"That will be especially critical in contested states such as North Carolina, which hadn't voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976 until Obama eked out a victory three years ago.
Obama is committed to winning here again. The Democratic national convention will be held in Charlotte next year, and Obama is traveling to Durham on Monday to make a jobs pitch and raise his profile."
Um so. The pResident. Of the United States. Needs to raise his profile (??). In a state that he just won. Which was very unusual.
Sounds like an attention whore to me.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
Great Adventure
I never accepted the "Six Flags" moniker; it's Great Adventure. It's a groundbreaking park that always gets everything before every other Six Flags but never gets credit on the television shows. But here's the best part - one of the original, early maps!!! I didn't want to lose THIS -
"The Passion"
No, I'm not including a picture. Screw that. It's the whole point.
"It turns out the "this film is TOO HOT for France!!" rumors were invented by Icon, Mel Gibson's production company. In reality, the French were more than happy to be bored while watching Jesus get whipped for six hours."
You know, it's not just that you're bored, it's that you're bored AND EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE. It's like you're *supposed* to love it or there's something wrong with you. I don't want to roll around in and crawl through the passion scenario; that's what Communion is here to symbolize. I don't see anywhere where we're *called* to revel in the passion, so why should I feel bad about a mere movie?? It isn't like Moses brought it to us from the mountaintop, you know? I am allowed to have an opinion even if that is that I loathe it.
And...so I do. From the insistent message of the relics and talismans of Catholicism to the female devil, to the lack of sympathetic characters. Yes, all of them. (You didn't think Cavaziel was Jesus, right? Good, me either.)
You know, if one has a desperate need to see Jesus' story portrayed on screen, it's hard to beat Jesus of Nazareth. Even if you're annoyed by Powell's ethnicity (I'm not but some are) the movie itself is full of human characters - like Peter! - who make you laugh and feel things - John the Baptist is AMAZING, if too brief. Right down to pegging the "Eli eli lama sabach thani" on the cross as quoting scripture, not admitting defeat. Not everyone knows that even now, for some reason. (Shame in a day when the bible is so free so many aren't familiar with the basics - guess that's how it goes sometimes.) And you don't have to worry about your children seeing it, like the Passion...thing. And you don't have to sit there for hours squirming in your seat, wondering where the hell to look, hoping no one notices you hate it or pretending to like it, praying for it to end. I didn't; I watched it at home and was free to say what I liked, out loud, which got me through the ordeal. But still something to consider when asking the burning question, "Shall I or shall I not watch The Passion?"
"It turns out the "this film is TOO HOT for France!!" rumors were invented by Icon, Mel Gibson's production company. In reality, the French were more than happy to be bored while watching Jesus get whipped for six hours."
You know, it's not just that you're bored, it's that you're bored AND EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE. It's like you're *supposed* to love it or there's something wrong with you. I don't want to roll around in and crawl through the passion scenario; that's what Communion is here to symbolize. I don't see anywhere where we're *called* to revel in the passion, so why should I feel bad about a mere movie?? It isn't like Moses brought it to us from the mountaintop, you know? I am allowed to have an opinion even if that is that I loathe it.
And...so I do. From the insistent message of the relics and talismans of Catholicism to the female devil, to the lack of sympathetic characters. Yes, all of them. (You didn't think Cavaziel was Jesus, right? Good, me either.)
You know, if one has a desperate need to see Jesus' story portrayed on screen, it's hard to beat Jesus of Nazareth. Even if you're annoyed by Powell's ethnicity (I'm not but some are) the movie itself is full of human characters - like Peter! - who make you laugh and feel things - John the Baptist is AMAZING, if too brief. Right down to pegging the "Eli eli lama sabach thani" on the cross as quoting scripture, not admitting defeat. Not everyone knows that even now, for some reason. (Shame in a day when the bible is so free so many aren't familiar with the basics - guess that's how it goes sometimes.) And you don't have to worry about your children seeing it, like the Passion...thing. And you don't have to sit there for hours squirming in your seat, wondering where the hell to look, hoping no one notices you hate it or pretending to like it, praying for it to end. I didn't; I watched it at home and was free to say what I liked, out loud, which got me through the ordeal. But still something to consider when asking the burning question, "Shall I or shall I not watch The Passion?"
Monday, May 2, 2011
Grandmaster
OK it's cut off 0 see it here - HERE Do a search, there's more.
Ok you see that guy? He was my sensei. If anyone can teach you karate, HE can. He did nothing but street fights in Okinawa. AND HE NEVER LOST. Yet, he was the most gentle, kind man I ever met. You fuck with him and he'll fuck you up - you're a little scared girl? He'll treat you like a little scared girl and cherish you. But look at that face! Who wouldn't be scared? LOL. Gary Alexander - my total hero.
By the way, he doesn't have a Dojo anymore; he will, however, give private lessons. Apparently he's immortal lol.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Eggbert Goes OFF!
Ding! Ding! Ding! Roger Eggbert Goes OFF!
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110414/REVIEWS/110419990
Poor Roger Eggbert. Forced to sit through such tedium when all he really wants is his leftism spoon-fed to him in some pablum. I'm not sure when he turned into such an asshole, but he really is.
I feel like my arm is all warmed up and I don’t have a game to pitch. I was primed to review "Atlas Shrugged." I figured it might provide a parable of Ayn Rand’s philosophy that I could discuss. For me, that philosophy reduces itself to: "I’m on board; pull up the lifeline."
Yes, I'm sure that's exactly what it sounds like to you. Oddly enough, you share that view entirely - remember when you, Mister Rich Man, wrote that piece about how you didn't want to be kept alive artificially and then you almost died but your wife said not to pull the plug? And after much expensive intervention (which I'm sure didn't cost you a dime in premiums or expenses; thus we could ALL afford it) you lived after all and you were glad? And this is why you want all of us to be forced into Obamacare and lose our good insurance plans? Yeah, pot? Meet kettle. Ebert's on board, pull up the lifeline. Hypocrite.
There are however people who take Ayn Rand even more seriously than comic-book fans take "Watchmen." I expect to receive learned and sarcastic lectures on the pathetic failings of my review.
No sirrah, I shall merely point and laugh. And express my contempt.
And now I am faced with this movie, the most anticlimactic non-event since Geraldo Rivera broke into Al Capone’s vault.
Yeah I remember that. Millions of people watched it. And his career is still cooking along last I checked. Even if he is a bit of a dingbat.
I suspect only someone very familiar with Rand’s 1957 novel could understand the film at all
Ok, so first off, you didn't understand it. I wouldn't brag about that, but OK - we shall keep in mind that you do not understand what you are reviewing. As a matter of fact, you should have stopped right there.
and I doubt they will be happy with it.
So OK. Let’s say you know the novel, you agree with Ayn Rand, you’re an objectivist or a libertarian, and you’ve been waiting eagerly for this movie. Man, are you going to get a letdown. It’s not enough that a movie agree with you, in however an incoherent and murky fashion. It would help if it were like, you know, entertaining?
Well, to be entertained it is likely one would need to actually understand the film in the first place, no? Normally if I don't understand something I don't feel justified in mocking it. I would normally at least bother clicking a few links to understand the subject matter at least a tad first; maybe even ask a few questions. As to people who understand it not liking it?
Well, sorry Dilbert but that's a HUGE fail. See, http://www.atlas-shrugged-movie.com/2011/02/earlybird-reviews-of-the-full-atlas-shrugged-movie-spectacular-solid-faithful/ we've got glowing reviews from David Kelley, Hans Schantz, Big Hollywood, REASON.com, Hustle Bear http://hustlebear.com/2011/02/28/im-so-relieved-the-atlas-shrugged-movie-was-fantastic/, and oddly enough the MOST glowing review comes from an Ayn Rand biographer, Barbara Branden. See what a difference understanding the subject matter makes? Except I think you're playing dumb just a little in order to have more negative things to say. You pretty quickly pulled the words "objectivist" and "libertarian" out of your muddled little brain, didn't you? Wonder how that happened.
Based on the one leaked scene I've already seen, I'm aching for more - see, movies are so endlessly, tediously left-oriented, you BET we're waiting for this.
For the rest of us,
Us? You're rich; you're not one of us. Nyah!
it involves a series of business meetings in luxurious retro leather-and-brass board rooms and offices, and restaurants and bedrooms that look borrowed from a hotel no doubt known as the Robber Baron Arms.
So there goes the pretense that you didn't understand it. You know exactly what you're doing. You just don't LIKE it.
During these meetings, everybody drinks. More wine is poured and sipped in this film than at a convention of oenophiliacs. There are conversations in English after which I sometimes found myself asking, "What did they just say?" The dialogue seems to have been ripped throbbing with passion from the pages of Investors’ Business Daily. Much of the excitement centers on the tensile strength of steel.
The story involves Dagny Taggart (Taylor Schilling), a young woman who controls a railroad company named Taggart Transcontinental (its motto: "Ocean to Ocean"). She is a fearless and visionary entrepreneur, who is determined to use a revolutionary new steel to repair her train tracks. Vast forces seem to conspire against her.
It’s a few years in the future. America has become a state in which mediocrity is the goal, and high-achieving individuals the enemy.
I'm sorry, how is that the future again? Oh, yeah, it isn't. It's NOW. And don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about as you rail against greedy evil corporations and greedy evil rich people and how much more they should be forced to hand over and how much they should be shackled and regulated. Because that isn't going to work. We're onto that shit.
Laws have been passed prohibiting companies from owning other companies
Sounds like you understand it. Remember that next time you scream for "regulation! Stop the deregulation of business! More regulation!"
Dagny’s new steel, which is produced by her sometime lover, Hank Rearden (Grant Bowler), has been legislated against because it’s better than other steels.
Ah, the Handicapper General in Harrison Bergeron. Who wrote that, Vonnegut? Yes indeed How futuristic is THAT? I mean, nothing like that goes on in the real world today, right? (I could start with "progressive" taxation but that's a tad obvious...we'll look into this "futuristic" reality more later. I'm interested now.)
The Union of Railroad Engineers has decided it will not operate Dagny’s trains.
I could have sworn there were a few unions right NOW that were refusing to do their jobs unless their pay was raised and their power extended...now where did I read about that? Hmmm...
Just to show you how bad things have become, a government minister announces "a tax will be applied to the state of Colorado, in order to equalize our national economy." So you see how governments and unions are the enemy of visionary entrepreneurs.
Hmm, yes, I can see how unrealistic...oh, wait. Spread that wealth around, Ebert! I accept Mastercard and Visa.
But you’re thinking, railroads? Yes, although airplanes exist in this future, trains are where it’s at.
Um...well I guess I missed the part where freight is hauled now largely by airplane and not by trucks and trains and boats. I'll remember next time I have to sit for ten minutes and wait for the freight train to finally get past. Oddly, I just got done spending two years in shipping/receiving for a large warehouse - we didn't have many pilots coming in to get their paperwork signed; it was all truck drivers. Stupid regressive company. And what president and vice president have recently been going on and on and on about how the key to the future is high-speed trains? Hmm...I can't quite remember who said it...
When I was 6, my Aunt Martha brought me to Chicago to attend the great Railroad Fair of 1948, at which the nation’s rail companies celebrated the wonders that were on the way. They didn’t quite foresee mass air transportation. "Atlas Shrugged" seems to buy into the fair’s glowing vision of the future of trains.
So do a certain president and vice president. Their names still escape me.
Rarely, perhaps never, has television news covered the laying of new railroad track with the breathless urgency of the news channels shown in this movie.
Now here's where I stop and let you in on something; there's a reason for that. See, a thousand page book that is not just a story, not just an economics lesson but also a philosophy involves a lot of EXPOSITION. And it's very difficult to translate that exposition into another media, another format, like film. I think it's quite a clever idea to do it using the news. Especially after the collective four year orgasm we've had to watch in the media concerning a certain president whose name still escapes me.
It would help if it were like, you know, entertaining?
The movie is constructed of a few kinds of scenes: (1) People sipping their drinks in clubby surroundings and exchanging dialogue that sounds like corporate lingo; (2) railroads, and lots of ’em; (3) limousines driving through cities in ruin and arriving at ornate buildings; (4) city skylines; (5) the beauties of Colorado. There is also a love scene, which is shown not merely from the waist up but from the ears up. The man keeps his shirt on. This may be disappointing for libertarians, who I believe enjoy rumpy-pumpy as much as anyone.
See, I happen to know something concerning Ayn Rand and city skylines; that just tells me the people behind this film really GOT it. Ayn Rand did not believe in building memorials. She believed that the NY Skyline WAS our memorial. So, win.
Oh, and there is Wisconsin. Dagny and Hank ride blissfully in Taggart’s new high-speed train, and then Hank suggests they take a trip to Wisconsin, where the state’s policies caused the suppression of an engine that runs on the ozone in the air, or something (the film’s detailed explanation won’t clear this up). They decide to drive there. That’s when you’ll enjoy the beautiful landscape photography of the deserts of Wisconsin. My advice to the filmmakers: If you want to use a desert, why not just refer to Wisconsin as "New Mexico"?
Um...yeah I could see where that would really annoy...what? See, you're failing in even the rudimentary aspects of your profession here. This film has been optioned for a long long time. Many years. The last time they tried to make it their female lead (Angelina Jolie) had to drop out; there have been millions spent in other attempts. The option was going to run out in TWO MONTHS, so the filmmaker had two MONTHS in which to get the screenplay written, gather the money, select a cast and start production or he would have lost it altogether and the tens of millions he has spent. So, like the good little sheeple you are, instead of rewarding the fact that these people have pulled off a spectacular feat - an Herculean feat, one which all the other reviewers are lauding as something that was impossible, but pulled off spectacularly, you choose to...gee, you choose to punish achievement don't you? Good boy! Now roll over play dead. No, I won't scratch your tummy.
"Atlas Shrugged" closes with a title card saying, "End of Part 1." Frequently throughout the film, characters repeat the phrase, "Who is John Galt?" Well they might ask. A man in black, always shot in shadow, is apparently John Galt. If you want to get a good look at him and find out why everybody is asking, I hope you can find out in Part 2. I don’t think you can hold out for Part 3.
Well most of us already know - this story has been around for 50+ years and "going Galt" is part of a pretty familiar lexicon even to people who haven't read it. And honestly he wasn't supposed to make an appearance until part 3, but they have to give us a LITTLE something, don't they? Call it an Easter Egg. And I'll call your review a big fat juicy turd. No, I don't have to see the movie first; see, we've already established one can pronounce judgment without understanding, so there it is.
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110414/REVIEWS/110419990
Poor Roger Eggbert. Forced to sit through such tedium when all he really wants is his leftism spoon-fed to him in some pablum. I'm not sure when he turned into such an asshole, but he really is.
I feel like my arm is all warmed up and I don’t have a game to pitch. I was primed to review "Atlas Shrugged." I figured it might provide a parable of Ayn Rand’s philosophy that I could discuss. For me, that philosophy reduces itself to: "I’m on board; pull up the lifeline."
Yes, I'm sure that's exactly what it sounds like to you. Oddly enough, you share that view entirely - remember when you, Mister Rich Man, wrote that piece about how you didn't want to be kept alive artificially and then you almost died but your wife said not to pull the plug? And after much expensive intervention (which I'm sure didn't cost you a dime in premiums or expenses; thus we could ALL afford it) you lived after all and you were glad? And this is why you want all of us to be forced into Obamacare and lose our good insurance plans? Yeah, pot? Meet kettle. Ebert's on board, pull up the lifeline. Hypocrite.
There are however people who take Ayn Rand even more seriously than comic-book fans take "Watchmen." I expect to receive learned and sarcastic lectures on the pathetic failings of my review.
No sirrah, I shall merely point and laugh. And express my contempt.
And now I am faced with this movie, the most anticlimactic non-event since Geraldo Rivera broke into Al Capone’s vault.
Yeah I remember that. Millions of people watched it. And his career is still cooking along last I checked. Even if he is a bit of a dingbat.
I suspect only someone very familiar with Rand’s 1957 novel could understand the film at all
Ok, so first off, you didn't understand it. I wouldn't brag about that, but OK - we shall keep in mind that you do not understand what you are reviewing. As a matter of fact, you should have stopped right there.
and I doubt they will be happy with it.
So OK. Let’s say you know the novel, you agree with Ayn Rand, you’re an objectivist or a libertarian, and you’ve been waiting eagerly for this movie. Man, are you going to get a letdown. It’s not enough that a movie agree with you, in however an incoherent and murky fashion. It would help if it were like, you know, entertaining?
Well, to be entertained it is likely one would need to actually understand the film in the first place, no? Normally if I don't understand something I don't feel justified in mocking it. I would normally at least bother clicking a few links to understand the subject matter at least a tad first; maybe even ask a few questions. As to people who understand it not liking it?
Well, sorry Dilbert but that's a HUGE fail. See, http://www.atlas-shrugged-movie.com/2011/02/earlybird-reviews-of-the-full-atlas-shrugged-movie-spectacular-solid-faithful/ we've got glowing reviews from David Kelley, Hans Schantz, Big Hollywood, REASON.com, Hustle Bear http://hustlebear.com/2011/02/28/im-so-relieved-the-atlas-shrugged-movie-was-fantastic/, and oddly enough the MOST glowing review comes from an Ayn Rand biographer, Barbara Branden. See what a difference understanding the subject matter makes? Except I think you're playing dumb just a little in order to have more negative things to say. You pretty quickly pulled the words "objectivist" and "libertarian" out of your muddled little brain, didn't you? Wonder how that happened.
Based on the one leaked scene I've already seen, I'm aching for more - see, movies are so endlessly, tediously left-oriented, you BET we're waiting for this.
For the rest of us,
Us? You're rich; you're not one of us. Nyah!
it involves a series of business meetings in luxurious retro leather-and-brass board rooms and offices, and restaurants and bedrooms that look borrowed from a hotel no doubt known as the Robber Baron Arms.
So there goes the pretense that you didn't understand it. You know exactly what you're doing. You just don't LIKE it.
During these meetings, everybody drinks. More wine is poured and sipped in this film than at a convention of oenophiliacs. There are conversations in English after which I sometimes found myself asking, "What did they just say?" The dialogue seems to have been ripped throbbing with passion from the pages of Investors’ Business Daily. Much of the excitement centers on the tensile strength of steel.
The story involves Dagny Taggart (Taylor Schilling), a young woman who controls a railroad company named Taggart Transcontinental (its motto: "Ocean to Ocean"). She is a fearless and visionary entrepreneur, who is determined to use a revolutionary new steel to repair her train tracks. Vast forces seem to conspire against her.
It’s a few years in the future. America has become a state in which mediocrity is the goal, and high-achieving individuals the enemy.
I'm sorry, how is that the future again? Oh, yeah, it isn't. It's NOW. And don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about as you rail against greedy evil corporations and greedy evil rich people and how much more they should be forced to hand over and how much they should be shackled and regulated. Because that isn't going to work. We're onto that shit.
Laws have been passed prohibiting companies from owning other companies
Sounds like you understand it. Remember that next time you scream for "regulation! Stop the deregulation of business! More regulation!"
Dagny’s new steel, which is produced by her sometime lover, Hank Rearden (Grant Bowler), has been legislated against because it’s better than other steels.
Ah, the Handicapper General in Harrison Bergeron. Who wrote that, Vonnegut? Yes indeed How futuristic is THAT? I mean, nothing like that goes on in the real world today, right? (I could start with "progressive" taxation but that's a tad obvious...we'll look into this "futuristic" reality more later. I'm interested now.)
The Union of Railroad Engineers has decided it will not operate Dagny’s trains.
I could have sworn there were a few unions right NOW that were refusing to do their jobs unless their pay was raised and their power extended...now where did I read about that? Hmmm...
Just to show you how bad things have become, a government minister announces "a tax will be applied to the state of Colorado, in order to equalize our national economy." So you see how governments and unions are the enemy of visionary entrepreneurs.
Hmm, yes, I can see how unrealistic...oh, wait. Spread that wealth around, Ebert! I accept Mastercard and Visa.
But you’re thinking, railroads? Yes, although airplanes exist in this future, trains are where it’s at.
Um...well I guess I missed the part where freight is hauled now largely by airplane and not by trucks and trains and boats. I'll remember next time I have to sit for ten minutes and wait for the freight train to finally get past. Oddly, I just got done spending two years in shipping/receiving for a large warehouse - we didn't have many pilots coming in to get their paperwork signed; it was all truck drivers. Stupid regressive company. And what president and vice president have recently been going on and on and on about how the key to the future is high-speed trains? Hmm...I can't quite remember who said it...
When I was 6, my Aunt Martha brought me to Chicago to attend the great Railroad Fair of 1948, at which the nation’s rail companies celebrated the wonders that were on the way. They didn’t quite foresee mass air transportation. "Atlas Shrugged" seems to buy into the fair’s glowing vision of the future of trains.
So do a certain president and vice president. Their names still escape me.
Rarely, perhaps never, has television news covered the laying of new railroad track with the breathless urgency of the news channels shown in this movie.
Now here's where I stop and let you in on something; there's a reason for that. See, a thousand page book that is not just a story, not just an economics lesson but also a philosophy involves a lot of EXPOSITION. And it's very difficult to translate that exposition into another media, another format, like film. I think it's quite a clever idea to do it using the news. Especially after the collective four year orgasm we've had to watch in the media concerning a certain president whose name still escapes me.
It would help if it were like, you know, entertaining?
The movie is constructed of a few kinds of scenes: (1) People sipping their drinks in clubby surroundings and exchanging dialogue that sounds like corporate lingo; (2) railroads, and lots of ’em; (3) limousines driving through cities in ruin and arriving at ornate buildings; (4) city skylines; (5) the beauties of Colorado. There is also a love scene, which is shown not merely from the waist up but from the ears up. The man keeps his shirt on. This may be disappointing for libertarians, who I believe enjoy rumpy-pumpy as much as anyone.
See, I happen to know something concerning Ayn Rand and city skylines; that just tells me the people behind this film really GOT it. Ayn Rand did not believe in building memorials. She believed that the NY Skyline WAS our memorial. So, win.
Oh, and there is Wisconsin. Dagny and Hank ride blissfully in Taggart’s new high-speed train, and then Hank suggests they take a trip to Wisconsin, where the state’s policies caused the suppression of an engine that runs on the ozone in the air, or something (the film’s detailed explanation won’t clear this up). They decide to drive there. That’s when you’ll enjoy the beautiful landscape photography of the deserts of Wisconsin. My advice to the filmmakers: If you want to use a desert, why not just refer to Wisconsin as "New Mexico"?
Um...yeah I could see where that would really annoy...what? See, you're failing in even the rudimentary aspects of your profession here. This film has been optioned for a long long time. Many years. The last time they tried to make it their female lead (Angelina Jolie) had to drop out; there have been millions spent in other attempts. The option was going to run out in TWO MONTHS, so the filmmaker had two MONTHS in which to get the screenplay written, gather the money, select a cast and start production or he would have lost it altogether and the tens of millions he has spent. So, like the good little sheeple you are, instead of rewarding the fact that these people have pulled off a spectacular feat - an Herculean feat, one which all the other reviewers are lauding as something that was impossible, but pulled off spectacularly, you choose to...gee, you choose to punish achievement don't you? Good boy! Now roll over play dead. No, I won't scratch your tummy.
"Atlas Shrugged" closes with a title card saying, "End of Part 1." Frequently throughout the film, characters repeat the phrase, "Who is John Galt?" Well they might ask. A man in black, always shot in shadow, is apparently John Galt. If you want to get a good look at him and find out why everybody is asking, I hope you can find out in Part 2. I don’t think you can hold out for Part 3.
Well most of us already know - this story has been around for 50+ years and "going Galt" is part of a pretty familiar lexicon even to people who haven't read it. And honestly he wasn't supposed to make an appearance until part 3, but they have to give us a LITTLE something, don't they? Call it an Easter Egg. And I'll call your review a big fat juicy turd. No, I don't have to see the movie first; see, we've already established one can pronounce judgment without understanding, so there it is.
Henny Penny With a Twist
A little red hen once found a grain of wheat whilst scratching industriously in the barnyard.
"Oh! A treasure!" she cried. "Who will help me plant this grain of wheat?" she asked.
"Not I," said the dog, happily scratching himself behind the ear.
"Not I," purred the cat, stretching luxuriously in the sun.
"Not I," grunted the pig, lazing in his mud hole.
"Not I," said the turkey. "What a silly idea! Why don't you just, like, eat it?"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny planted the grain of wheat. Very soon the wheat began to grow and the green leaves came out of the ground. The sun shone and the rain fell and the wheat kept growing until it was tall, strong, and ripe.
"Who will help me reap this wheat?" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog, and began to follow a butterfly across the barnyard to see where it would go.
"Not I," said the cat. "I would soil my fur! Working in the dirt!"
"Not I," said the pig. "Much too hot for such endeavors!"
"Not I," said the turkey. "It looks so pretty where it is. Why mess with it?"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny reaped the wheat in the hot sun.
"Who will help me thresh this wheat" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog, as he wandered off into the woods.
"Not I," said the cat. "The chaff would make my eyes itch!"
"Not I," said the pig. "I'm late for my nap."
"Not I," said the turkey. "What is threshing?"
"To thresh is to beat the stalks until the seeds come out," Henny Penny explained.
"What a waste of time, when you could just peck them out! As if!" said the turkey. "Not I!"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!"
And Henny Penny threshed the wheat, all by herself.
"Who will help me take this wheat to the mill to have it ground?" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog, distracted by his tail, which he began to chase.
"Not I," said the cat. "It is beneath my dignity to fetch and carry!"
"Not I," said the pig. "It's much too far to the mill."
"Not I," said the turkey, and stared up at the sky. No one knew why.
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny took the wheat to the mill, and by and by she came back with the flour.
"Who will help me bake this flour into bread?" asked Henny Penny.
"Not I," said the dog. "The Man is heading for the creek with his fishing pole.
See ya!" "Not I," said the cat. "The flour dust... no, no, no!" She wrinkled her nose and began to groom herself, just at the thought of it.
"Not I," said the pig. "It's almost lunch time."
"Not I," said the turkey. "Flowers should be left in the garden, not put in the oven! Duh!"
"Then I shall do it myself," asked Henny Penny. "Cluck! cluck!" And she did.
Henny Penny baked the flour and made a lovely, golden loaf of bread. The scent of the bread wafted out over the barnyard, and all of the animals began to drift toward her window.
"Who will help me eat this bread?" asked Henny Penny asked her chicks, who had gathered 'round.
"I will!" said the dog, standing on his legs to peek in through the kitchen window.
"I will!" said the cat, leaping upon the window sill.
"I will!" said the pig, standing beneath the window with his mouth watering.
"I will!" said the turkey, leaping onto the pig's back for a better look at the loaf.
"No... I will," said Henny Penny, "I and my chicks."
"By myself I planted the wheat. By myself I reaped it. By myself I threshed the wheat and carried it to the mill.
By myself I baked the bread. Now I, and mine, will eat it."
Cluck! cluck! cluck!"
"Capitalist pig!" cried the cat. ("No need to be insulting," grunted the pig.)
"Imperialist!" cried the dog.
"UNFAIR!" screamed the turkey.
"Speciesist supremacist!" shouted the pig.
Henny Penny stood dumbfounded when suddenly a huge wolf with a federal badge and a gun showed up in the barnyard and started telling her how it was going to be.
"Comrade Penny, I am confiscating 3/4 of this loaf in the name of the commonwealth and distributing it to your hungry neighbors - to wit the cat, the dog, the pig, and the turkey. The other 1/4 we'll need to support our redistributors - these guns and badges don't pay for themselves you know. Now if you resist we shall have to put you in the gulag and those guards have to eat too, you know. But I'm sure you're a good citizen and don't begrudge your neighbors the good life you are enjoying, so that surely won't be necessary. Naturally we will leave you a grain of wheat so that you can plant, reap, thresh, mill and bake it again in order to stimulate the local economy and create job growth. If you apply down at the county office there shouldn't be any problem getting an allotment of one grain for each of your chicks - that's all they really *need* after all, so don't worry about that - I'm surprised you hadn't looked into that benefit sooner! Now have a good day, comrade, and thanks for the bread."
Henny Penny sat there staring at the warm spot where the bread had been, looked at the satisfied cat, the smirking dog, the pig in his poke and the turkey, then down at her grain of wheat. She began to see herself and many other industrious hens each taking their grains of wheat and pouring them into the harbor at midnight...
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
16 And Pregnant
This will likely be TMI for men; so probably more for the ladies. Particularly moms or those otherwise interested in natural childbirth and nursing issues.
Much has been said about this MTV show, but I'm concerned here with a specific episode which seems to speak to the whole series as a whole. It's easy for the obstetrical field to expect full obedience from 16 year olds (not that they don't want it from the rest of us as well) and it gets on my freaking nerves seeing how these girls just do whatever an OB tells them. I've yet to see an episode where one of them has a natural childbirth, much less chooses to nurse their babies. And this is one field (of several) in which some self-education is actually necessary if you're not just going to blindly follow the worst possible advice and make uninformed decisions. It's very easy to push around someone who's in labor, even if she's self-educated *and* has advocates (like a midwife) *and* isn't 16 years old. What chance do they have here?
This episode, "Samantha", dealt with a young girl who was simply told that if she wasn't in labor by her due date (never mind when the baby is actually ready) she was to be induced. These basically arbitrary calendar dates are in charge of the whole thing, I guess. So, on her very due date, off she was bundled to the hospital to begin the whole cascade of interventions that lead directly to our abominable Caesarean rate as well as the ludicrous infant mortality rate we have in this country. (Compare with the infant mortality/Caesarean rates of countries where midwifery and homebirth are the norm - except in clear cases where interventions are actually necessary and you'll see what I mean.)
After being carted off to the hospital, they immediately started the Pitocin drip. Thanks a lot, guys, NOW I don't get my Oxytocin and endorphins and dopamine (our bodies' own morphine/love hormones, which skyrocket during labor and birth when labor occurs naturally) so I can have the super-strong, unnatural Pitocin contractions *without* my body's defenses and be in triple the amount of pain, minus the "love rush" that would normally occur. Triple/quadruple whammy. So as she's laying there screaming with this unnatural labor, they begin talking about when she can "get her" epidural. Of course, an epidural interferes with the labor progression and suppresses the pain of the contractions, which necessitates even MORE Pitocin, which then causes the baby to go into distress from the too-powerful contractions, which means...Caesarean! Just cut it out, quick!
But what really killed me as they were doing all this, the nurse asked her mother "So, did you have natural births?" "Oh no, Caesareans." Naturally. But...what in the heck did she think was NATURAL about what they were doing? This isn't a natural labor in any sense of the word - Pitocin is not what your body produces to start labor. I had one baby naturally and another induced, and you'd better believe the induced one was far more painful and unpleasant. Thankfully I didn't get the epidural because at least I was able to complete the thing without being cut in half. Others having epidurals at 2 centimeters aren't so lucky. And at least I knew a thing or three about nursing a baby, or I'd not have made it through that either, considering the hideous advice they kept trying to feed me.
So what chance, I ask, do these girls have for a natural birth experience and successfully breastfeeding? Not bloody much. Naturally she ended up with a Caesarean.
I'm going to wrap this up with the most ludicrous and objective-killing advice ever given by a famous pediatrician on nursing that I've ever heard given on a national television show, since I'm on the topic already. If you want women to tell you how horrible breastfeeding is, just google "I hate Breastfeeding" or "Breastfeeding Sucks" and you'll find plenty. Most of whom were given hideous advice and had their own nursing processes interfered with from day one (hospitals are notorious for slipping babies bottles on the sly, which in and of itself interferes with the process...then try to tell you you don't have enough milk so you should pump and supplement...which of course interferes with the process even more, making it into a mockery). The very fact that they all say they felt "like cows" says so much...um, we are nothing like cows. If you need to compare it to something compare it to something that makes SENSE like a mother cat and her kittens. The cow analogy is stupid because you're talking about milk that human babies can't even digest unless it's tampered with. These are animals that stand within minutes of birth and have to "butt" their mother's udders with their heads to get the milk to come out - animals that are walking around an hour after they're born. Giving milk our own babies can't even drink. Yeah...that makes a lot of sense.
So anyway, when I heard the renowned T. Berry Brazelton giving the exact OPPOSITE of the right advice to a new nursing mom, my head about exploded. She was greatly dismayed that her newborn was nursing every hour and a half - jeez, I wish I'd been that lucky. Try every 45 minutes (as well as literally the entire night...fortunately I had the sense to take the baby to bed with me so I didn't have to be awake for it. No, you don't roll over on the baby.) It takes time to establish a milk supply and for the baby to gain the experience to effectively get the milk. For that time you sometimes have to stay what seems hooked up for most of the day and/or night. Which is why it's a good idea to pencil in at least two months of downtime after giving birth, if not more. At least if you want to succeed at feeding your own baby for free, and in a way that is usually quite pleasant once it's firmly established.
So, his advice to this woman? Oh, every 1 1/2 hours is too much (that's odd, because it only takes 1 - 1 1/2 hours for the breast milk to pass through the baby altogether - so, uh, YES, the baby is actually hungry after that) so HOLD BACK FOR AT LEAST 3 HOURS...why? So the breast will be FULLER, thus the baby will get more.
I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Absolute and UTTER ignorance of how a milk supply is established and how it self-adjusts. You know how it works? Just like a free market - supply and demand. If you WAIT until it's full, your body gets the signal almost IMMEDIATELY that it's MAKING TOO MUCH MILK and it needs to STOP making so much of it. He basically gave her a prescription for STOPPING breastfeeding, not for doing it successfully. You want more milk? You want to stop having to do it so often? DO IT MORE...keep those puppies EMPTY, and empty them even sooner than the baby asks for it...the signal goes out "Not making enough! Make more, stat!" And that's exactly what happens. Which is why the first couple months you're doing it fairly constantly - the body hasn't adjusted to this whole system yet. Once it does, you're in business. And no, it's *extraordinarily* rare that there's a genuine medical reason for a lack of adequate supply, so don't even tell me that every woman who says her baby was simply starving really was - that's really not something that happens in any kind of common fashion; as I say, it's very very rare that that's the case. We'd be extinct already if it were that common. It's bad advice and bad interventions that lead to this epidemic of women's bodies that just don't work properly (for labor, birth and nursing.) We all know that *sometimes* interventions in all three areas are necessary and life-saving - that's what they're there for. Could we start saving them for the actual times when they're NEEDED? With nursing it takes maybe two days for your supply to adjust up or down according to whether you're making too much (full breasts) or too little (empty breasts.) For a doctor to give such hideous advice fills me with ire.
But it's so ubiquitous that we're just used to all of it. With my second child, the nurse came in after about 8 hours and asked me how many "times" he'd nursed...uh, who's counting? Whenever he wants it, he gets it. And lots of skin-to-skin contact (another thing someone isn't telling the doctors for some reason) to stimulate supply. After all, there's nothing there after an induced labor, to start with - gotta get things started as quickly as possible. So she was like, "Um, don't do THAT!" I said, "Why not?" "Because...because you'll get sore nipples." Uh...ok. I'll just follow my own counsel, thanks. It never happened, fortunately; he was too lazy to suck that hard anyway. Fortunately the pediatrician was from India and was a lot smarter than that about these issues - she just said "Good. Nursing on demand is the best thing while they're new, and they tend to self-schedule more in a few months." At least somebody knows what they're talking about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)