That's What Jenni Said

I started down a rabbit hole of googling because a woman on a message board I frequent was upset that men at her workplace act chivalrous- holding open doors for ladies, carrying boxes, letting them into elevators first, lending umbrellas, etc. She wanted to know if this was actionable under a typical HR department as sexism or discrimination. Several folks who replied said it is called ‘benevolent sexism’ and is a bad thing. So I found this article that summarizes research that indicates chivalry is the carrot (positive reinforcement) afforded to women who maintain the feminine gender role and is the flipside of the stick (derision, violence, ridicule, etc) used when women step outside of the feminine gender role. I never thought about chivalry like this or that it had that sort of subconscious purpose and effect. Now I happen to enjoy (a lot) the traditional gender roles and conforming to the feminine expectations of society and while I don't support the stick to keep people in l...

Why I chose this book  As noted in my last book review entry, I am working my way through three distinct volumes on Middle Eastern history, each focused on a different cultural group whose interests were or are entangled in the region – native Muslims; Americans; native Byzantines. Oren’s book centers on American involvement in the region as seen from the American point of view from the time of our nation’s founding through the present age. Book recommendation: Buy Recommendation Justification: This book is long (over 600 pages) and at times tedious and dry as compared to Ansary’s work which I reviewed yesterday .  While Ansary covered over a thousand years in less than four hundred pages, Oren devotes the same page count for just the first hundred years of the history he is presenting. Still, the knowledge gained from a focused reading makes it well worth the effort. To this end, I suggest reading no more than a few chapters a day to keep from feeling overwhelmed with fact...

Why I chose this book  With the escalations in terrorism and violence directed at Americans over the past decade that have originated in the Middle East, it has been an item on my to-do list for some time to dive into the history of the region. Toward this end, I picked up three distinct volumes concerning the Middle East- the first focused on its comprehensive history from the perspective of the Persian, Turkish, and Arab Muslims starting from the time of Mohammad; the second centered on American involvement in the region as seen from the American point of view from the time of our nation’s founding; the third revealing Middle Eastern history through the eyes of the Eastern Christians (Byzantines) who resided there after the fall of the Roman Empire. Perhaps in time I will also pick up a volume that channels the thoughts of the European powers who were heavily involved in shaping Middle East history. That will just about round out the story from every perspective.  Book reco...

I am too tired to string my thoughts on this matter into coherent paragraphs; please forgive the series of standalone statements. My mother has been the primary caregiver for my father over the past few years while his health as declined. We knew that eventually Dad would need to transition to a nursing home but it was always just that- an “eventually” thing. My parents are in the Medicaid gap. They make too much for medicaid qualification but not enough to pay the costs of long term care on their own. My mother went into the ICU on Tues, near death, from a sugar overdose (blood sugar = 750. 750!), leaving my father helpless. My mother will not be released for the hospital for several days and even when she is she can no longer care for Dad; she is too weak physically. He is incontinent, cannot bathe, dress, or feed himself any longer. A home healthcare agency is providing 24x7 custodial support in the home for Dad and has been since Tues. At $18/hr. My parents cash on h...

Coming as a surprise to many education administrators and counselors who are tasked with shaping our children within the school setting and preparing them for adult responsibilities, studies are now out showing that promoting high self esteem as a cure-all has been a lot of baloney.  The experiment has failed to elicit the changes promised and instead has created a worse problem: narcissism on grand scale (across an entire generation; maybe even two).  Turns out an unrestrained sense of self-worth is pretty dangerous. One of the psychologist bloggers on the political right that I follow has provided interesting insights on the studies; on narcissism; and on the risks of raising children with superegos (dictator training 101) or, at the other extreme - with such a deep sense of worthlessness paired with idealized view of others that they’re willing to sign up for enslavement to the state or jihad crusades. Her essay is here: http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/02/narcissism-a...

Regardless of one's political slant, there is a bit of logic askew to deem education or healthcare a human right. Here's why. In order for something to be a right- a fundamental human right that others cannot take away from you, it cannot involve forcing someone else to do an action. It *can* involve preventing someone from doing something (like killing you; the recognized right to life for example prevents people from killing you without punishment) but it can't compel others to do something otherwise you are stomping on *their* rights to abstain from that activity. The problem with making a good or service that cost $$$ a right means that someone has to pay for it. And, in theory, you cannot force people to work. If you cannot force people to work (that would be against their human rights i.e. forced labor) then you have two problems- one you cannot force someone to teach others or force another to write the curriculum and two you cannot force the general population to...

One thing pneumonia does is afford its victim endless hours to consider philosophy and conduct a comprehensive assessment on one's life. Where is God taking my life this year? What goals do I want to work toward prayerfully? How can I be a better wife, better friend, better community member? I've had so much time to ponder these questions. Other than a weight loss and fitness goal that remains elusive, I've actually accomplished all of the goals I put down to paper a few years ago. It's the first time in my life where I'm not sure where to go next in long term planning. There is nothing I feel compelled to accomplish with burning desire. Instead, I'm quietly asking God to give me some new direction and goals. Jon and I are very different. He is able to find the joyful purpose in ordinary day to day living. No specific goals to strive toward are required to bring a sense of purpose and utility into his life. I love that about him - he embraces simplicity. I under...

Good: Barack Obama has evidenced proof of the American Dream and shown that the practice of racial discrimination and oppression on a national/societal level is a closed chapter of American history. Bad: He's as close to being a utopian socialist as we've had in a leader in a long time. And how will this play out internationally- will his presidency embolden terrorists who will perceive him as weak and scare the oppressed worldwide who are fearful that an Obama led America might not protect them anymore? Good: We leave for Peru tomorrow! New adventures. Bad: There are calls for a national strike this week that may prevent us from getting to Manchu Picchu once we are in Peru or prevent us from leaving the country when we are ready to come home. Good: my mother is settling in better in Woodbridge and getting to know people. Bad: She is rubbing in my face how the paid caregiver we hired is "practically a daughter" who "loves her and takes her places like a dau...

For molecularshyness : Wasn't it the republican party that was founded in part on an anti-slavery platform? Wasn't it the *republicans* who propped up Abe Lincoln and strongly favored ending slavery? Wasn't it the *republicans* who championed civil rights legislation while democrats filibustered it? The republicans support business because business (including businesses owned by blacks and other minorities) are the backbone of our capitalist economy which preserve our other freedoms. Hard to preserve anti-discrimination laws in hiring if there are no businesses. Hard to preserve anti-discrimination laws in property purchases if no one has money due to a poor economy. On the other hand, the democrats support giving away the US treasury as much as possible to those they view as needing help from the government- and largely that has been people they look down upon as helpless or ignorant (blacks, immigrants, etc). As I discussed in my previous post, freed slaves were mai...

First party system: inception to 1836 Federalists - broad central power - Hamilton. supported England in French- England war. Stronghold in New England. Anti-federalists - limited federal power. anti-national bank. supported the French revolution. Thomas Jefferson. supported France in 1793 French English war. ...also called democrat-republicans. Second party system: 1837 to 1852 Federalists disappeared. Anti-federalists split into multiple parties- [1] Jackson democrats who were against the bank of the united states b/c it was too centralized and too corporate. farmers and common/poor man were in this party from the start. Believed in appointing friends/supporters of like mind when becoming president instead of letting the previous executive employees stay in tenure. [2] bankers and businessman therefore fell together into the Whig party. They supported public works programs and subsidies to businesses and high taxes on imports to protect American businesses...

oil market and today represents more than 50% of oil purchases on the commodity market. Speculative purchasing involve buying a whole lot of a commodity you don't actually need with the anticipation that someone else does need it eventually and will pay you more than you bought it for to get it. Think of it like domain squatting, but with commodities like oil, oj, etc. I definitely agree that speculation can drive commodity prices up. And I agree that it sucks. But is it moral for the government to step in and tell people who is allowed to buy a commodity and when they can sell it and how many times you can sell it? That's micromanagement control. I realize it may be constitutional since the trading crosses state lines, but is it moral? Edit: More researching on the fact and discussing it with economic types brings new information. Its just a *theory* that oil speculation is driving up costs. The counter argument is that if the oil speculator middlemen were not buying the oil...

I do not like McCain. I do not like McCain. I do not like McCain.   I do not like Romney. I do not like Romney. I do not like Romney.   According to the presidental candidate selector at selectsmart.com however, my results are shown below. Obviously I need to do more research on McCain to see if I can get over his angry-little-man personality and support him since apparently I do, in theory, agree with most of his positions. My big issues are foreign policy [do not give up on Iraq; support free trade], immigration [increase legal immigration;offer a guest worker program and amnesty, build a fence for security going forward], lower taxes, absolute opposition to universal health care, support of 2nd amendment gun rights, and in general a president who will discourage congress from getting involved in domestic issues they have no constitutional jurisdiction over [like marriage, divorce, funding for the arts, etc, etc]. 1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%) 2. Alan Keye...