monkey nonsense

was reading an article from the washingtonpost about the latest trends in high school naming…

“Of almost 3,000 public schools in Florida, five honor George Washington, compared to 11 named after manatees. . . . In the last two decades, a public school built in Arizona was almost fifty times more likely to be named after such things as a mesa or a cactus than after a president.”

baaaaaaaah, the Great Googali Moogali Goo is very excited and eagerly awaits news from Florida about when a new high school will be named after him!

rest of the article here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902028.html?hpid=topnews

interesting cnn article about whether or not you can tell if someone is gay from the way they walk.  a grad student is doing research into this by having people walk around with red lights on them in the dark and recording their strides.  because all you see is their outline and stride, you’re not biased by any other things that might give you clues as to their sexual orientation.  he theorizes that your sexual orientation is as basic as your stride which can’t really be chosen/changed, supporting the nature side of the nature vs. nurture argument.

take a look at the videos and see if you can figure out who’s gay or not (answers available too) – http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/26/sexuality/index.html

i wasn’t able to load all the videos so i haven’t really watched them to see how accurate i am.  but it’s kind of interesting… just today, on my way into work, i saw this girl walking in front of me in a skirt and i couldn’t help but feel that the way she was walking seemed more like a guy than a girl.  i didn’t realize until that moment that guys have a certain bounce in their step and girls walk their own certain way… i wonder whether gay/straight also impacts your stride.

i’m a fan of stupid lawsuits. i think it’s amusing what people can think of to sue about… for example, suing (former) friends over starting a competing chinese school that will steal students (not rightfully your property) away which will reduce the amount of profit your non-profit chinese school makes. hrm…

there’s a lot of news going on about the $65 million Pants lawsuit… so apparently, a guy is suing the owners of a cleaner (Chung family) because he claims the pants they returned after the $10.50 alteration he dropped it off for are not his. but apparently, he’s taken on “‘the awesome responsibility’ of suing the Chungs on behalf of every resident of the District of Columbia.” i wonder if everyone in DC will be receiving their share of the money. some other of my favorite quotes from coverage of the case (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/12/AR2007061201667.html):

From the start, Pearson kept referring to himself as “we,” as if he were representing everyone in town. Bartnoff was having none of it: “Mr. Pearson, you are not a ‘we.’ You are an ‘I.’”

After questioning eight witnesses, Pearson spent two hours telling his own story, but as he came to the part about when Soo Chung finally told him she had found the missing pants, the tale of the $10.50 alteration that went awry proved to be too much.

“These are not my pants,” Pearson recalled telling Chung when she handed him a pair of gray pants with cuffs. “I have in my adult life, with one exception, never worn pants with cuffs.”

“And she said, ‘These are your pants.’ ”

Pearson paused. He struggled to breathe deeply. He could not continue. Pearson blurted a request for a break, stood up, turned around and walked out of the courtroom, tears dripping from his full and reddened eyes.

he also wants to be awarded attorney’s fees, even though he represents himself. He would like to be paid at a rate of between $390 and $425 an hour.

and from blog coverage of the case (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher/2007/06/pants_trial_day_two_we_see_the.html?hpid=topnews):

“Your position,” Bartnoff said to Pearson this morning, “is that ‘Satisfaction Guaranteed’ means they have to satisfy whatever you demand, with no limitations, absolutely unconditionally?”

“That’s correct,” Pearson replied.

“I have grave doubts about that,” said the judge.

and people’s response to the blog post:

I want to hire him as my attoney. So, if he does not satisfy me, I can get $ 54 million.

hehehehehhehehhe

From a washingtonpost.com article…

The Brangelina of Wilson Bridge’s Bald Eagle Set
Widower George Nests With Martha’s Rival
By Daniela Deane
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 6, 2007; B01

Martha is scarcely cold in the grave, and George has already shacked up with another bald eagle. Worse: It’s the nestwrecker who tried to peck to death Martha, George’s longtime mate and the mother of his 16 eaglets.

Even the brawny bunch of construction workers on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge project near the eagles’ nest are aghast. They call the younger bird in George’s life “Camilla,” “Angelina” and “Charlotte the Harlot.”

“George has taken a second wife,” said John Undeland, spokesman for the bridge project. “He’s moving on with his life.”

Last April, George and Martha, as nicknamed by the bridge workers, made national headlines when Martha was attacked by — oh, let’s just call her Angelina — a rival for George’s attentions.

Martha, who had lived with George on Rosalie Island on the Maryland side of the bridge since the 1990s, was seriously injured in Angelina’s bloody midair attack and was taken to a bird rescue center in Delaware, where she recovered in a few weeks. Bridge workers cheered when she made her way back to her George soon after she was released into the wild in Delaware.

But tragedy struck again in September, when Martha flew into a tree or a power line and dislocated an elbow in her right wing. She was euthanized, and veterinarians said then she was at least 13 years old. A bald eagle’s normal life span is about 20 years.

Throughout the ordeal, Angelina — a far younger eagle than Martha who is described as “in her prime” (aren’t they always?) — never really went away. And now, she has just plain moved into Martha’s old home.

“Since January, they’ve gotten closer and closer, first hanging out on the same branch, one in the nest, the other right beside it, then in the same nest,” said Michael S. Baker, environmental manager for the bridge project.

The only thing the two new lovebirds don’t seem to have done yet, Baker said, is produce some eaglets.

“They were spending so much time together that we were somewhat hopeful they would do their thing and lay some eggs,” Baker said. “But they’re just not there yet.”

Baker said they’re sure because if there were eggs, one of the eagles would always be protecting the nest.

Baker offered several possible reasons why the eagles are “still only courting.”

“George lost his longtime mate, and the two of them have only been together a couple of months,” he said. “It’s only been a few months since all the craziness between the females. Even for a wild animal, that’s a lot.”

Baker also said that although George and Martha were acclimated to the heavily traveled bridge, which carries about 200,000 vehicles a day, Angelina might not be “comfortable with all that urban activity.” He said workers have also seen the eagles on nearby farm property, one of them carrying a stick, prompting scientists to speculate they might be building another nest elsewhere. Namibia, perhaps?

George also might be getting a bit long in the tooth for eaglets, Baker said. “George and Martha were on the far edge of sexual viability as it was,” he said. “George may have a few good years left in him, but he may not. Maybe we should get him Viagra.”

Tugboat captain Paul Lingle, who works on the bridge project, said that when Angelina attacked Martha, “she wasn’t in our good graces.”

But, he said, the workers will probably, eventually, come around to the new gal in town.

“I guess she’s good for George,” he said. “So, yeah, I think we will warm up to her.”

interesting article in the washingtonpost today about a 20 year long study to see if your behavior as a 1 year influences
your future romances.

oh weird… i hadn’t even noticed but it mentions a researcher at CMU!
from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/11/AR2007021100931.html

Plagued With Relationship Troubles? Blame Your Parents.
By Shankar Vedantam
Monday, February 12, 2007; A02

So, Valentine’s Day is two days away, but you know he isn’t going to bring you any flowers. And instead of a cuddle and a kiss, you know she is going to dig up that old canard about your mother.

Does your relationship feel like an endless rerun of “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” — Edward Albee’s grim masterpiece of domestic disharmony? Do you always spend Valentine’s Day alone? Do all those smooching couples sound like idiotic moths banging their heads against a windowpane?

If the answer to any of these questions is yes, science can finally provide a simple explanation — and a measure of grim satisfaction: Blame your parents!

Forget about Hallmark cards and chocolate. Just in time for Valentine’s Day, scientists are announcing the results of an astonishing two-decade-long study that explored the connection between insecure infants and relationship problems in young adults. Turns out the kind of baby you were at 12 months can say a lot about the kind of lover you will be at 21.

“If you are more insecure when you are 1, you are more likely to experience more negative emotions in your relationship with your current partner when you are 21,” said psychologist Jeffry Simpson at the University of Minnesota.

People from Sigmund Freud on down have made arguments about the role of early relationships in later life. But Simpson and his colleagues have shown for the first time, in a paper in the current issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, an empirical connection between early behavioral patterns and romantic relationships years down the road.

The study closely tracked 78 people over a quarter-century, starting when they were babies. Mothers and infants were brought into a laboratory, and the mothers were asked to leave briefly. The infants became upset, of course, but the psychologists were interested in what happened when the mothers returned. Some infants clung tightly to their mothers and sought comfort. In a little while, they calmed down. But others refused to calm down even after lengthy soothing. And some babies refused to turn to their mothers for comfort at all.

Simpson said research has shown that secure infants turn to their parents when they are upset: “The kid learns, ‘I can count on my parents to calm me down.’ They learn to turn to others. Whereas insecure kids learn that my parent is either rejecting or they learn my parent is neglectful. Or ‘I have to protest to get attention.’ ”

The researchers checked in with the children again when they were in first through third grade. They asked teachers how each child compared in social skills with other children in the class — especially when the child was upset. Did she act out her anger or reach out to others to solve the problem?

The next check came at another developmental milestone, when the kids were teenagers. The psychologists studied how the adolescents reached out to their best friends for support: “Do you rely on your best same-sex friend at 16 to calm you down or do you distract yourself?” Simpson asked.

Finally, the researchers studied the people when they were between ages 21 and 23. They asked the volunteers how often they felt happy or sad in their romantic relationships. The volunteers’ romantic partners were asked to describe the relationship as well. Finally, the couples were presented with a conflict and given 30 minutes to try to resolve it. Researchers videotaped the couples as they dealt with the problem and the emotions it produced.

“We find if you are insecure at age 1, that predicts being rated as being less socially competent than your peers during grades one-two-three, which predicts less reliance on your best same-sex friend when you are upset at 16, which then predicts more negative emotion in a romantic relationship at age 21 to 23,” Simpson said.

Does this mean all insecure infants are doomed to a lifetime of unhappiness? Simpson argued otherwise. Human destiny is not so circumscribed, he said. What the study showed is how each developmental step influences the next, positively or negatively. While it is certainly best to be started in the right direction, people can always learn the skills needed for successful relationships.

At its core, said Brooke Feeney, a social psychologist at Carnegie Mellon University who published another study in the same journal, research into the factors that predict happiness in our personal lives reveals a paradox about relationships — and a timely lesson for Valentine’s Day.

Contrary to the popular American myth that people left to fend for themselves become strong and independent, the psychological research seems to show exactly the opposite is true: It is the people who are confident enough to reach out to others for help — and to whom help is given — who become truly capable of independence.

Like those crying infants in Simpson’s study who turned to their mothers for support and, once comforted, resumed their explorations of the world, Feeney found that romantic partners similarly become more independent once their emotional needs are met.

“It is a lot easier for people to take risks and accept challenges when they know someone is available to help them and comfort them if something goes wrong,” Feeney said. “The most secure individuals are able to turn to other people for support.”

Surgery on Girl Raises Ethical Questions
By LINDSEY TANNER
The Associated Press
Thursday, January 4, 2007; 7:27 PM

CHICAGO — In a case fraught with ethical questions, the parents of a severely mentally and physically disabled child have stunted her growth to keep their little “pillow angel” a manageable and more portable size.

The bedridden 9-year-old girl had her uterus and breast tissue removed at a Seattle hospital and received large doses of hormones to halt her growth. She is now 4-foot-5; her parents say she would otherwise probably reach a normal 5-foot-6.

The case has captured attention nationwide and abroad via the Internet, with some decrying the parents’ actions as perverse and akin to eugenics. Some ethicists question the parents’ claim that the drastic treatment will benefit their daughter and allow them to continue caring for her at home.

University of Pennsylvania ethicist Art Caplan said the case is troubling and reflects “slippery slope” thinking among parents who believe “the way to deal with my kid with permanent behavioral problems is to put them into permanent childhood.”

Right or wrong, the couple’s decision highlights a dilemma thousands of parents face in struggling to care for severely disabled children as they grow up.

“This particular treatment, even if it’s OK in this situation, and I think it probably is, is not a widespread solution and ignores the large social issues about caring for people with disabilities,” Dr. Joel Frader, a medical ethicist at Chicago’s Children’s Memorial Hospital, said Thursday. “As a society, we do a pretty rotten job of helping caregivers provide what’s necessary for these patients.”

The case involves a girl identified only as Ashley on a blog her parents created after her doctors wrote about her treatment in October’s Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. The journal did not disclose the parents’ names or where they live; the couple do not identify themselves on their blog, either.

Shortly after birth, Ashley had feeding problems and showed severe developmental delays. Her doctors diagnosed static encephalopathy, which means severe brain damage. They do not know what caused it.

Her condition has left her in an infant state, unable to sit up, roll over, hold a toy or walk or talk. Her parents say she will never get better. She is alert, startles easily, and smiles, but does not maintain eye contact, according to her parents, who call the brown-haired little girl their “pillow angel.”

She goes to school for disabled children, but her parents care for her at home and say they have been unable to find suitable outside help.

An editorial in the medical journal called “the Ashley treatment” ill-advised and questioned whether it will even work. But her parents say it has succeeded so far.

She had surgery in July 2004 and recently completed the hormone treatment. She weighs about 65 pounds, and is about 13 inches shorter and 50 pounds lighter than she would be as an adult, according to her parents’ blog.

“Ashley’s smaller and lighter size makes it more possible to include her in the typical family life and activities that provide her with needed comfort, closeness, security and love: meal time, car trips, touch, snuggles, etc.,” her parents wrote.

Also, Ashley’s parents say keeping her small will reduce the risk of bedsores and other conditions that can afflict bedridden patients. In addition, they say preventing her from going through puberty means she won’t experience the discomfort of periods or grow breasts that might develop breast cancer, which runs in the family.

“Even though caring for Ashley involves hard and continual work, she is a blessing and not a burden,” her parents say. Still, they write, “Unless you are living the experience … you have no clue what it is like to be the bedridden child or their caregivers.”

Caplan questioned how preventing normal growth could benefit the patient. Treatment that is not for a patient’s direct benefit “only seems wrong to me,” the ethicist said.

Dr. Douglas Diekema, an ethicist at Children’s Hospital and Regional Medical Center in Seattle, where Ashley was treated, said he met with the parents and became convinced they were motivated by love and the girl’s best interests.

Diekema said he was mainly concerned with making sure the little girl would actually benefit and not suffer any harm from the treatment. She did not, and is doing well, he said.

“The more her parents can be touching her and caring for her … and involving her in family activities, the better for her,” he said. “The parents’ argument was, `If she’s smaller and lighter, we will be able to do that for a longer period of time.’”

___

On the Net:

Ashley’s blog: http://ashleytreatment.spaces.live.com

Journal: http://www.archpediatrics.com

from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/04/AR2007010401060.html

i was reading an article about billy graham and his family trying to decide where to be buried once they’ve died. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ article/2006/12/12/AR2006121201338_pf.html) it was an interesting article… i guess the subject is a touchy one and it’s interesting to hear how families are dealing with it. it’s pretty cool that it seems his family has two really nice burial places to pick from, but bahhhh! when i read the description about one of the places:

The tour is geared particularly to children, according to Franklin, starting with the life-size mechanical Holstein named Bessie who greets visitors from her stall just inside the front door.What Bessie will say is yet to be decided, Franklin said, but she might start off with something like, “Hello. I bet you didn’t know milk comes from a cow. Well, let me tell you about that.” She’ll then introduce the main man: “When Billy was young, we cows knew there was something special about him. . . .”

first off… talking cows?! bah! what’s that got to do with billy graham!? second… what kind of start is it when you start talking about milk? and what kind of transition is “well, let me tell you about that” …. and then when billy was young?!

HAHAHHAHAHAHA, this is so sad!!
NASHVILLE, Tennessee (AP) — It is considered polite to light a match after passing gas. Not while on a plane.

An American Airlines flight was forced to make an emergency landing Monday morning after a passenger lit a match to disguise the scent of flatulence, authorities said.

The Dallas-bound flight was diverted to Nashville after several passengers reported smelling burning sulfur from the matches, said Lynne Lowrance, spokeswoman for the Nashville International Airport Authority. All 99 passengers and five crew members were taken off and screened while the plane was searched and luggage was screened.

The FBI questioned a passenger who admitted she struck the matches in an attempt to conceal a “body odor,” Lowrance said. She had an unspecified medical condition, authorities said.

“It’s humorous in a way but you feel sorry for the individual, as well,” she said. “It’s unusual that someone would go to those measures to cover it up.”

The flight took off again, but the woman was not allowed back on the plane. The woman, who was not identified, was not charged in the incident.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

from http://www.cnn.com/2006/TRAVEL/12/06/plane.passing.gas.ap/index.html

oh those french canadians!

In French-Speaking Canada, the Sacred Is Also Profane
Quebecers Turn to Church Terms, Rather Than the Sexual or Scatological, to Vent Their Anger
By Doug Struck
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, December 5, 2006; A21

MONTREAL — “Oh, tabernacle!” The man swore in French as a car splashed through a puddle, sending water onto his pants. He could never be quoted in the papers here. It is too profane.

So are other angry oaths that sound innocuous in English: chalice, host, baptism. In French-speaking Quebec, swearing sounds like an inventory being taken at a church.

English-speaking Canadians use profanities that would be well understood in the United States, many of them scatological or sexual terms. But the Quebecois prefer to turn to religion when they are mad. They adopt commonplace Catholic terms — and often creative permutations of them — for swearing.

In doing so, their oaths speak volumes about the history of this French province.

“When you get mad, you look for words that attack what represses you,” said Louise Lamarre, a Montreal cinematographer who must tread lightly around the language, depending on whether her films are in French or English. “In America, you are so Puritan that the swearing is mostly about sex. Here, since we were repressed so long by the church, people use religious terms.”

And the words that are shocking in English — including the slang for intercourse — are so mild in Quebecois French they appear routinely in the media. But not church terms.

“You swear about things that are taboo,” said André Lapierre, a professor of linguistics at the University of Ottawa. In the United States, “it is not appropriate to talk about sex or scatological subjects, so that is what you use in your curse words. The f-word is a perfect example.

“In Canadian French, you have none of the sexual aspects. So what do you replace it with? You replace it with religion. If you are going to use a taboo word, it would be anything related to the cult, to Christ, the Communion wafer, Jesus Christ, vestments, and elements of the altar like tabernacle. There’s quite a few of them.”

Visitors from France are dumbfounded at that use of French, said Lamarre. “But that’s because they got away from domination of the church a long time ago. They cut off the head of the king really early. We didn’t do that.”

The Catholic Church was overwhelmingly dominant in Quebec from early in the province’s history — England’s King George III gave the French Catholic clergy enormous power in 1774, in part to counter the growing American insurgency to the south. In the “Quiet Revolution” of the 1960s, Quebecers rebelled. They “just stopped going to church one Sunday,” as Lamarre put it.

The swearwords have persisted even though church attendance has plummeted in the past 40 years. Because of that drop, “when the young kids on the street are swearing, they don’t even know what they are swearing about,” mused Monsignor Francis Coyle, pastor of St. Patrick’s Basilica in Montreal. “They’re baptized in church, and that’s about it.”

Last spring, the Montreal Archdiocese commissioned an advertising campaign that erected large billboards in the city intended to shock and educate. Each billboard featured a word like “tabernacle” or “chalice” — startling swearwords on the street — and offered the correct dictionary definition for the religious term. Such as: “Tabernacle — small cupboard locked by key in the middle of the altar” containing the sacred goblet.

“The point was to try to get people not to use the terms too glibly,” Coyle said.

The campaign ended, but Lapierre said Quebecers continue to use the words in highly inventive ways — as expletives, interjections, verbs, adverbs and nouns. One could say, for example, “You Christ that guy,” to mean throwing a person violently. “I don’t know any other language that does that so well,” he said.

The French here also modify the oaths into non-words, depending on the level of politeness desired. The word “bapteme” — baptism — is used as a strong oath, but a modification, “bateche,” is milder. The sacramental wafer, a “host” in English and “hostie” in French, can be watered down to just the sound “sst” in polite company. “Tabernacle” can become just “tabar” to avoid too much offense.

The oaths are so ingrained that one cannot converse fluently without them, said Lapierre. “I teach them in my class.”

sienna miller and pittsburgh fight!

apparently she called the town shitsburgh…. hahahahhahahahahahahha