|
Post by liriodendron on Apr 3, 2008 17:29:24 GMT -5
It amuses me that I'm the old fogey on this board. Believe me, mes amies, I've been a pretty bad girl in my day. Great. Now that Donna Summer song is going through my head. Toot toot. Beep beep. ![::)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png) Call me old-fashioned, gk, but I'm with you on this one. While I have no real objection to the occasional well-chosen expletive, I wouldn't want to frequent a place that made me feel as though I'd wandered into the men's locker room or the BOQ. I get similarly uncomfortable when the conversations begin bordering on licentious, causing me to feel rather like a voyeur.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 3, 2008 22:56:16 GMT -5
Call me old-fashioned, gk, but I'm with you on this one. While I have no real objection to the occasional well-chosen expletive, I wouldn't want to frequent a place that made me feel as though I'd wandered into the men's locker room or the BOQ. I get similarly uncomfortable when the conversations begin bordering on licentious, causing me to feel rather like a voyeur. Ouch. I guess I shouldn't asked if I wasn't ready to hear the answer.
|
|
|
Post by hartlikeawheel on Apr 4, 2008 23:56:16 GMT -5
I'm laffing at some of the clever statements here.
This fall a little girl (oh, you know, like 19, like) took me into her confidence and told me, in some generous detail, of the number of sexual encounters she had had. I listened in silence and without comment.
After she paused, searching my facial expression, which I think was pretty noncommital, she said, "I don't suppose you'd want to be my friend now."
I had to go into the other room to laugh out loud. This generation uses a lot of terms which to my taste are crude and without wit or thought. But, dang, they have completely forgotten that we lived through the '60's!
Having experienced nearly all of the sixties in it's more lavish form I consider myself fairly unshockable.
"Toot, toot. Beep, beep" indeed,, Lirio.
|
|
|
Post by liriodendron on Apr 5, 2008 0:59:16 GMT -5
Actually, slb, I wasn't speaking specifically to you. Your response wasn't there when I began typing. We must have been posting at the same time and I am obviously a slower typist. I'm sorry if I sounded a bit preachy. That was not my intention. I'd had only three hours of sleep the night before and I am probably not at my most eloquent when I am tired. My words weren't meant to hurt anyone's feelings, though obviously they did, and I apologize for that. I enjoy the company of everyone at this forum and I'm not feeling very good about the fact that something I've said has caused someone else to feel bad. I considered apologizing in a pm, but I thought that since my comments had been made publicly that my apology should be public as well. I am sorry. I hope that you will accept my apology. That said, I'll try to find a better way to express myself, because I am feeling uncomfortable about some of the bantering on the board. I don't mean that in a judgmental or self-righteous manner. I adore a clever double-entendre as much as the next person. However, oftentimes, what's being written is so personal in nature, that it does become, at least for me, a bit voyeuristic, which, in turn, makes me uncomfortable. I think that you are all such wonderful, caring people and I am so very happy to have met all of you. I love the discussions that we have. I enjoy hearing about your lives and accomplishments. I've learned a lot here and I would hope that this board is around for a very long time. Everyone here brings their own unique personality and knowledge and sense of humor to the table and I think the fact that we are all such very different people, yet can have such enjoyable conversations together, is pretty spectacular. You might as well face it - I like you, I really like you. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) I'd just like to ask if it would be possible to tone it down, maybe keep the innuendos a bit less blatant and of a less personal nature, consider the possibility that Jerry could wander by and start to question just what gailkate has been up to. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) And in return, I'll try to keep my occasional, well-chosen expletives to a minimum and directed towards the appropriate political party. Deal?
|
|
|
Post by rogesgallery on Apr 5, 2008 2:14:28 GMT -5
How does one follow such an honest and heartfelt plea of compassionate understanding and simple expression of love for the community which we all here inhabit but to say. PLEASE Lirio my Deario do not visit "When I was a Kid" Just... just don't go there.
Seriously though, that was very well said. And in the the words of my favorite Poet'r... Mike "Nobody apologizes as well as you"
|
|
|
Post by hartlikeawheel on Apr 5, 2008 9:08:16 GMT -5
I suppose it is counterproductive to follow that with, "Nobody does it better?"
|
|
|
Post by joew on Apr 5, 2008 12:09:22 GMT -5
I just want to say I agree with lirio. I think she said it very well. It can't have been easy for her. It's not even easy for me to say I agree, since I also like you all and enjoy the chance to be in touch with you, and, like her, I don't want to hurt your feelings.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 5, 2008 15:00:34 GMT -5
Well, I'm torn with my response. I know that lirio didn't mention *me* by name, but I honestly don't think there's too much argument that I'm the bawdiest of the dames here. Not that books, etc can't be just as baaad, but they don't go quite as far as I do. So, yeah, I felt and still believe that I've said stuff that has made lirio uncomfortable. And that doesn't make me feel good.
otoh, while I agree that we should be sensitive to others' sensibilities, I find it *very* disappointing that my silliness and randy ways are unacceptable to others here. I had always thought, despite being pretty ruttish, that y'all were okay with it.
Now I find that I'm offensive, even if "only slightly."
Give me some time to not take this personally.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 5, 2008 16:37:02 GMT -5
fyi, lirio and I have met in the chatroom and are happy sisters-in-communication. ![:-*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/kiss.png)
|
|
|
Post by joew on Apr 5, 2008 16:39:10 GMT -5
It takes two to tango, slb2. You aren't making posts in a vacuum, iykwim.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 5, 2008 16:44:19 GMT -5
Yes, joew, that's true. But I can only speak for myself. A kiss to you, too. Everyone deserves a smack now and then. ![:-*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/kiss.png)
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 5, 2008 17:20:11 GMT -5
It takes two to tango, slb2. You aren't making posts in a vacuum, iykwim. Bravo, Joe! Who even hinted this was about women? I'm sorry I brought it up, and then again, I'm not. Remember, this '60s free spirit grew up with "Father Knows Best" and twin beds. Everyone who wants to - including the randiest men - is free to jump in and tell me to enter the 21st century. You'll all be my special friends even if you don't want to be. Giant group hug. ![](http://www.pushupstairs.com/images/emoticon/extra1/grouphug.gif)
|
|
|
Post by Jane on Apr 5, 2008 17:21:13 GMT -5
No, slb, please don't. We love you, honey.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 7, 2008 17:38:28 GMT -5
Another political hot potato. Paul Krugman has written a fascinating column on the causes of rising food costs. www.nytimes.com/2008/04/07/opinion/07krugman.html?hpHe mentions several causes, but this surprised me: Where the effects of bad policy are clearest, however, is in the rise of demon ethanol and other biofuels.
The subsidized conversion of crops into fuel was supposed to promote energy independence and help limit global warming. But this promise was, as Time magazine bluntly put it, a “scam.”
This is especially true of corn ethanol: even on optimistic estimates, producing a gallon of ethanol from corn uses most of the energy the gallon contains. But it turns out that even seemingly “good” biofuel policies, like Brazil’s use of ethanol from sugar cane, accelerate the pace of climate change by promoting deforestation.
And meanwhile, land used to grow biofuel feedstock is land not available to grow food, so subsidies to biofuels are a major factor in the food crisis. You might put it this way: people are starving in Africa so that American politicians can court votes in farm states.In MN we have been totally brainwashed to support ethanol as the answer to dependance on oil and global warming. Is that what is being said around the country?
|
|
|
Post by brutus on Apr 7, 2008 19:30:37 GMT -5
Gail, though I can't speak to the actual energy costs of producing ethenol, I don't doubt that you're pretty close. Even if you're not, I still have trouble believing it's a viable option.
Farmer grows corn. Carbon fuels, in this case, diesel fuel runs his equipment and trucks to plant, spray, harvest, and transport the crop to market. His local elevator ships the corn, by truck or rail, both of which consume more diesel fuel, to the ethanol plants. The plants use carbon fuels to produce the ethanol, which is trucked, once again consuming diesel fuel, to the terminals where it is stored and mixed with gasoline. The terminal ships to, either a station or a bulk storage plant, by truck, which is burning diesel fuel. If it's in a bulk plant, the fuel gets still one more ride to the final user, another trip in a truck, which burns..........you get the picture. I didn't count how many rides that corn got from the farm to final user. But, figure roughly 5 miles/gallon of fuel usage for the average truck. Took a lotta diesel to make cheap fuel eh? Something's gotta give. ~B~
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 7, 2008 20:03:50 GMT -5
Holy cow! (so to speak) I had no idea about the 5 miles/gallon. Thanks for the lesson, ~B~.
|
|
|
Post by brutus on Apr 7, 2008 21:02:20 GMT -5
If you care to do a little more math, The average semi hopper truck will carry something like 1060 bu of corn. Figuring roughly $0.79/ mile just for fuel for the truck, how many cents/mile does each bushel cost to move down the road? You still haven't paid the driver of the truck, figured in maintenance and repairs, bought any tires for the truck, nor have you figured any other costs, that's just for fuel! Dem ol' trucks are spendy devices to operate! ~B~
|
|
|
Post by michael on Apr 7, 2008 21:06:24 GMT -5
I thought that recaps (or is it retreads) were popular with you truckies?
|
|
|
Post by brutus on Apr 7, 2008 22:40:51 GMT -5
Oh yeah, Mike, recaps are popular, but, for a capped trailer tire, you're looking at a good $200. Brand new "virgin" tires run upwards of $400, depending on brand. ~B~
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 21, 2008 0:04:38 GMT -5
If anyone has a few words to say about how events in Afghanistan are going, I'd love to hear. A friend's husband will be deployed there this fall, leaving Cheryl and their three young boys.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 21, 2008 9:51:07 GMT -5
Not much in the MSM, but googling for blogs and small papers might give us more insight. Soon, though, we'll hear from Our Doc in Kabul (remember "Our Man in Havana"?), assuming she can write us once or twice.
I hate sending fathers and mothers into war zones. I know that's always been possible for lifers or people who've signed on for a long-term commitment, but it still seems wrong for our "volunteer army." After all, Cheney got 4 academic deferments and a 5th for having a child. It was easier to play all the options when we had a draft than it is now for these volunteer professionals.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Apr 21, 2008 11:36:09 GMT -5
If anyone has a few words to say about how events in Afghanistan are going, I'd love to hear. A friend's husband will be deployed there this fall, leaving Cheryl and their three young boys. Yup, I'll see what I can report from the field while I'm there May 2 - 15. Caution: when I was there in 2003, I was at least 6 weeks in country before I felt I had any idea what was really happening. For aid workers, it's usually best not to discuss politics and religion. My impression is that those who work in the Kabul or Bagram military/NATO centers are pretty safe, while those in the small forward units along the border with Pakistan (lots of Marines) or in points south like Kandahar (Army soldiers) have a much harder row to hoe. The more widely distributed PRTs (Provincial Reconstruction Teams) seem better received and thus safer. More to follow.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Apr 23, 2008 9:57:23 GMT -5
Over on the Advisory Board, I mentioned the new Lonely Planet guide to Afghanistan. Although those deployed with the military probably get plenty of security info, I also bought a copy of "The Essential Humanitarian Field Guide to Afghanistan" (the best) and visit a bunch of websites - Kabul Caravan and BAAG for example - to keep up to date on the situation there. BAAG (British Agencies Afghanistan Group) has a good "Briefing Pack" though the most recent one I could find is 2006. I take my own travel security very seriously and am always "heads up," but the resources may be TMI for someone whose loved one is over there.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 23, 2008 13:57:12 GMT -5
I'm guessing TMI means Too Much Information? Maybe that would also be TMG (...for Gail) but can you give us some examples? Even just simple things - do women always look down? Do you ever wear anything resembling body armor? I can't help wishing you could do this in a virtual setting.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 23, 2008 18:17:00 GMT -5
I'm guessing TMI means Too Much Information? Maybe that would also be TMG (...for Gail) but can you give us some examples? Even just simple things - do women always look down? Do you ever wear anything resembling body armor? I can't help wishing you could do this in a virtual setting. gk, what do you mean-- do women always look down? Look down where? Um, examples of what? I'm slow right now. Used too many brain cells sorting all those Brownies and Cadettes. ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Apr 23, 2008 22:07:03 GMT -5
Too Much Information = TMI.
Afghan Women don't always look down, but they certainly won't look at a man in the eyes, if he is not a relative. Western women shouldn't either. In fact, women aren't out and about all that much, except to go to the market or to family gatherings.
Examples of the TMI things I was thinking about:
I really should rent an international cellphone before I leave, or in Amsterdam, as it is not a luxury, it's a safety necessity. When I was in Kabul, we all had two-way radios on us at all times with direct connection to our NGO HQ, the security guards at our guest house, the UN, the US Embassy, and ISAF. We had specific instructions and drills on what to do in an emergency. We always kept an "escape bag" handy with necessities for 48 - 72 hours in case we had to leave emergently. We had to keep current Pak and Tajik visas in our passports because 2 of our three emergency escape routes involved those countries. We had required radio check-in twice daily, and we had to use code names for ourselves (I was "Romeo 6") and our common destinations in those check-ins, and during any other communications. That was so potential kidnappers would not know our identities and travel plans.
You don't ever "go out for a walk." Call the driver even to go two blocks, and travel with others, preferably at least one adult male who looks like your brother or uncle if you are female. If the drive is longer than half a mile, there will probably be at least two security checks en route - by ANP, ANA, or ISAF or NATO.
No body armor - that was for the military. But always a headscarf, and clothes with long sleeves, skirts or loose pants to the ankle.
Don't ever go off the road, and always pay attention to those red and white markings on the stones at roads edge, so you know where landmines are and aren't.
We used different routes every day, and alternated unmarked vehicles with white SUV's emblazoned with our NGO emblems, depending on the day's security situation. Sometimes being identified as an aid worker was protective, sometimes it made you a target. We had "lockdown" several times while I was there; that was rather like house arrest. We could not leave the property because the security situation was deemed too risky. We lived in a guesthouse surrounded by 10 foot walls topped by barbed wire, with locked gates guarded 24/7 by at least two armed guards. We lived in a very nice neighborhood, across the street from the Presidential Palace and grounds.
I attended weekly NGO briefings at the UN for security updates; our NGO Security Director attended higher level briefings daily. That was how we identified the brief window of opportunity when we could travel over the Khyber Pass to Peshawar - a once in a lifetime experience.
It sounds quite restrictive, but one gets used to it quickly, and we all had a wonderful trip, no safety problems. Most of the time you are very safe in Kabul and environs, but there is a higher risk of an untoward incident there than in Seattle if you are inattentive.
Lots more I could say, but that should give you a flavor...
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 24, 2008 0:04:41 GMT -5
It sounds cautious and well-planned, but I don't know how there can be much security when you travel to places where you hold open clinics. Couldn't anyone who wanted to just walk in? And you must have to announce that you're going to be someplace far enough in advance to let patients know there will be a medical team available to them. I hope I'm not making you spend too much time answering these questions, but I'm very curious about how your days will be planned and the logistics of getting to your site. Will you always return to Kabul at night?
Susan, I don't look directly at Muslim men even in St. Paul. Since we're so friendly and polite, we look right at someone we're passing - just to say "excuse me" and "thank you." But I've learned to drop my eyes when I encounter a Somali, for example.
|
|
|
Post by slb2 on Apr 24, 2008 0:13:24 GMT -5
No one has ever said a word to me about it. I've interviewed quite a few Ethiopian men; shook their hands, looked in their eyes. Are they followers of Islam? Goodness, the story I wrote that landed me my job with Mshale (the African immigrant newspaper, five years ago) was an interview with a Somali hip hop band, four young men. We met in a coffeeshop or um, maybe it was Cafe Brenda's in Minneapolis.
I'd no idea. And since no one's said anything, I don't think I'll change. Not to sound snobby, but so far, my job's been going well.
|
|
|
Post by doctork on Apr 24, 2008 11:06:56 GMT -5
It sounds cautious and well-planned, but I don't know how there can be much security when you travel to places where you hold open clinics. Couldn't anyone who wanted to just walk in? And you must have to announce that you're going to be someplace far enough in advance to let patients know there will be a medical team available to them. I hope I'm not making you spend too much time answering these questions, but I'm very curious about how your days will be planned and the logistics of getting to your site. Will you always return to Kabul at night? The 3 refugee camps where we will probably work are mostly out in the middle of nowhere, and not visibly targets. We'll have armed guards, so it wouldn't be easy for just anyone to walk in. Strangers stand out. Our travel schedule will be decided day by day depending on security considerations, as well as medical need. For the most part, residents of the camp are there anyway, and don't need a lot of notice; the need is always great. We may spend as much time teaching host nationals as we do providing care; their schedules can be re-arranged readily as needed by the country director and camp manager. I think we'll probably return to Kabul each night, mainly because there are very few ways to accommodate 12 western visitors any other way. Much of what will happen and how it will happen, I'll just have to take on faith. I'll see when I get there, meanwhile I'm reading up and preparing. The Lord helps those that help themselves.
|
|
|
Post by gailkate on Apr 25, 2008 13:50:54 GMT -5
I received this today and was surprised as hell. Can't believe McCain would take this position - he has a daughter! The Ledbetter case was the one dismissed by the Sup. Ct. because she hadn't filed her complaint within 180 days of the start of the discrimination. She had worked 19 years at Goodyear when she learned she was making much less than men in the same job. On Wednesday, Senate Republicans filibustered the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a law that would have overturned an appalling Supreme Court decision that practically abolished remedies for gender-based compensation discrimination in the workplace. In opposing this legislation, Senator John McCain said that if women want better-paying jobs, they just need more "education and training." Then, he didn't even show up for the vote.
Let's tell Senator McCain that should stop blocking an up or down vote on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act if he wants to ensure equal rights for women under the law.
Please have a look and take action. act.credoaction.com/campaign/mccain_vs_ledbetter/?r_by=26-471790-p863wJ&rc=confemail
|
|