Is This The New American Dream?

In reference to my post of 7/14, a New York Times article about luxury bathrooms.

Does anyone else think eating in the bathroom is disgusting?

And I can't be the only one who thinks it is absurd that one of the bathrooms referenced in this article is more than 1/2 the size of my home.

Comment Policy

As sole author and editor of this blog, I establish the following policy regarding comments.

1. All comments must contain the author's name. If you have a blogger account, Choose the box tagged "Blogger," and then sign in with your username and password. If you do not have a blogger account and wish to leave a comment, choose the box tagged "Other," and then type your name. You must type your actual name. Any comments registered as Anonymous (whether comments are positive or negative in nature) will be deleted, as will any comments posted under a false name.

2. Comments are encouraged, and I completely respect anyone's right to disagree with anything I have written. I do require, however, that you make all comments (whether in agreement, disagreement, or whatever) in a respectful manner. I reserve the right to delete any comments that I consider to be vulgar or offensive.

3. Do not leave spam. And I mean this in the broadest sense.

I hate to have to establish a Comments policy, but a proliferation of Anonymous comments (of all nature - positive, negative, and completely inane spamlike comments) have left me frustrated. I implemented Comment Moderation briefly in order to delete them before they even appeared, but I don't like slowing the comment process by those who have interesting and relevant things to stay. Instead I am hoping that people respect the policy, and if not, I will delete any comments any offenders leave. (Why? Well, just like your mom once told you...Because I'm in charge and I said so!)

So family, friends, and others who have intelligent and interesting things to say, please continue leaving your thoughts. Those who are still trying to figure out what inane means...go away.

A Culture of Want

Last Friday, Jeff, Gregory, and I went to the movies. Because the movie we wanted to see was popular, we were only able to get tickets for a show starting about an hour and a half after we arrived. Fortunately the theater was located in an area of "downtown revitalization" so we weren't forced to sit in the theater and stare at movie posters, but could walk through the area, which was filled with restaurants, bars, stores, and commercial enterprises of every sort. We wandered past most, but only ducked into two: Bombay, where we like to browse, and Borders, where we listened to music and perused books. There were other stores of interest - a DSW, for instance - but I refused to let myself go in. The reason: there was nothing I needed. Had I gone in, however, I very likely would have found something I wanted. And then I might have bought it...simply because I wanted it.

A few days after we went to the theater, I was reading the Washington Post and came across an article about the growing popularity of luxury items in homes. Marble countertops, walk-in closets the size of dorm rooms, showers with five showerheads, nine car garages, theater rooms, exotic woods floors, heated toilet seats. The list goes on. The owners of these luxuries were all quoted saying some variation of "I earned it" or "I deserve it." I have to wonder if they truly believe that. And if so, just what they have done to deserve these luxuries.

By American standards, by legal standards, these people have done nothing wrong. They do indeed have the right to build homes as large and as fancy as they want. If we so choose, we can fill walk-in closets with shoes or buy a new dress for every wedding we're invited to. If we can afford it (or are willing to take on the debt), we can have pretty much whatever we want, no questions asked. But perhaps there are some questions we should ask, questions like: Do I have the moral or ethical right to this? When there are people in the world without potable water, do I have the right to luxuriate for 30 minutes in my five showerhead shower? When century old forests are being destroyed and land is at a premium, do I have the right to a five thousand square foot home? When the world's gas supply is dwindling and pollution is rising, do I have the right to drive a car that gets 10 miles per gallon?

Perhaps I'm in the minority, but I think the answer to these questions is "No." Yes, I know that you not buying a pair of shoes isn't directly going to feed a starving child in Africa (or America). And conserving energy in America isn't going to bring reliable electricity to Iraq. But what if we started spending our luxury money on making sure others have necessities? What if we realized that making more money doesn't entitle us to more natural resources? What if we started thinking about how the choices we make affect others? What if we learned to distinguish want from need?

I'll go ahead and be the first to admit that I am selfish, that I stand in the shower for too long, that I don't give enough to others, that I buy things I have no use for, that I lust after beautiful homes. I want. It's hard not to here in America, in a culture where most of our stores are here to fulfill desires, not needs. Where we all, admitted or not, have some desire to keep up with, if not get ahead of, the Joneses. We want people to admire our homes, our cars, our clothes. But we don't really need that, do we?

Aside from the adventure of travel and the wonder of seeing places I've only dreamed of, I think one of my motivations for wanting to do an around the world trip is to force myself to recognize how little I truly need and to acknowledge how much I've been given. Living out of one backpack, I'll hopefully recognize the frivolity of a pair of shoes for every outfit. Experiencing firsthand the poverty in which so much of the world lives, I hope to lose any desire for useless rooms and extravagant trappings. I want to learn to live simply. Not to deprive myself, but to be appreciative of my life and circumstances, of the fragility of fate that let me be born who I am, where I am. I long to be able to differentiate need from want and to choose my wants carefully. To ask only for shelter over my head, food on my table, health, good stories, and laughter...and friends and family with whom to share it.

Perks

I have my own office with a door and a nameplate. I'm going to have to go in early when no one else is there and take a photo. I also have my own electric pencil sharpener. Life is good.

Three Years, Three Jobs...Time for Number Four

Friday July 7 was my last day at The Children's Partnership. If I mention that I first started there on June 20, 2005, perhaps you won't be surprised that I've left this job. That was after all, a span of one year and seventeen days between my first and last day, which is actually a record length of time spent at one job in my post-college life. In the three years since I graduated, I have had three jobs. This is the first job, however, that I have actually quit, since my first two jobs were offered and accepted with the understanding that they would only last for a year.

Quitting a job is awkward, especially when your office consists of only you and one other person at the time you give your resignation. But it was something I needed to do, and I survived even despite my abnormally strong dislike of any sort of confrontation. And no, it wasn't actually confrontational by normal standards, but considering I find returning unused items to a store to be a sort of confrontation, this was seriously confrontational for me. Ohh the discomfort. What exactly am I supposed to say to remarks like "I'm in shock" or "This is such a huge loss for us." I mean, I know it's a huge loss...I'm pretty irreplacable. But it's not like I can say that - I act humble, even if I'm not. (kidding, kidding)

I wonder what it says about me that I have had so many jobs in such a short span. Clearly, it hasn't hurt me as I've always had another job lined up to replace whatever job I'm leaving, but I haven't met too many other people who are on the same path as I am. I mean I know people who've worked at coffee shops longer than I've worked at professional jobs. I like to tell myself that I just haven't found the right job yet, and that when I do, I'll stay there. (I mean, I did stay at the Louisville Zoo for three years, so it's not like I have no sense of job commitment...) But part of me wonders if I just have unreasonable expectations and am too difficult to satisfy.

I have a hard time accepting the idea that work is just something I have to do, whether I like it or not. If I only get this one life, I don't want to spend most of it doing something I don't like. That can't be the point of life, can it? Working for a paycheck just doesn't cut it for me. I need stimulation and challenges. I want to think that what I am doing is important and is somehow leaving a positive mark on the world. I want to feel that although I may be able to think of other ways that I might want to spend my time, that just maybe I'd want to do what I'm doing at work even if it wasn't my job. I know that's probably not all that reasonable, but I don't think it should be entirely impossible. In fact, I'm hoping that my new job proves it even a teensy bit reasonable. I'll let you know. Tomorrow's my first day as Editor at the Smithsonian American Art Museum. Wish me luck!

Happy Fourth of July

Weddings Galore

At the time Jeff and I got married last year, a number of my friends were already married or engaged while very few of Jeff's were. Jeff loved to exaggerate this, acting as if I were dragging him off to a wedding every weekend. Well the table's have now turned and Jeff's going to have to shut his mouth, because it now seems as if every single person Jeff knows is getting married. While the only wedding I have on my agenda for the next year is Despina's (yay!), Jeff's list is exceptionally long. It includes

1. Chris & Jackie - Summer 2006
2. Phil & Rian - Fall 2006
3. Jayanth & Fiona - Fall 2006
4. Tony & Katie - Winter 2006
5. Alison & Chris - Summer 2007

So really it looks like Jeff's friends are just latebloomers. Although he claims the resason that they're all getting married now is because he showed them how you can be married and still be cool. Um-hum. Riiiight.

Questioning Israel

I don't get Israel. And I don't get why the United States is such a strong ally of Israel. I sometimes feel as if we all let Israel get away with things that we would not stand from any other country because of guilt. The world (aside from the Muslim world which suffers from denial) suffers from collective guilt over the Holocaust. Of course, the Holocaust was one of the world's greatest tragedies and its perpetrators, in various forms, were numerous. But there are three important facts here that we seem to overlook:
1. The Holocaust happened over sixty years ago. The majority of victims and perpetrators are gone. We are not guilty of the sins of our fathers. It is an event to remember and learn from, but not an event whose shadow we should always live in.
2. It is impossible to make up for the Holocaust. Millions of people lost their lives in extremely savage ways. Millions of others suffered horribly. Entire families were lost. No land, no looking the other way, no monetary gifts can make up for that.
3. Being wronged does not give you the right to wrong others.

My first question: Why exactly is Israel entitled to the land that they have been given or have taken over? The Israeli argument is that their land is the land promised to them by God. That it is, was, and always will be the land of the Jewish people. I don't understand how that argument holds any legitimacy in today's world. Why do we all bend to their religious beliefs when we certainly don't bend to any other denominations? How can historical ownership be the criteria for present day ownership? Wouldn't that then give older countries or former colonizers the right to land that they once held? And if it always was intended to be their land, why did so many of them give it up and disperse throughout the world before later reclaiming it (and what rights should they have had to it at that point)? Before the Holocaust, the land was the Palestinian territory and was administered by Britain. While many Jews did live there, the prevailing thought of many was that the land, once relinquished by Britain, was to become Palestine. Instead, partially because of the Holocaust, the land became Israel, and the Palestinians are still without a homeland. How can any of this be considered legitimate?

My second question: Why does Israel believe in exchanging violence for violence? I understand that it must be difficult to live surrounded by people who hate you, who don't recognize your right to exist, and who would love to see your country annihilated. And while a number of the countries are openly hostile to Israel, some have made great strides towards, if not being friendly, at least coexisting despite the tensions. As a nation of people who have been the victims of some of the world's worst violence, it seems to me that there would be a general abhorrence of violence and a desire to avoid it at all costs. But perhaps a desire for vengeance is stronger, even if the revenge is carried out on those not responsible for the original act of violence? The fact is that violence does not end violence, but instead breeds it. Missile attacks, which kill civilians intentionally or accidentally, do not create friends. The cutting off of entire villages from supplies does not breed goodwill. As the movie "Munich" depicted, whenever an evil is destroyed, another, usually stronger and more radical, pops up to take its place. There has to be a point when you quit playing tit for tat. Military force and violence should be reserved for the most dire of situations, not every act perceived as malicious. As long as military force is the first, or only, option, there will be no peace in the Middle East.

Clearly, I am no expert on these issues. And I don't mean to imply that Israel alone is at fault for the current situation. There is obviously plenty of blame to go around. I am simply trying to understand why we tend to heap the blame on the Palestinians while turning a blind eye to the equivalent actions of Israel. I do think that Israel deserves to exist. But I also think that Palestine does too. And I can't understand why we can't make that happen.

(And you know what I hate most about this whole issue is that by even asking these questions, one sets themselves up to be considered anti-Semitic or at best anti-Israel. Anyone who knows me knows that I am neither. I am simply for a more balanced view of the situation and in favor of a homeless minority finally being granted the statehood that they've had coming to them for decades.)

Some Say the World Will End in Fire, Some in Ice

I think we all just might drown. In the DC area, it has been raining for nearly 48 straight hours. And by raining, I mean torrential deluges of water. I mean four inch deep rivers of water on perfectly flat roads. I mean streams of water shooting up higher than your car from the middle lane of a major thoroughfare. I mean rain that bounces back up a few inches because it hit the ground so hard. Downpours. Thunder. Lightening. We're getting it all.

And it's causing problems. First, it was the power going out. It went out around 10:30 yesterday morning and didn't come back on until the afternoon. We headed out to the Smithsonian around noon, because sitting at home without any electricity isn't much fun. We all figured out why people worked so much before there was electricity - there's not really that much else to do.

And then the second, and more annoying, problem is that we have water leaking into our bedroom. The gutters are full of leaves and sticks, so they can't handle all the water (not sure they could anyway, but they'd be doing a little better.) So instead of being funneled down and away from the building, the water is running right up against the building and seeping in wherever there are cracks, which is apparently right along our bedroom window. By the time we noticed it, a good section of the bedding had been soaked through and the carpet was wet. So now the bed's in the middle of the room, all the stuff that was under the bed is all over the place, and the room is a general mess. Of course, since the rain hasn't stopped at all, no one can get up on the roof and clear the gutters, so every time the rain gets hard, the dripping starts. Hooray for Chinese water torture.

Seriously, if it doesn't stop soon, I think we might just float away.

Welcome to the Hotel Blackinton

We have a fairly well stocked kitchen that usually serves three meals a day and is always available for self-service, a comfortable couch, an available air mattress, wireless Internet, and a bathroom with shower and tub. Laundry facilities are available in the building. A furnished patio is available for outdoor eating. And guests have full use of tennis courts and pools. We are conveniently located right next to the Beltway and are only a five minute walk from the Grosvenor Metro stop, which is on the Red Line. Best of all, we're free.

Since Jeff and I moved into our small one-bedroom apartment, we've played host to a number of guests. High school friends on their way through town. Family members up for a visit. Post-college friends stopping in for a night. A study abroad friend looking at graduate programs in town. Pretty much anyone who we know who has ever been in the area. If someone asks, we say yes, unless we're going to be out of town or we have a packed house. (Although the packed house part hasn't stopped us before, as we've had three guests in addition to the two of us at one point in the past.)

I think of it as traveler's karma. I've been fortunate many times in travels through Europe and the United States to have people who are willing to provide me with a place to crash, who don't mind playing tour guide for a day or two, and who make it much more affordable to travel. Hotels are expensive, not to mention lonely, if you're traveling by yourself. So when a friend calls, I say yes, with the knowledge that somewhere down the line, I'll be rewarded with the same hospitality. I also just enjoy having the company of friends and family.

This summer, our apartment has already played host to Matthew and to my friends Joyce & Jack. It's about to get another visitor, but this visit is going to be a new one for our establishment. This is going to be a long term stay. We're moving from the weekend B&B to the Extended Stay hotel. My brother Gregory will be arriving on Monday and will be calling our couch home until mid-August. In a very last minute offer, he received an invitation to intern at the Architect of the Capitol, which is a really great opportunity. However, by the time the offer was made, the cheapest housing to be found in DC (which is never cheap to begin with) was around $100 a day. Seriously. Unless he lived in the ghetto.

So arrangements were made for Gregory to come live with us for the summer. It will be cozy, for sure, but Jeff and I are glad to be able to help. Fortunately, Gregory is about the easiest person to live with that one could possibly imagine. And I've had plenty of experience living with him before, so we should be just fine. And I have to admit that I think Jeff's pretty excited to have someone in the house who might actually enjoy playing video games with him. It'll be interesting, but isn't life supposed to be?

House Rejects Network Neutrality

Well, last night the house passed the Communications, Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement (COPE) Act and killed a proposed network neutrality amendment. Now it's up to the Senate. Debate hasn't yet begun on the issue, so you still have time to contact your senators and ask them to protect network neutrality. Regardless of whether you support the COPE Act (which you probably do if you're just familiar with the bill as an anti-monopoly bill and not aware of the impact it could have on universal access or the ability of communities to negotiate their own franchises), you should be concerned about network neutrality. I am not a big fan of government regulation, but I'd rather have government say that big telecom doesn't have the right to regulate the Internet than have big telecom determine what I view over the Internet and how quickly I view it.

This article is worth reading for more information on the vote and its effects.

See yesterday's post for more on the issue and on getting involved.

Network Neutrality - Clearly, I'm Serious About This

I know I recently blogged about network neutrality and current telecom legislation, but the battle is really heating up. I'm not sure it's being felt in other areas around the country, but it certainly is being felt here in DC. The big telecoms are bringing in lobbyists by the busload, taking out full page ads in the Washington Post, and running television commercials. Attempting to make companies like Google and eBay look bad by claiming they don't do their part to expand Internet services, and by making claims such as "The Internet can't be free," the big telecom companies are trying to gain control of the Internet. They want to be the gatekeepers of what you see and how fast you see it. They want to change the face of the Internet. The Internet's founder himself (no, not Al Gore) has come out in the favor of network neutrality. It is the way to ensure that the Internet remains what it was intended to be - a network for the free exchange of ideas. Please, please, please take action on this issue. By clicking on the image below, you'll go immediately to a site that will allow you to easily contact your elected officials. If you want to learn more, just go to Google News and type in "network neutrality". You'll get every side of the issue. This opinion piece co-signed by a UIUC and a Stanford professor presents the side I'm on.

A Few Notes On Politics

Kentucky Politics
I just noticed that Governor Ernie Fletcher is running for reelection in Kentucky. Seriously, what kind of superiority complex must he have? First he runs his campaign based on a promise of cleaning up politics. Then he spits in the face of everyone who might have been naive enough to believe that by running one of the more corrupt administrations in recent history, complete with an indictment to prove it. And now he decides to run for reelection? I can just see him sitting in his office sneering at the entire state, making out every single Kentuckian as a pure idiot. How stupid he must think his constituents are. I only hope he's not right. Voting for him is like kicking yourself in the head.

National Politics
And so Bush is back up on his platform railing against gay marriage. Interesting how this issue has been ignored since his reelection but is now back on the table as mid-term elections near. This couldn't be about politics, could it? Unfortunately, that's exactly what it is. It's not about what's right or what's fair, but about what will keep people so fired up that they will ignore all the other issues when it comes time to vote. It's disgusting.

I just don't understand the grounds for outlawing gay marriage. The only rhetoric I ever hear is that the Bible says marriage is between one man and one women. I don't know if this is true, because I've never read the Bible that closely, but I do know that we are a secular nation, so it really shouldn't matter one lick whether the Bible says marriage is between one man and one woman or between one man and one cow or between two women, a siamese cat, and three aliens. It's irrelevant.

As we all know, marriage is a civil institution. Just going to a church and having someone say you're married doesn't cut it in the eyes of the government. You have to apply for a marriage license and have it processed by the state. Marriage is an institution set up to provide protection under the law. Marriage guarantees the right to make medical decisions for a loved one who is incapacitated, it guarantees the right to joint ownership of property, it guarantees the right to file taxes as a couple, it guarantees the right to be covered by a spouse's insurance. Why should two people who love each other and are committed to sharing a life together be denied these rights? What good reason is there for it? What if you were unable to marry your partner of choice because the government denied it - maybe because your partner was the "wrong" race, or age, or weight, or political orientation? We'd all be up in arms over that. So tell me what is the difference?

Civil rights are meant for all people. Remember the "all [men] people are created equal" part of the Constitution? Marriage is a civil right, and thus a right for all people, regardless of whether they love someone of the opposite or the same sex. Gay marriage is not a threat to straight marriage. If you really think about, more than anything, it's a reinforcement of the importance of marriage.

Next Blog

Sometimes after I finish reading someone's blog, if I have nothing else to do, I press the "next blog" button to see what else is out there in the blogger world. Rarely do I find a blog that's as interesting as mine (but that would be pretty hard to find, now wouldn't it?). But I enjoy pressing the button anyways. But the problem is that eventually I always run into a deadend. Someone out there decides that they're too good for the blogger banner bar, and there's no "next blog" for me to check out. Then what am I supposed to do? Sometimes it takes quite a while to get to this point, but I just followed the "next blog" link after commenting on Matt's blog, and I was at a deadend in only two clicks. And the first blog was in a language I don't know and the second blog was a computer how-to blog. Didn't help much with my boredom.

A Working Girl's Summertime Blues

Summer has arrived. Perhaps not according to the calendar and its obsession with solstices, but Memorial Day has come and gone, and the mercury has soared into the 90s. It seems to me that it must be summer.

It's harder to tell now when summer comes and when it goes. That clear demarcation of summer - the last day of school and a few months later, the first day of school - is no longer mine. I no longer have the luxury of a final bell followed by a walk down to the Dairy Queen for a dipped cone or a day of cramming a year's worth of stuff into my parent's car followed by a 17 hour drive back home. The first morning without an alarm clock or the need to be anywhere never comes anymore. No, summer is not the same when there is no break, no man-made delineation of seasons. It's hard when everyday is a 9 to 6 with no deference to the rising mercury, the jingle of the ice cream truck, or the allure of the pool. A week of vacation and a holiday here and there does not make a summer.

So I grasp at summer however I can, trying to keep it from slipping through the air conditioning vents of the office where I sit all day and lament its passing. I take my lunch outside in the Circle, sweating through the heat and humidity of midday DC, defiantly refusing to move into the shade. I savor the sloppiness of perfectly ripe peaches purchased from a farmer's market. I fight off mosquitos and wasps to have my hamburger and corn-on-the-cob on the patio. And I pray to win the lottery, which I unfortunately always forget to play, with the hope of taking back my summer.

Pomp & Circumstance

I'm heading home tomorrow morning for Mark's high school graduation. That's right, my little brother is all grown up. It's hard to believe. When I left for college, he was only 11 years old, and now he's turning 18. Where does all that time go? Sometimes Mark laments being the youngest for just that reason - the rest of us were often missing from some of his moments. But I must say that we've all been there for all the big ones. Hey, we were even there for him being born, and I don't think he can say the same for any of us. And while I'm sure there must be some downsides to being the youngest, I think there must be an awful lot of positives.

ICEEs, for instance. I received my license when Mark was only 9 years old, so I became a regular chauffeur for him. He didn't have to wait for my mom or dad to be available to take him somewhere, the way I did. Instead he'd talk me into taking him wherever he wanted or needed to go. And then he'd sucker me into buying him an ICEE on a whole lot of these trips. His plot involved chanting "K-Mart ICEE" every time we drove anywhere near the K-Mart, which being right down the road, was pretty often. And I, being a sucker for his "It's so hard to be the youngest" spiel, would stop and buy him an ICEE. Thank God they closed the K-Mart or I'd probably still be buying him ICEEs everytime I go home. Hard to be the youngest, huh?

And what about that trip to Greece and Egypt at age 15? I don't know too many 15 year olds out there who've rode a feluca down the Nile or trekked around the Pyramids. Hard to be the youngest, huh?

Or what about having 8th graders fighting to be your Big Brother/Sister when you're in 1st grade because everyone thought you were the world's coolest kid? Or what about never having to drive the 'Vrolet, because the rest of us had killed it by the time you got your license? Or what about getting to go hang out at with your older siblings at college when you're just in high school? Hard to be the youngest, huh?

Oh, I know there are downsides. There always are - oldest, youngest, middle, whatever. It's always a tradeoff, a balance of positives and negatives. But youngest looks pretty good to me. Especially when you're Mark, and you've got so many good things going for you.

But I wouldn't trade with him...I like being the proud big sister.

HR 5252

I would like to ask each of you to contact your Representative in the Federal House and ask him or her to Vote NO on H.R. 5252, The Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006. On the surface, this bill might look good to you - after all, it is supposed "To promote the deployment of broadband networks and services". Yay for broadband, right? Well, in this case, no, not exactly.

One of the main points of the bill, and a point which I find terribly troubling, is the allowance of national franchises. What this means is that large telecom companies like AT&T, Verizon, etc. can establish a national franchise for their services instead of negotiating with each community. Of course, the telecom giants are for this because it makes their lives much easier. But this will be a huge loss for cities. Right now, each city has the right to negotiate a franchise with these companies. In doing so, the city charges a franchising fee and the city bargains for services, such as technology service to schools and government and community facilities. With national franchises, cities will lose the right to bargain for the services that best benefit their citizens and franchising fees will now go to the federal government instead of the local government. For the services that best benefit you and your fellow citizens, it is vital to have franchising controlled at the local level. You can read an example of a city's gains through the negotiation of a cable franchise on one of the Web sites I maintain.

Additionally, the bill does not call for universal service, which is a requirement that companies provide service to all people in an area, not just the ones they pick and choose (ie the people in the most revenue-generating areas). Instead the bill includes anti-discrimination language which the bill's supporters say will, in effect, lead to universal service. However, the bill only protects against intentional discrimination based on income, which is, of course, quite hard to prove. Universal access is necessary to make sure that all Americans have access to technology services and thus have a fair chance at making it in our ever more technology-dependent world. Telecom giants say that "market forces" will ensure universal service, but I question what market forces are in act in a low-income area where only a small percentage of the total population of that area will subscribe to services. Or what market forces are in act in a rural area where it could cost companies more to extend services to those areas than they would be able to generate back from that specific area.

Another contentious area is what is referred to as network neutrality. There is much back and forth on whether the bill will or should include any provisions about network neutrality. It's a very tricky area, and I encourage you to learn more about it. The choices aren't that great: proponents say it will keep the Internet "open". Opponents say it gives the government too much control. Theoretically, without network neutrality, telecom companies could create a "tiered" Internet, in which content delivery would not be controlled by the consumer so much as by the content provider. Theoretically, telecom companies could create relationships with providers who are willing to pay more to have their content transmitted at higher speeds. Thus certain material would flow over high bandwidth and certain over low bandwidth regardless of what service the consumer subscribes to. With network neutrality, the government would have some regulatory powers over the Internet. So I have to say that it's somewhat of a no-win situation. But I don't like the idea of a tiered Internet. Afterall, isn't the great thing about the Internet the free flow of information?

Anyhow, I hope you are still reading and that you will take the time to learn more about this. For work, I've been attending a lot of Congressional briefings on the issue lately, so I do have some knowledge on the topic. This bill will have an effect on everyone in some way or another, but it will especially affect those who are low-income and underserved, so please consider speaking out both on your behalf and theirs. I do hope that after some consideration you will contact your House member and ask them to vote NO on H.R. 5252 based on the reasons I supplied above, particularly federal franchises and the lack of universal service.

Friday Night Winnings

Last year I stumbled across an entry form for the Bethesda Literary Festival Essay Contest, and on a whim, entered the contest. The topic was "Home," which was a theme I felt well versed on and the topic of an essay I'd written in college, so I whittled the 10+ pages down to 500 words and entered. Happily, I won 3rd place and $150.

This year, I received the entry form in the mail with instructions that this year's topic was "Bethesda." I could write anything I wanted, but the essay or fictional piece had to include at least one place in downtown Bethesda. Hmmm. A little harder and definitely not something I'd written about before. But once I thought about, I came up with an idea and the essay flowed pretty easily. Last Friday, eight finalists were summoned to Barnes & Noble for a reading. The four Honorable Mentions were called up, and my name wasn't read. Then the four prize winners were called up, and I was among this group. (Pshew, I hadn't accidentally been called and was indeed a finalist.) Each place was announced, and the corresponding essay was read. I was definitely the youngest person in the adult category, with the oldest a self-declared 80 years old, and the rest primarily middle-aged. After 4th and 3rd prizes were announced, myself and the 80 year old were the only two left. And then they called her name (well, it wasn't my name and she responded, so presumably her name) for the 2nd place prize. Which meant that I had placed first. With this came $500 and a free class at the Writing Center...along with all the accolades I could handle. Actually one woman did ask if I had any books she could buy, but I think she was a little nutty.

Anyhow, for your reading pleasure, I'm including the essay below. It's a fictionalized personal essay, meaning the events are real, but they didn't necessarily unfold in the way they're portrayed, and the people are also real, but are more characters than real-life portrayals. (I'm including this disclaimer so as to avoid any James Frey incidents. Please no Oprah breakdowns, people.)

LIES OF OMISSION

As my husband and I pedal along the Capital Crescent trail, I keep a watch out for turtles, yelling out the number I glimpse sunbathing on logs or somersaulting into the canal, hoping that one of us will remember so that I can tell my grandma how many we saw. When I see her, which isn’t as often as I’d like, or when I talk to her, which isn’t as often as I should, I tell her about our bike rides. I talk about the leaves that catch on the breeze, pirouetting through sun and shadow before landing on the trail. I tell her about the kids pumping their legs so hard that the training wheels on their bikes lift off from the ground and they glide unknowingly on only two wheels. We laugh together about the freshman kayakers who can’t get their boats to go in a straight line, and she asks whether the little girls who were once selling sugary lemonade and gooey brownies were on the trail that day.

When there’s not a bike story to tell, I’ll recount my trips to the Bethesda Farmer’s Market, and together we’ll fawn over the earthy smell of ripe tomatoes and the way that smell always takes me back home to Kentucky summers and BLT sandwiches on the back porch. Sometimes I’ll mention the deer I spy out the window when I’m cleaning dinner dishes at twilight or tell her about the black squirrels so common here.

I keep track of details and file away images so that I always have a story to share with her. But there are so many details I leave out. I don’t tell her about sitting on the floor of Barnes & Noble, a teetering stack of books beside me, as I searched for the perfect guide to bike trails in the area. And I never make her laugh at stories about my attempts to conquer chopsticks during sushi dinners at Matuba. Art gallery hops and Barking Dog Friday night specials find no place in my stories.

It’s not that she wouldn’t be interested in those details, but that those details would complicate her world in a way that I wouldn’t know how to fix. She is at that age now where she spends most of her time looking backwards rather than forwards. She lives in memories—with brown hair, smooth skin, regal posture. She does not recognize the mirror’s reality—the grey hair, the lined face, the body being pulled towards the earth.

And so as not to shatter her fragile cobweb of memories, I don’t tell her that the town she remembers as Bethesda—a town of farmhouses and cornfields where my uncle lived when he once called Maryland home—is not, and was not, Bethesda. Instead, I filter my reality to fit her memory, pulling out the idyllic and removing the urban. Through lies of omission, I make my Bethesda hers.

April's Random Thoughts

I don't really have anything of substance to write about, but I thought I'd write something since it's been a while. So here are some random thoughts for your enjoyment.

• Tuesday was free icecream day at Ben & Jerry's. I caught it at just the right time and only had to wait about 5 minutes while everyone else I talked to had to wait around 30 minutes. Free icecream is quite nice.

• I think the lacrosse guys at Duke are innocent. I think they behaved poorly and didn't exercise good judgment, but I don't think they are guilty of rape. I think it's a false accusation, which, if it is, is absolutely terrible because it only makes true rape cases all the more difficult to prosecute. There are too many loopholes in the case and too little evidence. I believe the prosecutor, who is in an upcoming election, is pursuing the case for political gain (getting tough on crime, etc.), which is wrong, especially considering he is putting other people's lives and reputations on the line. If he had a legitimate case, fine. But since there seems to be no evidence to indict, a decent amount of evidence to acquit, and only her word to substantiate the claims (and she has filed a rape accusation before that appears to have been dropped for whatever reason), I think he's really stretching to make a case. While we'll probably never exactly what happened, I'll say that if I were on the jury, knowing what is known now, I'd vote not guilty.
  

• And on a travel note, Jeff and I have tentative plans to do an around-the-world trip when he gets out of school and before I start school. It would be ideal if he would finish in December 2007, because we'd then have until August 2008 when I'd like to start school to make our trip (But no holding our breaths here.) Anyhow, I'm so excited about the idea, that I've started thinking of all the places I want to go and flipping through guidebooks whenever I see one. Currently I'm focused on the South America portion of the trip. I'd never really been into South America before, but recently I've found it very exciting. Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro, Machu Picchu, the Amazon, Patagonia, Iguazu Falls, the Galapagos... Other than South America, I'd also definitely like to make it to Africa and parts of Asia. The rest can wait if time doesn't permit them from fitting into this trip. We're open to suggestions too, so if you know of somewhere cool, let me know.
  

A Few Denver Photos

Skiing at Winter Park


A Slightly Fuzzy Picture of Us Before the Wedding

Me at Balancing Rock at Garden of the Gods

Garden of the Gods with Pike's Peak in the background


Us at Garden of the Gods


Jeff at the Siamese Twin Formation at Garden of the Gods


Triple Rock Formation at Garden of the Gods


Garden of the Gods