If I were a different person, it wouldn't have been funny.

If I weren't white, if English wasn't my native language, if I was genuinely poor.

It was funny, hilarious even--but that humour is predicated upon the ridiculousness of her claim.

To explain:

At work today, a woman (Irish, white, probably from a rural town) came up to me while I was just finished washing some dishes at work. I had seen her ask Mari, my co-worker (who is Welsh), about birthday parties a few minutes earlier. She asked me a question, and I started to answer. I could not have had more than two or three words out of my mouth before she interrupted me.

"I don't want to speak to you. Your English is very broken."

And then, without a further glance is my direction, she turned and re-directed her question to Mari.

I retreated back to the dishwashing area, shocked speechless. Utterly flabbergasted, I must have then looked the part she had cast for me--that of a foreign service-worker. Me? Broken English? In all probability, mine is better* than hers.

Her attitudes prejudices about class, about race**, and about language coalesced in that moment of condescension. They judged me unworthy of even an attempt at communication.

Now, I'm tempted to call her a racist, classist bitch, but as Jay Smooth points out, that's the wrong direction for this kind of communication. What she said was definitely racist, and classist. Whether she is racist, classist, and/or a bitch is not relevant.

How did I react?

Well, I retreated to my corner and I laughed. Repeatedly. I didn't say anything both out of shock and out of the habit of deferring to the customer's wishes. I wish now, in retrospect, I had overridden that particular habit by directly asking her why she thought my English was inadequate or, more importantly, why that gave her the right to dismiss me. It was an opportunity to challenge her prejudices, and I failed to engage. As she was trying to leave--I say trying because she was standing by the exit gate looking extremely confused, like so many of our customers do--I told her in loud, clear, unbroken, unaccented American English, "Just press the first button up here on the left to open the gate. Have a good day." I revelled a bit in having gotten to not only acknowledge her looking stupid but also to have corrected her, and inwardly I hoped she had noted my English skills and felt even more stupid.

* Ok, I recognise that 'better' is a problematic term, since it assumes a hierarchy, assumes that there are purer versions of English than others. It also assumes that hybridity and fluidity in language is undesirable. I don't mean to promote this attitude towards language, but nevertheless, adopting her standards of evaluation, the irony is that I would 'rank' higher. Even if I think ranking at all is stupid.

** I say race because (1) 'white' is constructed differently here than in the U.S., with Eastern Europeans definitely not being treated 'white' and (2) as my boss pointed out, because I am rather tan (my sun-lovin' Californian skin, even when sun-deprived, is way too dark for Irish people) it's quite likely she may have thought I was Spanish.

- Thank you, "Personal Finance": That class was not a pleasant or enjoyable experience by any means--in fact, it was far more painful than was necessary (ggrrrrr at the professor for being doddery)--but it managed to pry open the "No god! Not the numbers! Not the practical!" part of my brain enough. I thrive on the theoretical more than is good for me, and I possess an aversion to dealing with numbers that I consciously recognise is both self-destructive and irrational (hah! bad pun!) but still cannot shake. This class forced me to confront my discomfort, and as a result it has lessened. I was financially retarded, and this class radically restructured/built my approach to money. Thank god.

Philosophy Exam – First Year

Answer two questions

Two hours
1. Patch together some things you have heard in lectures, in no particular order.

2. Has this question vexed philosophers for centuries?

3. Create an impression of original thought by impassioned scribbling (your answer may be ungrammatical, illegible, or both).

4. Does the answer to this question depend on what you believe?

5. How much irrelevant historical background can you give before addressing this question?

6. Describe two opposing views, then say what you personally feel.

7. Rise above the fumbling efforts of others and speculate freely on an issue of your choice.

8. EITHER

(a) Answer this question by announcing that it really means something different (and much easier to answer).

OR

(b) Write out your answer to last year’s question on this topic.

9. Protest your convictions in the teeth of obvious and overwhelming objections.

10. Keep your reader guessing about what you think until the end. Then don’t tell them.

From Crooked Timber. Hilarious, but also creepily accurate!

Even from inside, through the door to the lanai, I can hear the waves pounding.

At the same time, I'm reading about the slow erosion of the Wexford coast in Colm Tóibín's The Heather Blazing. It's odd to read this here in Hawaii, over 7,000 miles from that place that I miss so much. Here, there is no grey, steely weather or perpetually cold water. Water and air are warm at every hour of the day.

Yet the two are still not dissimilar. Clouds do not necessarily last all day, rain is usual for any time of the year. And, of course, there is the distortion in time, the stretching of moments that leads to a sort of melancholy.

You can feel it in his writing. I don't mind that so much; I can appreciate the stillness of mind. I like less the heartlessness that seems to accompany it, the way his protagonists lack feeling. There is a disconnect between their heads and their hearts. There is a disconnect between them and their families, a seemingly insurmountable separation. They each seem more attached to the land--the Wexford coast--than the people that fill their lives. The Blackwater Lightship. The Heather Blazing. Both are a bit foreign to me, much as I appreciate the rich inner life of thought that each possesses.

So here I sit, in the quiet moments suspended between one day and the next, in a place where I am at my leisure to sleep or eat or swim. I am ever so slowly uncoiling, working free the anxieties I have forgotten how not to carry.

I am, as of yesterday, officially a college graduate. More to come later, when I've slept more.

(FYI, I'm also back in PA--but only until Thursday morning so if you want to see me act fast!)

I am reaching a whole new level of stress and anxiety. So if I don't answer your emails, your phone calls, your facebook messages, etc., etc., realise it's all I can do to hold myself together.

T minus 9 days and counting!

Dumbass. ( From the Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show (April 1, 2008)... )


Because that's exactly what feminism is. Getting married multiple times, having abortions, hating on men, becoming career-obsessed, and worshiping Hillary Clinton.

I could go on an angry rant. Instead, I answer with this:



(Note the Allison Janney. Woot!)

Emails have been sent! One chapter down!

I'm rewarding myself with yoga. A painful yay!

At some point, I'm going to compile a list of all the fabulous, interesting things I've found with which to procrastinate....

Over the past two days, I've been "writing." What this has actually involved has been digging around for sources to cite for what I already know to be the case (unfortunately, it's not acceptable for me to just launch in to the historiographical debates about the Famine--silly academia wants me to show I'm not just making this crap up), writing a few sentences that don't cohere and aren't as apt as I'd like, but also procrastinating by reading blogs and having conversations with my friends.

There've been a couple of really good conversations though. Totally worth the time loss. I've talked about dealing with homophobia and racism as an outsider, if murder as self-defense can be ethically permissible, Catherine MacKinnon's views on sex in a patriarchal paradigm, whether chivalry can be compatible with feminism, how it feels to be a cultural hybrid, whether the claims of pedophilia raised against Cathal O Searcaigh are personal vendetta or justified, how ethics is shifting from a sanctity of life perspective to quality of life, how one's social framework influences one's overall perspective on becoming sexually experienced.....

The point of this all is to say that I'm really going to miss living in an environment where a range of topics at a quality level is not only possible but probable. That is one of the things I love that I will miss in Cork.

( I had a doctor's appointment for my knee this morning. )

Am I stupid in not believing him, or justified? Should I trust the doctor, the 'knowledgeable' one, or my own judgment?

In other news, life forces are converging to make Ireland a lot less fun: (1) The knee, (2) Having a thesis chapter due the first week I'm there, and (3) A conversion rate ($1.50, yes $1.50!!!!, to the Euro) that makes me want to shoot myself. I just want to go home (because it was in the end a home) and regain that peace and happiness I found there. Is that so much to ask for?

Tennessee state Senator Doug Henry: “Rape, ladies and gentlemen, is not today what rape was. Rape, when I was learning these things, was the violation of a chaste woman, against her will, by some party not her spouse. Today it’s simply, ‘Let’s don’t go forward with this act.’ ”



So if a woman's had sex she deserves to be raped, because she's not 'chaste' anymore? If a woman's married, but is raped by her husband, that's ok too? If a woman doesn't want to be raped, all she has to say is "Let's not go forward with this act"? SERIOUSLY?!!

..... I cannot believe this man has the power to decide the life of a single woman, much less the lives of women (plural). He is so clearly light years from understanding what it's like to be female. Not only today, in this extremely privileged but still highly troubled country, but EVER.

Most of the time, I really prefer not to use the whole pro-choice argument of "77% of pro-life leaders are men. 100% of them will never be pregnant." because I think men have a stake in the decisions we make regarding procreation (albeit not as much as the one whose body is being appropriated.... and don't even get me started on the economic punishment that goes along with it). But then some dumbass opens his mouth and spews out this kind of ignorant shit.

Grrrrr. Grrrrr.

For those of you who are Americans, and especially those of you who are registered Democrats, who are you planning to vote for? I'm trying to be responsible and do my research, and I'm at that stage where I'd like the contributory opinions of those I respect. Who do you like, and why? Who do you not like, and why? (Actually, even if you can't vote--either because you're not registered or are not American--who would you vote for if you could?)

This has been simultaneously the best and worst year of my life. Here's to things that are all good:

10 Things I Never Get Tired Of

1. Long conversations with good friends.
2. Staring at Hailey.
3. How ridiculous my family is.
4. Talking about Ireland.
5. Iron & Wine's "Fever Dream."
6. Barry's Tea (hand-carried back over from Cork in bulk to last me through the year).
7. Feeling sunshine warm my skin.
8. Making Becky laugh so hard she can't breathe.
9.  The West Wing.
10. Flip-flops.

Sonas agus séan don athbhliain daoibh! Happiness and prosperity in the new year to you all!

Arís eile, indeed.

Ok, this is too funny not to post. I love philosophy jokes (especially as they're so few and far between). I have to show this to Suzi--she's writing her thesis on Kant, and we've amicably disagreed about Kantian ethics for a few years now. I have utilitarian leanings, although I'm starting to suspect that I should reverse my position on Virtue ethics (I think Rivka may have straw-manned it, sadly). Anyways, behold: The Kant Attack Ad.


I'm ostensibly working on thesis right now. I've decided someone should pay me a dollar every time I have to read the words 'narrative' or 'historiography' (this includes words categorically linked like 'narrativist', 'narratology', 'history', 'historicism', etc.).

The Question: Given an acknowledgment that Thanksgiving is based on a racist myth that glosses over the genocide of Native Americans, what are we ethically bound to do to rectify this injustice?

Robert Jensen's Answer: Abolish Thanksgiving and replace it with a Day of Atonement and fasting. Until that happens, one should personally either partake in Thanksgiving festivities but bring the issues to the table, or (as he chooses) abstain altogether and spend the day thinking about how Native Americans have suffered.



To my lovely people whose opinions I value, what do you think about Jensen's article and/or what I've said? Or, more generally, what are your own feelings on the politics and history of Thanksgiving?

A note on the song: Check out the lyrics (and the song). It's an interesting (and chilling) take on the psychology behind the aid response (or lack thereof) to New Orleans. You can download it here, if you're interested.

Haha... what's the second sentence of my current reading for thesis? "We not only create our selves by how we actualize tradition but also reveal ourselves to others by doing so." (from Philosophical Imagination and Cultural Memory)

I feel urged to respond. The Golden Compass is coming out on December 7 (yay!), and the forces of [stupid] Christianity have begun to mobilize themselves against what they claim to be written by a person who is a "militant atheist" and has a "profound disrespect for the interior life of children." See here (1), here (2), here (3), and here (4) for examples.

Ok, so I know I'm biased. I know I'm not exactly gung-ho about Christianity. (Cough, Cough.) But I do recognize that there are rational Christians, and there are crazy Christians. Just like there are crazy/rational atheists, crazy/rational Buddhists, crazy/rational Jews (you get the point).

And yes, Philip Pullman is an atheist (though he seems to hedge this claim to agnosticism here). But he is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a militant atheist. He does hold a certain strong dislike for C.S. Lewis, regarding The Chronicles of Narnia as harmful propoganda.

Why are these people so crazy? Why do they not even take the time to read the books, to understand what they're denouncing? If they did, they would find that although these books by no means worship at the feet of Catholicism, or Christianity as a whole, but they're about all the right things--about the importance of knowledge and wisdom, about open-mindedness, about love and caring, about humanity.

This is why I love The Amber Spyglass. This is why it's my favourite book. Every time I read it, I feel this resounding "Yes!" along my core. It's about how to be a good person, about what it means to grow up, about a love of learning. And it's about all those things without needing religion.

I'm not at all surprised that the Catholic League is denouncing the film & the books. As is pointed out in (2), it's actually surprising that a response has taken so long given that the film's been in the works for over three years. And in all fairness to them, it's not like there isn't a basis for their dislike--the books do have a pretty heavy-handed anti-religious-institution message. The Church is cast as a manipulative force that facilitates the torture of children. God loses his job title as creator of the universe. It also reappropriates the tale of Adam & Eve (in a way that's not sexist, too!) So, yes, they have reason to worry. But it's fiction; heck, it's fantasy--which is even further from a claim to portraying reality. And shouldn't a faith that's worth having be able to withstand things that speak to the contrary?  (I don't want to go too much into detail about the specifics, as I hope people who haven't done so already will take the opportunity and read these books that I guarantee will enrich your life.) But those good old Christian values are there--unless we interpret censorship and bigotry, sexism and violence, and a general ignorant hatred of everyone who doesn't espouse your worldview as examples of Christian values.

My favourite part may be that the Catholic League is actually charging money ($5) for their booklet: The Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked. If you want to throw religious propaganda at people, at least make it free!

And just to pimp it: The trailer for The Golden Compass.

Postscript: This said, I have my own reservations about the film adaptation about the book, though my concerns are very, very different. Perhaps at some point I'll post them. In all probability it will happen after I see the film--at midnight on opening night, of course.

So these icons were all made ages ago. And I mean ages—some even back in February, all of them over two months ago. Making them was cathartic and zen-like when I really needed that sort of brainless concentration. Soonafter, however, schoolwork and general life caught up with me and made me sit up and pay attention. Thus the belatedness.

Previews:





( may not be cool, but it's so where I live.... )

As always, I like comments! Lots of them! Feel free to take any. Note that while I don't require a comment or credit (so long as you don't claim it was made by you), I appreciate either or both being given.

I've been home for a week now. And the various points of interest are:

1) I am sunburnt (I went to Concord water park with Brian, Ruoling, & Kyle today. Brilliant.), for which I blame months of not being exposed to sun in Ireland.

2) My friends were home, and have left again, but life's going to be ok. (Christina, hope you got on the plane & got to DC safely!)

3) I FINALLY finished that damn paper. (I think there should be trumpets resounding for this one.)

4) But here's what I'm really excited about: Spring Awakening won a ton of Tonys tonight, including Best Musical and Supporting Actor for John Gallagher, Jr.!!!!!! It's actually ridiculous how proud I am of them. Ridiculous.