It Just Blows My Obstreperal Lobe Every Time

That you, male person in a suit jacket in a court walking purposefully with papers, assume that I, female person in a suit jacket (and, admittedly, sneakers rather than heels) in a court walking purposefully with papers, am not also a member of the ever-so-cool Lawyer Club. Just. Like. You. Only with different gonads.

This is supposed to be the twenty-first century.

To My 4th-Grade Teacher Mr. O'Mary

Thank you, sir, for the moment when you called me aside and told me that I had very high test scores and asked me if I understood what that meant, and when I said 'no', told me the most important thing anyone in my life ever told me:

That means you can be anything you want when you grow up. You can do anything you put your mind to, that's what this means.

I say thank you, sir, for telling me that before anyone ever got to me and tried to tell me that girls can't do math. I say thank you, sir, because you believed what you said, and I believed what you said, far, far more than I believed strangers who looked at me funny for liking 'boy stuff.' I say thank you, sir, because I believe that statement circumvented a great deal of the stereotype gap for me so that I never doubted I could be a scientist if I wanted to. Not only did I believe I was as good as if not better than every man I ever met in the physics program at UC Irvine - I had my 4th-grade teacher to prove it.

I have never, in my life, questioned my ability to learn something, or be something, if I put my mind to it. Now, I *am* an INTJ, and learning things is what we do, but your simple statement codified my belief system for me at a young age, too young for me to even realize it. Well timed, sir, and well put. Thank you, sir, for helping clear my way.

Here's to Friends

Here's to friends.

And now for something completely different:

I shocked the hell out of the Tortoiseshell of Gondor the other day. Poor kitty. It all started (hey, wait, don't leave, everyone on the Internet likes cat stories, right?) while I was in the shower and I heard an odd noise, so I pulled back the curtain and the ToG was in the hall outside the bathroom, so I called her name to make sure she was OK, and when she trotted over, all "Mom's talking to me!" and reared up to put her front paws on the edge of the tub as I bent down to make eye contact with her (I'm nearsighted) she got this utterly HORRIFIED look on her face. I mean, her little kitty jaw dropped and her eyes got like saucers when she realized there was WATER coming from a THING in THE WALL. OH GOD, THE HORROR.

Needless to say, the ToG left the field of valor with some alacrity. Discretion, you know, being the better part, and all that.

"Stop Being Such a Scientist!" - No, Stop Being Jackasses

On Living on Earth (NPR) this morning there was an interview with Randy Olson, who has written "Stop Being Such a Scientist", a book that, I understand from the interview, urges scientists to hone their communication skills and start telling stories because that's what you need to get people to understand and engage with whatever the scientific idea is.

Now, OK. Excellent idea. Scientists do need to do this. But, one of the questions asked of Olson at one point implies isn't this a condescending book, telling scientists (!) to learn how to talk down to dumb schlubs properly because the lay audience is simply that fucking stupid? Well, yeah. But here's the problem (Olson evaded this implication of the question pretty well): as long as we live in an American society that devalues and insults intelligence, you bet your ass scientists need a book to teach them how to sneak scientific knowledge into cool stories, and that such an approach is necessary. The problem isn't scientists learning how to tell cool stories, which is a skill of great value in any society because humans relate and learn through stories, but that America has raised generations of people to make fun of anyone who cares about shit enough to learn something complicated and be passionately engaged with their work, and to marginalize and ignore what they have to say.

Bitch, Esq.

Given how much time I spend lamenting things, legal, feministical (that's a word, I just made it up is all) in addition to providing color commentary on life, the universe, and everything, should I change the name of this blog from ...Parenthetically Speaking to Bitch, Esq.?

Conundrums, conundrums.

Women, STRIDE!

I hate it when people shuffle, and especially that it's almost always women. It's a form of body language conveying infirmity, weakness, that the walker is unsure of their footing metaphorically as well as literally. Why do so many women do it? Because we don't know we're doing it, like so many other pieces of body language exhibited by women in this sexist society we've grown up in. We hold our arms in on the subway, too. We don't take up the bench. Because we're 'nice'. Because we're taught to defer to others, to wit, men. Because we're unsure of our position in society, so don't take up too much room, you know, or you might get slapped down by the mighty hand of the patriarchy. It's all part of the same thing, and if I see another woman shuffle down the street so fucking timidly today I may just have to kill her to put her out of my misery.

So much patriarchy to fight, so little time.

Little Things I Twitter/Plurk About Instead of Posting

Really, so much of my life gets compressed into 140 characters or less, leaving me circumscribed by an arbitrary limit (that isn't even 42, dammit) derived from text messages, which I hate *anyway*.

And so.

Point the first:

1. I have a barrelful of apples, since a half-peck of MacIntoshes were on sale at the Super 88 store the day after buying a giant bag of Galas from the Russian store on the corner, three days after buying a bag (only of 5) Braeburns from the organic farmer's market at Government Center. Yes, for a really good crisp apple, I will make a client wait on our way back to the office. I will even ask him to hold my umbrella. I have learned that lawyers must be thieves of our lives in between our lawyering, and if that means talking to my brother on the phone while waiting to go before a judge, such is life. And, oh, yes, children, I will eat these apples. For the apple is my favorite fruit, crisp and juicy with that sublime flavor of knowledge of good and evil. I may also cook some kind of apple sauce (not applesauce apple sauce, but some kind of liquidy entity with chunks of apples in it, and spices) and freeze it for those long months devoid of apples, or make a relish and pickle the heck out of some of them. Or...make an apple *curry*. Oh, small symbol of the loss of innocence, how sublimely delicious you are!
2. Fabric origami boxes! What a neat idea! fabricorigami.com. How clever. I wish I'd thought of it.
3. Funniest Thing I've Read in Weeks: translations from the feline: the flying mouse affair. Hysterical.
4. Speaking of things I wish I'd thought of, or things I wish I'd written (see #3), there's been a remarkable dearth of creativity on my part these past two years because I've been killing myself in the vain attempt to have more money. By working 2.33 jobs, also known as 2 jobs normally, 3 in the fall semester. This has now reduced to 1.33 jobs, known as 1 job normally, 2 in the fall semester. I expected my creative juices would start flowing again and make their presence known sometime after the end of the fall semester, with perhaps a lag for actual, you know, recuperation. What I have not expected is the sudden desire to do photographic projects. That's just weird. I hate taking pictures. I hate having my picture taken. I like photography, at least, in principle. Sometimes, when done by other people (Jeremy Wheaton, for one). And yet. Sudden desire to take pictures of people. And things. In very specific combinations. It's so odd.
5. Also, there have been small amounts of yoga.


Note that I have not restricted myself to 140 characters in discussing these topics. You lucky ducks.

Judge orders military to stop enforcing 'don't ask, don't tell'

Judge orders military to stop enforcing 'don't ask, don't tell'.

FAN-FUCKING-TASTIC, that's all I have to say. Along with "high time."

The Number of Things About Which I am Displeased Keeps Growing

It includes things ranging from too many Dems without spines, oil creeping around in the gulf, toxic sludge elsewhere, land-based marine pollution, the need for all my income to be spent on paying off loans and credit cards when I also need it to continue working in some semblance of lawyerly attire, journalists that don't practice journalism, our broken immigration system, various other broken systems, the cat puking in areas difficult to reach to clean up (well, done, Tortoiseshell of Gondor), and today's rip in my skirt.

I am now 40, so my first post-40-birthday post should be cranky, yes? Good start.

Rape Culture

I read a discussion by Christian men about how women should adjust their dress so as not to provoke their lustful desires. Now, as you can imagine, this lies with me about as well as the complementary application of the concept that if a woman dresses in a revealing fashion, she's asking to be raped. Which is, just to clarify, bull.

What I find repeatedly mind-blowing on a semi-annual basis is the idea that men are such sexual kleptomaniacs that they will, because of being overwhelmed by their lustful urges due to my wearing jeans that have stitching on the back pockets, commit a crime, and yet not be held responsible for it because we live in a world established by the Global Accords Governing Fair Use of Women. And a woman is public property, at least in the West.

Federal Judge in CA rules Prop 8 Unconstitutional

Really, you people should read judicial decisions but here's my translation of the Judge's summary of the evidence at trial and the two sides' arguments:

1. Plaintiffs (those seeking to allow same-sex marriage) offered clear arguments and expert testimony on the violations of the Constitution created by enforcing Prop 8;
2. Proponents (of banning same-sex marriage) engaged in a lot of hand-waving rather than produce actual facts in support of their case, and their proposed experts weren't credible.

As a result, Proponents "failed to build a credible factual record to support their claim that Proposition 8 served a legitimate public interest."

*reads more*

The Judge finds that Prop 8 fails both rational-basis (legitimate public interest) and strict scrutiny (narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest), violating the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and denying plaintiffs their fundamental right to marry.

The Judge's equal protection analysis notes "[w]hen a law creates a classification
but neither targets a suspect class nor burdens a fundamental right, the court presumes the law is valid and will uphold it as long as it is rationally related to some legitimate government interest." Marriage, however, is a fundamental right.

The Judge notes further: "Most laws subject to rational basis easily survive equal protection review, because a legitimate reason can nearly always be found for treating different groups in an unequal manner. See Romer, 517 US at 633. Yet, to survive rational basis review, a law must do more than disadvantage or otherwise harm a particular group. United States Department of Agriculture v Moreno, 413 US
528, 534 (1973)."

"Plaintiffs challenge Proposition 8 as violating the Equal Protection Clause because Proposition 8 discriminates both on the basis of sex and on the basis of sexual orientation. Sexual orientation discrimination can take the form of sex discrimination."

"Having considered the evidence, the relationship between sex and sexual orientation and the fact that Proposition 8 eliminates a right only a gay man or a lesbian would
exercise, the court determines that plaintiffs’ equal protection claim is based on sexual orientation, but this claim is equivalent to a claim of discrimination based on sex."

"The trial record shows that strict scrutiny is the appropriate standard of review to apply to legislative classifications based on sexual orientation. All classifications based on sexual orientation appear suspect, as the evidence shows that California would rarely, if ever, have a reason to categorize individuals based on their sexual orientation. FF 47. Here, however, strict scrutiny is unnecessary. Proposition 8 fails to survive even rational basis review."

"[T]he state cannot have an interest in disadvantaging an unpopular minority group simply because the group is unpopular."

"The evidence shows that, by every available metric, opposite-sex couples are not better than their same-sex counterparts; instead, as partners, parents and citizens, opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples are equal. FF 47-50. Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it does not treat them equally."

The Judge held that Prop 8 violated both the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause, and enjoined the government defendants (that's distinct from the proponents mentioned earlier) from applying or enforcing Proposition 8.

Go forth, my friends and family in California, and wed, if you will it.

Living on Earth's (NPR) 1000th Episode

This episode includes a great history or overview of environmental politics, and a really stirring call from George Woodwell that scientists have an obligation today to be obnoxious (since simply setting forth the facts isn't being heard) to protect all people, b/c "the cost of failures...are going to be civilization itself."

The interview with Dianne Dumanoski about the "near miss" of the ozone layer hole clearly articulates the belief that the Earth was so robust there was nothing we could do harm it, which is what it used to be easy to think, even though it is demonstrably not true.

You Are Focusing on the Wrong Thing, I Think. Literally.

It isn't that Women's Boobs Control Health, Wealth, and Earthquakes. I know, shocking. Try to control your disappointment.

It's that sexual stimulation is good for the circulation (and probably some endorphin release, too, IMO), not really that staring at boobs will extend your life. The study just reads that way.

Betcha $5 the same study of gay men would have different results.

This does, however, lay the foundation for an argument, I think, that the world really would be a better place if everyone got some every morning.

I am Furious.

GRRRRRRRR. "All Your Boobs Are Belong to Us"

I haven't read the decision, so I may have a more nuanced analysis later, but implied consent trumping an outright "no"? Are-you-shitting-me?

Any man who tries that shit on me is going to learn just how fast I can hurt him. Hint: Fast.

Big News: New Copyright Rules

Now legal in the U.S.: Jailbreaking your iPhone, ripping a DVD for educational purposes

Fair Use Legalized, Says EFF

Statement of the Librarian of Congress Relating to Section 1201 Rulemaking

The purpose of the proceeding is to determine whether current technologies that control access to copyrighted works are diminishing the ability of individuals to use works in lawful, noninfringing ways.

Cool.