorial Day.

"With it being near $4 a gallon, you definitely have to drive slower and pick and choose when you're going to do it," said Steve Kahn of Roswell, Georgia, at a Memorial Day festival in Atlanta.

Some Americans have turned to public transportation. Ridership increased by 2.1 percent in 2007, in part because of rising gas prices, according to the American Public Transportation Association.

Americans took 10.3 billion trips on public transportation in 2007, the highest level in 50 years, the group said.

The Energy Information Administration says gas consumption for the first three months of 2008 is estimated to be down about 0.6 percent from the same time period in 2007.

For the summer season, gas consumption is expected to be down 0.4 percent from last year.

China & Tibet

After my Socialist meeting last Friday, we went out for drinks to "carry on the conversation". (I was really skeptical that anyone actually would continue to discuss politics...and this was one time I was pleasantly proven wrong.)

A couple of the guys brought these two girls back to the table, in what you'd think would be the standard pick-up. The one who was closer to me, that I could actually hear, was getting questioned a lot about what she thought about the political system in Sweden (which is where the two of them were from).
And then they hit her with questions about China. She argued against, & they argued for. (One of the great things was that the guys afterwards said that they knew they were taking a more extreme view for the sake of debate, & did agree with her on some points & don't believe that China should be held up as the ideal Socialist state.)

What does this have to do with me?

Just another opportunity where I feel totally ignorant of the world around me.

I've stopped reading the newspapers for what's going on because I know that it's so filtered & carefully evaluated that I feel it can barely be trusted as the truth. But that means that I'm totally in the dark about it all.

Like China & Tibet.


When I was in India, the town I lived near, there were a large number of Tibetan refugees. I remember seeing the postcards at the Cultural Fair with pictures of activists hanging a sign asking China to stop the genocide on the Tibetan people.

The whole thing sounded absolutely horrible. So I had no problem when I got the decal for "Free Tibet" to slap it immediately onto my car.

Now I kind of feel like I'm one of "those" kinds of liberals. And that makes me feel icky inside.


I did some reading. And while I know that I'm not getting the whole story, I feel like I'm getting a little more. (And if anyone had any more to let me know to help me be more educated about this subject, I'd be more than happy to hear it. Honestly.)

The issue doesn't seem to be as easy as a country that is being held against it's will by another one & is demanding autonomy. Tibet has long been a part of China. Recognized by Tibetans as part of China. It sounds like Tibet is wanting China to let Tibet preserve their cultural & religious heritage (or at that is at least the demands by the Dalai Lama).

This isn't what I'd think of when I think of "FREE (insert country here)".

Sure, there are plenty that think that China has no right to be involved in Tibet, but when is there ever a consensus on international relations anywhere?

And maybe it's just my skepticism, but just knowing that the CIA was involved with Tibet fighting China makes me pull back a bit.



I hope to learn more about the relations to cure my dreadful ignorance. But this is just a first start.

From "Taboo Tunes"

"On the ballroom floor you allow liberties to men that you never allow them elsewhere. You grant them liberties on the ballroom floor that if a man other than your husband would attempt them in your home & hour husband would find you at it, he would have no trouble securing a divorce, & if he shot the man no jury in the world would convict him for it."

~Reverend Billy Sunday, on the Tango, 1915


Also see:

From the Ballroom to Hell
The Immorality of Modern Dances
Taboo Tunes

Repulsive Item of the Day

A bumper sticker on a car that said "They had to call it PMS. 'Mad Cow Disease' was already taken."

Stupid sexist fuckers.

One Last Thing on Race

While walking to a party last night, I was thinking about perceptions of people walking at night (since as a woman I obviously pay attention to all the cars & people who walk past me just to be safe).


At some point, I realized that I would probably be more scared of a young white male offering me a ride than I would a young black male.

I thought that was interesting.

Racism & Me

For my work, we've had a 3-part training on diversity over the last few months, & I felt an obligation to write down some things I wanted to say about race...

~I can definitely say that I've become more aware of situations that I am in where the color of my skin could be working to my advantage. I do a lot of apartment searching & job interviews & I can't help but wonder if my race will help me.
(Especially I wonder if a black couple in a long-term relationship would be evaluated as if they were married in applying for an apartment. I was in both places, but I don't know if that happens for everyone.)

~I have shared about how uncomfortable I was when I walked out of an apartment building (which I had been looking at) & saw a few black men across the street from me. I don't know if the discomfort was because they were black, or because they were men.

~I have been actively been trying to learn more about the perspective(s) of black women so that I can better relate to some of my students, since I still feel very ignorant in how they're lives are shaped.

~I have been excited that many of the books we have been reading in our CADRE groups have involved African-Americans & Native Americans (& hopefully later on will include Latino/as).

~While my mother showed me the way to some avenues for understanding racism, a dialogue was never actually established.

~I became aware of White Priviledge while in India for my year abroad (with the extra restrictions placed upon me because I was White & the gained knowledge that many of the men were taught to believe that lighter skin was better). However, I don't think that I was able to transfer it as well to my life in this country until much more recently.

~I remember conversations with my friend Sarah Anderson (who is half-Japanese) on the impact of race on her life. She was disgusted with talks about affirmative action, hated that a presenter came in to talk to "all four" of the "peoples of color" by a blond-haired-blue-eyed woman, & hated the look the new drama teacher gave her when she introduced herself (with the irritation of knowing that the woman expected someone with her name to be a white female).

~I don't remember any racist comments made about Carlo when he was with my sister. I know my father would get irritated that he kept losing his job & left all the responsibility on my sister, but I think that could be because she's had bad luck with guys thus far.

~I feel uncomfortable telling people about how my sister left Carlo because he smacked her up real good (one time?) because I don't want them to assume that I'm making a statement about black men being abusive.

~After seeing my sister's child (from Carlo), I was unable to look adoringly at my other nephew. He seemed just so pasty. Julius has made if harder for me to look at white babies anymore.

~I don't remember what it was that tipped me off, but I know that I started being against Columbus Day in 5th or 6th grade because of the truth about what a bastard he really was finally came to me.

"She's All That"

Movie Anaylsis:
(rough)

This is another "make-over movie." On the plus side, both of the main characters get changed. But I still think it's stronger on her side than his. Through the story, Zack learns, essentially, to relax when it comes to making life decisions, & choose what he really wants.
But it's so much different for her. She has the obvious physical change that brings her beauty to the forefront. She also becomes more personal in her artwork; her art teacher tells her that she notices, & that Laney shouldn't let go of "what's brought about this change." So? So this is implying a bigger importance on the role that Zack has played for Laney, & not as much visa versa. Don't get me wrong though. I loved the idea of the movie when it first came out. I wanted to see a movie where the underdog was realised as being beautiful. And I still think that's the idea. I just wonder a little if girls are going to wonder about how much it is going to take to get there...and work at it...even if they are just fine right now.


(Another revision: Thinking again about the basics of this story...in the bet & the remaking of an "unappealing" girl into a beauty...reminds me a little of My Fair Lady. I kind of wonder a little as to whether the basic premise was stolen from there, and then dumbed down to be palatable for a teenage audience.
Makes me kind of remember Tiffany's bitterness at the rewriting of Shakespearean plays for teens...
I think this will require a rewatching...)

"Mean Girls"

Movie Analysis:
(rough)

There were some good points to this movie. It was right. Girls are really mean. And those who are passing through adolscence now have the advantage of scheming with 3-way calling. People can talk on AIM & save conversations to show later. It's different from how my life was like, but similiar to what Anne Barkow told me about her time in middle & high school.

The problem was that the idea was that it could all be fixed. All that was needed was for the girls to be put in one place where they could admit to back-stabbing each other & such. It isn't that easy to fix! It is ignoring some of the main causes for such subversive behaviour. The problem is that girls don't feel like they can be openly irritated since everyone is always telling girls to be "nice." This would be fixed just through apologies. Cliques & rifts don't disappear that easily. And the humour that is scattered throughout tends to undermine the point that was trying to be made. It was almost hard to tell if the movie was supposed to be sarcastic, but Tina Fey was actually trying to convey the idea from the book Queen Bees.... Serious idea by SNL. It didn't really work in the end. The start was okay, but didn't go where it should've.

(Additionally, I wrote this a couple years ago. Since then, I have been working in an inner city school in Minneapolis. I want to abridge some of the ideas that I wrote, and that have been written: this suppression of open irritation is more true for suburban middle & upper class white girls. While some parts may apply still, it is not as wholly true for lower class minority girls.)

"Clueless"

Movie Analysis:
(rough)

This was a movie attached in Branded by Alissa Quart. She commented on the movie's constant protrayal of consumerism. (For example, Cher has to go shopping when she's frustrated...& at any other opportunity it seems.) Quart says that it is just another "make-over" movie, but I don't think it's a make-over movie for just Brittany Murphy's character. Cher also starts working for more charitable causes (in a naive way). But she really doesn't change. Sure, she's thinking a little more openly, but not in any substantial way. She got the guy, but you can't believe that she's actually any different. So what do we have? Another consumerist girl...& one who pretends she's not...sometimes.

Branded

by Alissa Quart

Teens & parents are constantly bombarded with "branding." Colleges/universities, clothing lines, etc. have images attached to them, & people will do a lot to make sure that they're into the correct thing. Girls will work as consultants & get special attentions from the brand they commit themselves to. Teen movies have become covered in ads in the shots like never before...as have video games. There must be an "unbranding."

"Killing Monsters"

by Gerard Jones

Kids will form violent images in their minds without even seeing similar scenes. Acting out fantasies that are "violent" in their ideas are needed means for a kid to feel powerful & in control. Adults need to remember that there is a difference between make-believe & reality.

"i keep wondering what i take for granted that will shock posterity the way the belief in slavery now shocks us. could it be the idea that it's okay to raise animals purely for the purpose of slaughtering and eating them?"
--john powers, vogue magazine film critic

Music Exclusivity

Music is one of those areas that when you do crossing genres that you can sometimes feel uncertain if you should be. Is it respecting it & showing that it's really good? Or is it bringing it down through assimilation?

I don't know.

But it makes me feel a little confused with how to label the mixed CD I'm working on. I wanted to reburn my Dessa disc, & put the "Independent Women Pt. 1" on a disc that it would fit into. So I sought out more R&B music to fill out the CD.

But what do I call it? It's not just women. Not just about strong women.

It feels absurd to be worrying over something so insignificant as this, & yet I do.

Hmmm...

I wonder what that says about me & my place in this...

Mulan

This is a movie that I decided to rewatch to see how people were portrayed.

At first, it was just a "I want to rewatch to see if they're right that it is one of the rare movies for young girls that actually stars a strong woman" thing. I rented it with the intention of showing it at one of my movie classes for the girls, assuming it matched up to the feminist requirements.

And then I saw "Mickey Mouse Monopoly". I realized I couldn't just watch it to see how it talks about women, but also had to see what it was saying about the Chinese. So I watched it with these double lenses on.

I think that it does mostly work from the feminist angle. Mulan knows that the girl she's expected to be isn't really her, and never really strays from being herself. (With the exception of trying to act like a guy.)

However, I realized that while it may be a Chinese tale, the movie isn't really about them at all. It's a setting and sets what the characters should look like, but that seems to be the limits. Someone had pointed out when we watched "MMM" about how all the voices in the Disney movies sound "White", and the same is true for "Mulan". Several of the older men seem to have an accent, but no one else does.

(The woman in the video also said that it only worked to make "Mulan" in an extremely sexist culture. She made it sound as though Disney made Ancient China much more sexist than it really was, but since I'm not a Chinese history expert, I don't know.)

I also decided to be bothered by the presence of the dragon Mushu. At least a little. I know his purpose is there as comic relief. But it seems to feed into the concept of dragons in China. While I'm sure they frequently appeared on things, I just don't know if I want to have that as the lasting image of what things are from China.


So..."Mulan" works....when presented as being set in a place that doesn't exist. Then it can be the simple, and important, tale about a girl who wins against all odds.

But I just don't know if I'm comfortable with that.

Movie Recommendations

"Celluloid Closet"--Documentary of the portrayal of homosexuals in movies from the 1930s on.

"Mickey Mouse Monopoly"--Documentary about the portrayal of minorities in Disney films. (While I have not seen the entire thing, yet, the parts I saw did make me want to go back & rewatch the films with new eyes.)

Bad Medicine

Call it Viagra culture: In the eight years since the little blue pill made the scene, its wild success has institutionalized the impulse to treat any and all sexual problems, idiosyncrasies, or irregularities with prescription drugs. the result is an increasingly commerciatlized approach to sex that turns attention away from the complex social, cultural, and psychological determinants of sexuality that have been the subject of feminist analysis for several decades. Feminist activists and scholars have long observed that sexuality--especially, but not exclusively, women's sexuality--is as much a matter of politics as biology. But in their effort to medicalize sexuality, big pharmaceutical companies want us to believe that sexual problems are a result of biology alone. Of course the drug industry want us to believe that the solution to our sexual woes lies in a pill/patch/cream/nasal spray; after all, a pill that puts orgasms easily within reach can be marketed in a profit-making system, but social change is a little trickier...

The first success of Viagra culture, apart from the drug itself, has been the success of drug companies in successfully banishing the term "impotence," with all its psychological connotations of weakness and failure, and replacing it with the more biologically oriented, less judgmental "erectile dysfunction," or ED. And in the hopes of doubling their profits by doubling their market, pharmaceutical companies are now working toward their second challenge--reconceptualizing women's sexual problems as physiologically based "female sexual dysfunction," or FSD. So far, no "pink Viagra" has yet received approval from the Food and Drug Administration, but dozens of products are in development, and each year growing numbers of women are given off-label prescriptions of men's sex drugs, even though these drugs have not been proven sage or effective for women. (Despite the popularity of Viagra s a party drug for gay men, Big Pharma's marketing and research programs betray a deep heterosexual bias. The current research on FSD in particular tends to focus almost exclusively on heterosexual women, relying on a heterocentric view of sex and implying that only certain women's sexual problems--and only certain kinds of sexual problems--are worthy of consideration.)

The year 2003 marked both the fifth anniversary of Viagra's launch and the release of two prominent new sex drugs for men, whose names will be familiar to any e-mail user: Levitra and Cialis. All these drugs are intended to tread ED, a condition made famous by those first Viagra ads featuring an aging Bob Dole confiding in us about his post-prostate-surgury erection troubles. Nowadays, drug makers are seeking ways to distinguish their ED products in an increasingly competitive marketplace. Pfizer, the maker of Viagra, realized it needed sexier ads to capture the younger set, and soon dumped Dole as its poster boy in favor of highly masculine (and less wrinkled) professional baseball players and NASCAR drivers. The adds for Levitra and Cialis, however, have attempted to secure a portion of Viagra's multibillion-dollar annual market share by literally bringin women into the picture: Prominent ads from the Levitra campaign feature a female partner front and center, talking about her man's concern with erection "quality," the silent male demoted to the background. Cialis capitalizes on its alleged 36-hor range of effectiveness by depicting a heterosecual couple enjoying an air of romance ("If a relaxing moment turns into the right moment, will you be ready?"), with one of its first ads showing a couple enjoying the view from their his-and-hers bathtubs.

But pharmaceutical companies want women to be more than the spoonful of sugar tha makes the medicine go down for their male partners; they want women to spend an equal amount of time worrying about their own sexual problems and what pill might treat them. Female sexual dysfunction is listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the official catalogue of mental illnesses), so if a woman is diagnosed with something that falls under the umbrella of FSD (say, lack of desire, lack of arousal, pain during intercourse, or lack of orgasm), she is automatically considered to have a mental illness of disorder. A few generations ago, a woman might be considered mentally ill (more specifically, a nymphomaniac) if she wanted sex too much; these days a woman might just as easily be labeled mentally unsound if her libido is below "normal."

For years, Pfizer hoped to determine that Viagra could be used to counter lo0w arousal in women, but in 2004, the company stopped its clinical trials, concluding that Viagra was no more effective than a placebo. (The placebo, by the way, did have a positive effect on sexual arousal, suggesting, if nothing else, the important role of expectation in psychology.) But why have women share the men's candy when an FDA-approved sex drug specifically for women could be just as much of a marketing boon as Viagra was? With a market for such medical treatments at an estimated nearly $2 billion per year, pharmaceitical companies have a tremendous financial incentive to produce a successful contender, and thus far more than half a dozen companies are focusing their efforts on drugs intended to treat low desire and arousal, developing and testing a raft of pills, patches, creams, and sprays, hoping to find that elusive pick Viagra.


The main focus in FSD-drug development is on testosterone products intended to amp up sexual desire, rather than the Viagra model of products that increase blood flow to the nether regions. Just months after Pfizer pulled the plug on the Viagra trials targeting women, Proctor and Gamble announced plans to seek FDA approval for its Intrinsa testosterone patch, designed to remedy a lack of desire in women. Mainstreem media obediently followed Proctor and gamble's marketing spin--it's not just sexual arousal that's the problem, it's desire for sex to beigin with--proclaiming the failure of the Viagra trials to be evidence of women's complex sexuality. Testosterone--often called the "hormone of desire"--seemed like the most promising fix.

Though low sexual desire in women is often considered to be a product of low testosterone deficiency, this assertion has not been borne out of by evidence; a 2005 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association explicitly debunked the notion of a link between low sexual desire and low testosterone levels in women. In December 2004, the FDA reviewed the first-ever application for an FSD-specific drug--the aforementioned Intrinsa patch. The FDA's advisory committee determined that the benefit of the drug (an average of one additional sex act per month, according to the trials) was overshadowed by the patch's potential long-term health risks, and they unanimously voted against approval of Intrinsa.

Yet despite the lack of scientific data on the efficacy of testosterone to treat low libido in women, the absence of FDA approval of use of testosterone to treat these problems, the known risks of testosterone therapies for women (ranging from beard growth to more heath-threatening liver problems), and the unknown long-term risks of such therapies, a growing number of physicians are prescribing testosterone drugs off-label to women. (If a drug is FDA-approved for any one condition, a doctor is allowed to prescribe it off-label at her discretion for any other condition, even if the drug has not been tested or approved for that condition.) In an October 4, 2005 article in Newsweek, testosterone researcher D. Jan Shifren estimated that one-fifth of all prescriptions of testosterone products approved for men are actually written off-label for women for the treatment of "sexual dysfunction." Such off-label prescribing is becoming increasingly normalized in mainstream media accounts of FSD, and depicted fovorably in outlets such as CBS Evening News and 20/20, as well as in numerous women's magazines.


Women in search of solutions to their sexual problems often turn to the mass media, looking to magazines and television talk shows for advice, information, and empathy. But because many of these sources encourage women to see disappearing libidos or foiled orgasms as de facto FSD, these encounters often work to spread the Viagra culture, to the detriment of the women themselves. Two sexperts have risen to particular prominence in this converage of FSD, largely through their presence in pop venues: sex therapist Laura Burman, PhD, and urologist Jennifer Berman, MD. The Berman sisters have been favorable featured in numberous women's magainzes, including Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, and Ladies' Home Journal; appeared on many TV shows, such as Good Morning America, The Oprah Winfrey Show, and 20/20; and had their own weekly cable-TV talk show on the Discovery Health Channel. (Laura has a reality show called Sexual Healing upcoming on Showtime.) With cowriters, they've published two mainstream books on women's sexual problems: For Women Only: A Revolutionary Guide to Overcoming Sexual Dysfunction and Reclaiming Your Sex Life and secrets of the exually Satisfied Woman: Ten Keys to Unlocking Ultimate Pleasure.

In 2001, the Bermans founded the UCLA Female Sexual Medicine Center. Three years later, Laura Berman left UCLA to open a private clinic, the Berman Center, in Chicago. Jennifer Berman soon followed suit, opening a sexual-medicine practive in Beverly Hills at the Rodeo Drive Women's Health Center. The shift of the Bermans' practices from an academic center to the explicitly for-profit commercial sector speaks volumes about the new reatil-oriented cultures of both sex and medicine. Both practices offer a boutique experience in a high-end, spa-like environment. A review of the Berman Center's website, where a prospective client can secure an appointment witha credit-card number, indicates that an initial assessment will cost $550 plus testing, and another $550 will buy a session of "bio-identical hormone thereapy." Not surprisingly, there's no mention of insurance coverage. (there's already been a lot of outrage in feminist and women's health circles about the fact that Viagra is more likely to be covered than contraceptives, and one can easily imagine that insurance companies might similarly refuse to cover sex drugs for women, even if they are eventually FDA-appoved.)

Even more important than the commercialized nature of the Berman's practices, however, is their approach to treatment. Although both assert that they combine the strengths of psychotherapy with the benefits of sexual medicine, they ultimately give preference to the biomedical perspective. As part of a 2004 20/20 special on women's sexuality, the Bermans rtreated a woman whose husband had threatened to leave her if she didn't remedy her low mojo. Though the sisters failed to find any biophysical indications for the woman's depressed libido (in other words, no sign of "low" testosterone), they nevertheless wrote a prescription for testosteron and, with this magic bullet, side-lined the deeply problematic nature of the woman's relationship with her husband and any psychological facotrs that may have affected her sex life.


The spread of an already prevalent "just pop a pill" approach to the realm of sexual desire minimizes the myriad ways in which our society fosters sexual problems in both women and men. People work more hours in the U.S. than in any other industrialized society, take fewer vacation days, and have increasingly longer commutes--so exhaustion alone is quite possibly a major explanation for many an underused American bed. But for women, the same political struggles that have long informed their sexual choices and well-being are still in existence. Persistent gender inequality in heterosexual coupling (manifested in women shouldering much of the burden of household work and childcare), and increasing threat of restricted reproductive rights, and active epidemic of sexual vilence against women, and women's higher likelihood of being diagnosed with depression (and higher rates of antidepressant use) all likely play a role. In addition, women's magazines' continual emphsis on sex and how to make it longer, better, and more frequent can easily give women the impression that they're at fault if they can't blow their man's mind--to say nothing of their own--every time. Certainly, a sex drug won't address these fundamentally social and cultural causes of sexual discontent. Men, of course, can also experience sexual problems for many of these same reasons as well, a point usually minimized in discussions of ED.


As the medicalization of sex expands, growing numbers of critics are raising voices of dissent. Since its 2000 inception, the New View Campaign has used a variety of tactics to counter the growing biomedical orientation surrounding women's sexuality (see www.fsd-alert.org). Critical articles about FSD have also appeared in medical journals, such as the British Medical Journal, and a number of mainstream publications, including 2005 features in the Seattle Times and the Los Angeles Times. and recent drug scandals, such as those involving the Vioxx brand pain reliever and hormone replacement therapy, appear to be ushering in a more widespread critical appraisal of the health threats of our pill-popping culture.

Perhaps the biggest danger of the rise of the Viagra culture is that the source of women's sexual problems is becoming overtly depoliticized. A main intent of the feminist women's health movement was to politicize women's sexual/health problems, often by challening the power of the medical establishmetn. Now that drug companies are the major players hijacking the characterization of women's sexual problems, we need to firmly resituate women's sexuality back intot the political realm. Sure, some women may be helped by a new sex patch or pill, but this quick fix (with health risks) might just put a Band-Aid on a larger problem. Neither the medical establishment nor the drg industry is going to change, so it's time for women to demand that these profit-hungry entities stop trying to peddle drugs that benefit their bottom line at the expense of our health.

Notes To Come Back To: SCARFACE (1932)

~Intro (government needs help, responsibility to force them to act)
~Howard Hawks
~"Italian Accent" in subtitles
~"Old-style gang leader" vs. New Italians
~1932
~Volstead Act
~Corruption of politicians, lawyers, witnesses ("wink")
~Based on book/real events
~"Micks"
~Glorify/Romanticize as "Demigods" by plastering across front page
~Take off front page
-most not citizens; make laws; give bad name to Italians
-private citizens need to act (cops can do nothing)
~X marks the spot (need to rewatch to see how many times...but definitely many)
~His involvement eventually kills his sister

~Rinaldo, Camonte, Lovo, Cesca, Epstein, etc.

Christian Broadcasting

Last week, while working late, I brought up the commericals that ask you to donate several hundred dollars so that a Russian can be moved back to Israel.

Perri said that she had seen that commercial...and that her first reaction was: "If they're planning on sending people back to where they came from, I'm saying this now: I'm not going back to Africa."

I thought it was an intriguing thought.

If there was a mass effort to remove people from this country, I might just barely make the list...and that would only be for being a "crazy liberal", but not because of my color.

It's amazing how often it's possible to forget about "whiteness."

Hmm....

Gas Prices

driving back from target last night, i realised that it's kind of crazy the effort that gets put into watching the pennies on the gas station signs rise & fall.

...


i finally realised that this obsession is kind of absurd. a jump of 10 cents means that it will take an extra dollar to fill my car (for big trucks it's probably about $2-$2.50).

when did a dollar become so big? normally we get so excited over the things that we could get for $1 ("wow! a burger!...or fries!...that's awesome!). it seems a little strange that the thing we get so excited over spending to get food we compulsively stress over when it comes to gas for our cars.


just a thought.

(yes, i do realise that the jump up of $1+ per gallon that's happened over the last few years DOES make a difference...and that the difference has come about by the slow increase of pennies over time. on the short term, though, it does seem odd how close many people watch the gas prices to get the best deal...that really isn't that much better of a deal.)

(and yes, i will continue to be one of those people...though probably less so now.)