Tonight Patty and I are dining with friends of hers, then tomorrow it's my parents, and then Wednesday it's just us and Thursday night she gets on a plane. Deep breaths. What's great about Cardiff is this time I won't have to go those two - three weeks where it's impossible to hear from her. Those are always the worst.
Right now I have two pitches out that I'm waiting to hear on. My goal for the fall, if I can manage it, is to always have three things out awaiting answer. That way, nothing looms too large and neurotically in my head, and I produce more and get stuff done. Also, if someone says no, most of these things can be retooled for other potential markets/outlets/mediums/whatevers.
Meanwhile, 'tis the season in New York. We're just off Fashion Week, now moving into the New York Film Festival and shortly into the New York Musical Theater Festival. It's the most wonderful time of the year -- that is, if you care and have the time and the cash and the clout. Me? Any year I can't get into the opening night of the NYFF always feels slightly tragic to me. I saw Akira Kurasowa's Ran with my parents the year it opened the festival, sitting up in the balcony in a hand-painted sweatshirt dress and a big clunky antique anklet on that had been my grandmother's in the old country. Kurasowa spoke and everyone below us was in black tie, and you could feel in the air that it mattered. It's one of the only times I can think of where I wasn't where I wanted to be, but it was happily close enough.
Speaking of that time of year -- it's time for the Regency Assembly in New Haven CT -- October 16 & 17th. (yes, Dragon*Con Recency people, I still owe you a post, but you should come to this!). Baring extreme social excitement, this will probably be my last public outing before I leave for my 5 weeks in Europe at the end of that month, so if you want to say hi, come to Connecticut.
Girl on a Whaleship! In 1868 a six-year-old girl went with her family on a 3-year whaling voyage and kept a journal, now scanned in and available online.
At the polls, it's anger vs. despair and that breaks down along gender lines: men are angry, women are despairing and may stay home from voting. I could make comments. I could make a lot of comments, but they'd reinforce a lot of gender dichotomous stuff I work hard not to believe in or pay attention to when it comes to my opinion other people, so I'm just going to let it sit there, because you're all smart enough to draw your own conclusions.
Paul Krugman, meanwhile, on the rage of the rich. Btw, it's worth noting that study after study show that something like 98% of Americans, when polled, define themselves as a higher economic class than they actually are. There's some interesting lines to be drawn through my first voter rage link to this one, in light of that.
Keeping kids safe from the wrong dangers: statistically, it's irresponsible to put your kid in your car and drive them to the orthodontist; they're a lot safer if they walk there. Alone.
The German foreign minister has entered into a civil partnership. Good on him. Article linked because it notes how civil partnership in Germany conveys most of the same rights as marraige, oh, except tax benefits and the right to jointly adopt children. I'm so sick of all these "I suppose that will do" footnotes. Also can you imagine having such a high-ranking openly gay official in the US? Yeah, thought not.
So, Boardwalk Empire: Scorsese is at his best when he's working with music, and the same is true for this show so far. Much of the rest of it feels flat, and it's perhaps my own biases (and the heavily rhythmic trailers) that left me feeling this was something of a disappointment. On the other hand, Scorsese is also often at his best when working with small New York stories, so there may be hope for this, even as Atlantic City is on the fringe of New York. Certainly, it's no surprise to me that what shines the most in this show so far is the surprisingly sweet and wry face of the young Al Capone, a figure who is so far, merely a winking footnote to the audience. "Think about what this man will become!" the show cries. But I want the show to tell me a damn story. I'll be fannish if I'm fannish, and I'm happy to do the intellectual work, but the show should do its own hopefully compelling narrative work.
I've also seen a bit of discussion about the presentation of race in the series (notably, an early sequence showing a white band in black-face). Yes, it's historically accurate. But, that doesn't make it unreasonable for people to talk about how it makes them uncomfortable or whether or not showing this moment is necessary to the construction of the show. It's not appropriate to dismiss that conversation, even if you ultimately disagree with the conclusions any particular person involved in it reaches.
Last night on Angel: We watched "Number 5" and the one about Wesley's robot dad. Both episodes are problematic, and both episodes are saved by their heart and their performances.
I really, really did not know what to do with "Number 5". Is this Angel does Tarrantino? How much of this is as things happen in a supernatural reality and how much of this is as heightened (un)reality narrative bias? Is this racist? Should Whedon ever be allowed near anything that pretends to be about South American or Latin American or Hispanic cultures? Ever? Because I remember "Inca Mummy Girl" and so do you. On the other hand, it had such a small, gentle, touching ending, and I do like the idea that everyone, even the dude you think it just a punchline has an important, meaningful story and deserves your respect.
The Wesley's robot dad episode has its own set of problems. Namely, robot ninjas raining from the sky. Ninjas are a crappy shortcut in terms of narrative and racial presentation (faceless Asian horde, seriously?). On the other hand, the performances knock this out of the park -- we see the awkward Wesley we remember from Buffy, we see a man who is both too ruthless (Wes, just because you have nothing left to live for and would happily give up your life for the greater good, doesn't mean everyone else is on that page) and too generous (for fuck's sake, TELL FRED) to be happy, and, ultimately, we see a man who doesn't know quite what to think about his own childhood. Was his father merely cruel (not that words don't do a lot of damage) or as was referenced in an episode way back (Patty had to remind me) actually physically abusive? What makes Wesley the worse man? the desire to connect with his father or the desire to kill him? None of this works without Alexis Denisof being able to run rings around a simple script (again, ninjas? must we?).
This is also an episode that speaks, again, to so much of early Torchwood -- Wesley and Angel touching base after a night of professional disasters. Wesley, worrying about how their fearless, remote, miserable leader is doing, more than being worried about his own pain related to robot girlfrienddad. I can see watching this and shouting at the TV "what is this? Why is it here? What is the deal with these two? It makes no sense!" and I see how you get from here to Jack/Ianto "Cyberwoman" - "They Keep Killing Suzie" -- because none of that makes any sense either, it just seems to thanks to sex.
It's worth noting that if I write about pop-culture and race on here, I invariably get a lot of Hetalia ads.
Trying to raise a fairly free-range kid in an atmosphere that wants to believe there are rapists, abductors, molesters, and murderers hiding in the bushes and on the buses is frustrating beyond belief.
I had a conversation about the safety of the public buses in Mont. Co. the other day with our piano teacher. She didn't think the buses were safe enough for an 11 1/2 year old on her own.
Having ridden the local buses often the last few years, they are safer than many other options on a variety of levels. The accidents have been few and far between and deaths haven't occurred at all. I've been sexually harassed whilst waiting for the bus (it was super late and so there was time to start chatting) but never been accosted riding the bus. I have no problems with my daughter taking the bus on her own, if she feels up to it; she still has some reservations.
My daughter has to be driven to school now because there are no county school buses that run from our neighborhood to her new school. All three of us (including my husband who takes her to school; I pick her up) are at much greater risk for injury/death from being in a car accident on the way to and from her school than we were before when I was either taking public transit the entire way or driving a much shorter distance to the Metro station and she was walking to school and riding the school bus.
Not to mention that for women, our greatest risk is in the home and around people we know. We are far more likely to be killed/raped/beat up by a relative, former sig. other, or an acquaintance than a stranger.
I try to combat misinformation but it's so prevalent that it feels like emptying the ocean with an eyedropper.
I have a small play ground right out my back gate (within loud speaking voice distance) and I regularly let my daughter go alone to the play ground starting at about 4 1/2. Mind you when she was that young, I stood on the back deck, watched her walk all the way and then stood in the kitchen and watched her play. I still had "concerned" people who didn't know me comment to me about not being there to watch her.
I started letting her go to the farther play ground when she was about 8.
Things have changed so much. Too many playgrounds are designed for tiny kids, 6 and under, rather than the 6 and up set. So by the time kids are being allowed to go play outside, they are too big for the equipment.
Plus, few kids play outside any more. Our neighborhood is full of kids of all ages and the playgrounds are usually empty. The basketball court often has guys playing but that's it. I can walk all around the neighborhood and see very few kids outside, goofing off.
I don't remember how the issue came up (maybe Westerwelle went to Saudi Arabia), but the status quo was maintained: Westerwelle's partner doesn't travel to countries where it would be obviously problematic; Westerwelle says that by being an openly gay foreign minister, he's accomplishing something, regardless of where his partner is. (Never mind that his partner and everyone else's presumably have lives and things to do.) I don't think the question of unfair scrutiny ever got resolved, as these things never do.
There was a business component to this as well (well, I think there were two travel to-dos--I think I got them a bit confused and the scrutiny question was the business travel row): http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,684722,00.html As ever, it's only possible to find things on the Spiegel website in the language you're not looking for--hopefully Google Translate won't make a hash of that.
I mean, on a certain level I agree with the guy's partner not traveling to countries that have significant anti-gay laws, because it sucks if it's okay for the political guy with diplomatic immunity to have his partner there in a country where citizens can be imprisoned or worse for being gay.
The statistics about cars vs. other kinds of dangers are what make me a "bad mom" (drinking wine during pregnancy, letting my kid climb on stuff that's too big, etc.). It seems that people only want to outlaw fun risks, not the ones that actually matter.
We're a one-car family where I mostly walk, precisely because I understand something about statistics.
We used to practically live outside. Video games (i.e. original and super nintendo woo!) were for rainy days and sometimes in the evenings.
Now, I'm not a parent yet, but I see my cousins and friends with their kids, and it almost seems like they're over-sheltering them. I asked one of my cousins why she doesn't let her kids do what she was allowed to do when she was their age, and she says that things are different now. I don't know if it's that things are different, but attitudes definitely are. I have no idea how these kids are supposed to grow up and become responsible independent adults if they're never allowed to grow up with any sort of independence or responsibilities. But like I said, I'm not a parent, so maybe I shouldn't be saying anything.
Amen. I've been yelled at for drinking while pregnant (science says it's fine occasionally) but not for driving (statistics say there's a decent chance of awfulness). If I felt like getting into a discussion about it with strangers, I'd be wasting a lot of time.
And then this episode review/analysis which touches upon Wes/Fred and Wes/Lilah and has some of the best ever insights into both ships that I've ever read.
statistically, it's irresponsible to put your kid in your car and drive them to the orthodontist; they're a lot safer if they walk there. Alone.
Statistically, most kids do not live in the Death Race 2000 remake that is my neighborhood. Fucking Coney Island Avenue. (Obviously we walk everywhere anyway because this is NYC and I don't own a car, but GOOD GOD LOCAL DRIVERS THE RED LIGHTS ARE THERE FOR A REASON.)
Yes, it's a delicate balance no matter what. I suppose "Would you go there without diplomatic immunity?" is not a terrible test to employ. On the other hand, there are surely places where you'd be okay as a foreigner or a tourist, but where the situation is not good for locals.
Things have changed. People are more aware of certain dangers and there is more pressure to try and "do something" about those dangers.
My best friend has kids in the Spotsylvania Co. Va. school system and for the elementary students (5th grade and younger) someone has to be waiting at the end of the driveway for them when they are dropped off/picked up. If no one is at the end of the driveway, the bus drivers are instructed to not let the kids off the bus and return them to school where a parent/alternate responsible adult is then called to come get the kids.
This is because a trio of girls (12-16) were kidnapped and killed (Kristin and Kati Lisk and Sofia Silva) there in 1997 after getting off the school bus. Mind you, these girls would've all been too old to be included in this rule and all of them old enough to pick up younger kids.
In general, things are better for kids. Wearing seat belts and bike helmets, being in car seats, and in the back seat saves lives.
In suburbia though, people are way too afraid, when they really have no reason to be.
I am in total agreement with wondering about the currents kids learning to be independent. It's so hard to get them to want to be that independent sometimes.
I regularly have conversations with my daughter on how old she thinks she should be for thing X to happen (date, ride the bus by herself, walk to the local grocery store, go to the farther away playgrounds, etc.) She regularly says an older age than I do. Our kids are picking up that we think the world is a terrifying place, even when it isn't.
Joining you in the "crap mom" camp because I let my daughter do all sorts of things that are "dangerous" like stay at home by herself for a bit or walk to the grocery store by herself.
I regularly have conversations with my daughter on how old she thinks she should be for thing X to happen (date, ride the bus by herself, walk to the local grocery store, go to the farther away playgrounds, etc.) She regularly says an older age than I do. Our kids are picking up that we think the world is a terrifying place, even when it isn't.
This. My parents were extremely over-protective of me, but all I wanted was to take the short public bus ride from across the street from our house and walk a few blocks to my school. In, btw, one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in New York City.
I can't imagine being ten and not chaffing for more freedom.
Do parents let their 16-year-olds go on spring break trips on their own anymore? I wasn't allowed to go to Cancun like some of my friends, but a group of my friends and I went to DC for the weekend.
Okay, the article about kids and parents not knowing how to assess danger really hit home for me, because when I was a kid my parents refused to let me out out of the house except for school and the backyard, because they were afraid I would get kidnapped. But they were fine with driving me everywhere.
So it was darkly hilarious to read that they were in fact, putting me in far more danger by driving me places than they would have by letting me walk around by myself.
Oh and another thing? Terrible idea to shut up and shelter your kid that way. I went through massive adjustment problems my first two years of college because I was so much more clueless about the world than I should have been at that age, due to my lack of freedom growing up.
Do parents let their 16-year-olds go on spring break trips on their own anymore? I wasn't allowed to go to Cancun like some of my friends, but a group of my friends and I went to DC for the weekend.
Oh my. That was so not an issue when I was a teenager. Spring break trips period? Nope, couldn't afford it. I'd be allowed to take the bus into the city (I lived in rural Manitoba) to visit my best friend or boyfriend, though, so maybe that counts?
I am constantly amazed how different everyone's lives are, even those growing up on the same continent. I mean, I grew up in both a small prairie city and then a much smaller rural town. It felt like everyone had very similar life experiences. I can't help but be in awe over the glamour (in my eyes) you seem accustomed to. Although I do understand that it's not all theatre and vacations and famous people. :) While the internet can be a scary place at times, it's fabulous for seeing perspectives outside of your own little bubble.
The Cancun trips were things people would save for for years and gets jobs and stuff to fund. So I realize that even working for pocket money vs. necessity is a privilege for many teens, I do need to note this was at public school and was not about wealthy parents throwing money around.
Ah, that makes sense. My family never really traveled much beyond making the 1.5 hour drive up to the beach to visit my grandma and do family reunion-y things. But then, my entire family is like that. I was considered the "world traveler" in my family long before I traveled outside of North America. We did make the drive up to Saskatchewan when I was little for a wedding, and that is probably the most memorable trip of my childhood because 'We left our province wooo!!!'. :D
The kidlet is both more cautious than I would've been (I would've been taking public transit all the time if it had been an option for me.) and more cautious than I would be for her.
I understand how safe things like the buses and the Metro are both because of personal experience and the ability to read and understand statistics. She's still young enough for many things to be brand new. She's yet to travel truly on her own, so even though she's ridden the public bus and Metro a lot, she's never done it By Herself, and so it's weird and scary. And she's gotten the message from everywhere that the world is a Weird and Scary Place, even though we regularly show her that it isn't really.
Kids don't generally travel on their own any more, any where outside of the local area without at least one adult present. Sometimes, that adult is an older sibling/other relative and only barely older (and not necessarily the most mature person in the group) but 16 year olds, going camping for a weekend, not happening. Leaving the country on their own? Totally not happening. The parents would be considered neglectful and wrecklessly endangering their kids.
Kids 16 and up are still allowed to stay over night at home without parents. Though, I think that could also vary according to jurisdiction. Some places may be stricter.
See, I knew I was missing a lot of information there. Like I said, I'm not a parent, and sometimes a lot of these rules and expectations seem ridiculous to those outside of parenthood. How does it work for kids who walk home from school. My brother and I walked home on our own, oh gosh, probably since I was in grade 2 or 3, and I was the eldest. Granted, there were a few of use who would walk home together, but would that fly now-a-days?
That's amazing that your daughter is figuring she's too young to do all these things. My brother and I always wanted to do stuff long before my parents would let us, and my parents really encouraged independence.
Wow. My parents left me alone for a night probably by age 12. And again, they were really over-protective. This boggles my mind, especially when I spend so much of my life lamenting that my parents didn't let me do more hard, scary things. I'm not the person I could be. And I will never be able to be that person now, because of all the times my parents said I would crack my head open and die if I played on the jungle-gym.
If the are like Montreal drivers, they probably see them as intended to be helpful suggestions. Much like the cross walks in Toronto, or the posted speed in Calgary.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Page 2 of 5