Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. After you read this, you should delete and write your own post, with a new title above. Or hit Add New on the left (of the admin dashboard) to start a fresh post.

Here are some suggestions for your first post.

1. You can find new ideas for what to blog about by reading the Daily Post.
2. Add PressThis to your browser. It creates a new blog post for you about any interesting  page you read on the web.
3. Make some changes to this page, and then hit preview on the right. You can alway preview any post or edit you before you share it to the world.

Four Fails + One FTW: It's Our Fault That Tone Deaf Children Are Our Future

FAIL: The New York Times Stumbles Out Of The Gate, Trying To Get The Toothpaste Back In The Tube

By now, some of the more voracious readers of the internet may have been hit with the Pay Us Now ultimatum from The New York Times‘ website. I’m more than certain that lifelong readers of the Times who are afraid of a life without the periodical have already signed up. They may have actually decided to pay for a publication which produces most of the content that Arianna Huffington’s team of gophers reblogs over at her AOL website. If you have not subscribed, reasons may range from culture articles that are five steps behind the trends to an op-ed section that no longer has Frank Rich (who New York Magazine quietly picked up), but can boast Ross “Pornography is Adultery” Douthat.

Those readers have, since Monday the 28th, read twenty articles from the Times, the arbitrary amount that the publication has determined to be the cutoff. This is rather amusing, since most monthly periodicals rarely have more than twenty articles that the average reader has any interest in. When readers do hit this paywall, though, confusion sets in. The pricing system is based around an assumption that if you’re paying for their services, you have a smart phone or tablet computer, as there is no offer for only accessing the website from a traditional computer.

My Problem With WhiteGrlProblems

The Twitter account @WhiteGrlProblem has become something of A Thing recently, thanks first to re-tweets by actress Emma Roberts and later to Time Magazine, who named it number three on their list of 140 Best Twitter Feeds. For those who have resisted the (negligible) allure of having a continual stream of endless (useless) information fed right onto your smart phone, White Girl Problems is another one of the satirical twitter accounts, in which someone takes on a pseudonym to issue 140-character jokes and/or oddly out-of-context statements. While there are several satirical feeds I love and adore (Voldemort, you do it the best, though Feminist Hulk is pretty clutch, too) White Girl Problems isn’t one of them. And that’s not just because I’m a white girl.

If You Overemphasize Test Scores, Don’t Be Surprised When People Cheat to Raise Them

Last Monday, Michelle Rhee condemned a USA Today investigation of the successes that Washington, DC, public schools achieved under her tenure. From 2006 to 2010, most of which saw Rhee as chancellor, the percentage of students in Crosby S. Noyes Educational Campus demonstrating “proficiency” on federally mandated standardized tests raised staggeringly from 10% to 58%; a seemingly impossible feat. Rhee held Noyes up as a premier example of what public education reform might look like under the guidance of her test-based incentives. The school was awarded a Blue Ribbon by the Department of Education for its remarkable transformation. Last year, Washington ,DC, received $75 million from the federal government to support public and charter school development. While Noyes displayed an exceptional improvement, schools throughout the District made similarly stunning changes, commanding national attention and thrusting Rhee to the forefront of the corporate reform movement. However, if the unthinkable gains that Rhee’s students attained seemed impossible, that’s because they were.

Where Are Your Grocery Dollars Going?

In March, the USDA released the newest figures in a series of data entitled The Food Dollar; an annual breakdown of food prices that tracks where each dollar spent on groceries actually goes.  The results are startling.  For 2008 (the most recent data), only $.15 of every $1 spent goes back to farmers.  The other $.85 falls into the nebula of ‘marketing,’ defined as:

[…] The remainder accruing to food supply chain industries involved in all post-farm activities that culminate in final market food dollar sales.

Since 1993, when the Food Dollar was first calculated, farmers have been making progressively less money on the dollar, while these “post-farm” activities have been absorbing more and more of the consumer profits.

Freedom of Offending

“Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of offending culture, religion or traditions.”

–Staffan de Mistura, the top U.N. envoy in Afghanistan, who is wrong about that.

It feels weird having to defend a bizarre, craven Christian-supremacist.

Because We Like Our Tofu Well Done

But what do you think? A man had two sons, and he came to the first, and said, “Son, go work today in my vineyard.” He answered, “I will not,” but afterward he changed his mind, and went. He came to the second, and said the same thing. He answered, “I go, sir,” but he didn’t go. Which of the two did the will of his father?

Matthew 21:28-31

It is not difficult to understand why Jewish people desire the overthrow of Nazi Germany. The persecution they suffered in Germany would be sufficient to make bitter enemies of any race. No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution the Jewish race suffered in Germany. But no person of honesty and vision can look on their pro-war policy here today without seeing the dangers involved in such a policy, both for us and for them.

Charles Lindbergh

In On Violence, Hannah Arendt argued that a distinction needs to be made between force and power: “force” refers to acts of nature, which can be mitigated but not controlled; power is a function of  relationships. Recent events have caused me to reflect on these definitions and how they relate to our view of human suffering. In the case of natural disasters there is, if not consolation, at least a forced resignation to fate. With mass killing, there is the nagging feeling that if we only tried, it could have been stopped. The death of  thousands  in an earthquake is tragic; the death of  scores by the hands of megalomaniac is something even darker…

I do not support the intervention in Libya. From my admittedly limited vantage point, there is no a sign of a coherent strategy, a worrying sign given the ambiguity inherent in war. Does the fact that calls were made for Qaddafi to step down then mean that we are explicitly on the side of the rebels? Who are these rebels? Let us not forget that the line between oppressor and oppressed is easily straddled, as Rwanda and Kosovo have revealed.

Honoring Our Educators

“Part of compensation is public esteem. When governors mock teachers as lazy, avaricious incompetents, they demean the profession and make it harder to attract the best and brightest. We should be elevating teachers, not throwing darts at them.” — Nicholas Kristof

Imagine, if you will, this nightmare scenario: For thirty or forty years of your life, you will be expected to be at work by seven am. No gearing-up, coffee-drinking hour for you; from the first minute of active duty (which will be marked by an ear-drilling bell), you will need to bring your A-game. No pressure, but if you miscommunicate, the effect might ripple through the next decade of someone’s life, or further. Two or three dozen people — let’s say fourteen year olds — will scrutinize you, and later they will make fun of your appearance, and make up stories about your sex life. Sometimes they do it right in front of you, snickering.

You will be in a constant state of performance except when you are doing rote work, looking over two or three dozen nearly identical documents and scanning for mistakes until you can’t see straight. You will take your work home with you every night and into some weekends. The parents of those snickering fourteen-year-olds will also scrutinize you — some more harshly than the kids do — while others will expect you to do a hefty chunk of their parenting for them. You will have a moral responsibility to act as social worker as well as educator; you are the children’s first line of defense against abusive family members, for example. You will be at risk for burnout, but you deal with it because you like children, you like your chosen subject, and you feel like you are doing something meaningful with your life.

Then you go home, exhausted, open a newspaper, and see yet another headline calling you a spoiled brat, a leech, a glorified babysitter.

Conscientious Consumerism (or Why I’m boycotting Target, but still eating Chick-Fil-A)

The CEO of Whole Foods is a libertarian who doesn’t support the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  Target gave $150,000 to a conservative Minnesota Political Action Committee that endorsed an anti-gay candidate for governor.  S. Truett Cathy, the founder of Chick-Fil-A, is a right-wing religious conservative who propagandizes Focus on the Family in his restaurants’ happy meals.  Wal-Mart is just plain evil.  So where is it safe to shop?  How can I know that my money isn’t supporting evil?  And how do I look at myself in the mirror after I’ve eaten a delicious Chick-Fil-A sandwich?

I’ve been boycotting Target since last summer, when a gay rights group blew their cover and announced that the Minneapolis-based big box had donated $150,000 to MN Forward, a PAC that backed a right wing, anti-gay, anti-union candidate for governor.  Since Target was previously known as a pro-gay company that often sponsored LGBT community events, a number of gay-rights groups immediately called for a boycott and demanded that Target apologize and make an equal donation to a Minnesota gay rights organization (Target was a “Silver Sponsor” of 2010’s Twin Cities Pride, meaning the company donated between $15,000 and 25,000 in goods or services).  When I found out about the MN Forward donation, I wrote an angry note and mailed it to Target with my TargetCard bill.  The response letter I received- signed simply “Mary”- insisted that Target values all of its customers but makes these decisions based on the interest of the company.  Well I make decisions (most of the time) in the best interest of my conscience, so I’m boycotting.

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay rights organization, releases an annual “Buying Guide for Workplace Equality.”  The guide ranks hundreds of companies based on their workplace policies regarding LGBT employees.  Until recently, Target’s rating was a perfect 100, indicating employee protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity, domestic partner benefits, a company-supported resource group for LGBT employees, etc.  However, after the MN Forward incident, the HRC docked them 15 points for “engaging in action that would undermine the goal of LGBT equality.”

This is where it gets tricky for me.  It is entirely possible for an organization to provide parity in benefits for LGBT employees and same-sex couples while also participating in activities that directly harm those same employees.  So while Target’s current score of 85 is in the HRC’s “green zone” of companies that receive a score of 80-100, I still refuse to shop there.  Meanwhile, Chipotle has a score of 30, but does not engage in these negative activities.  Chipotle does have a non-discrimination policy that includes sexual orientation and they provide domestic partner benefits, but does not comply with the HRC’s other criteria.  It’s not that Chipotle is doing harm in the same way Target is, but the former is taking positive steps towards improving the lives of LGBT employees, while the latter is regressing.  (NB: I’ve heard rumors that Chipotle was under fire for dismissing a number of immigrant workers in Minneapolis, but I’ve yet to find a credible source on this.)

When I eat at Chick-Fil-A, I feel a little dirty.  I know that the CEO is a conservative Southern Baptist who requires that all franchises close their doors on Sunday (because you shouldn’t conduct business on the Lord’s day.)  But I also know that Mr. Cathy insists that employees respond to every question and request with “my pleasure.”  He is a Southern gentleman, after all.  The important thing for me is that this chain makes no secret of its political leanings.  So when I stop by once every 3 months for a sandwich, I know where my five dollars is going.  (I try to wait until I have a coupon so they don’t make quite as much money on me.)  A true friend stabs you in the front, right?

For a glorious few weeks in early March, it looked as though Target may have finally been ready to make amends with the gay community.  On February 10, Target posted a press release announcing the  exclusive distribution of a special edition of Lady Gaga’s new album The Advocate.  As part of their agreement, Gaga asked Target to “start affiliating themselves with LGBT charity groups and begin to reform and make amends for the mistakes they’ve made in the past…our relationship is hinged upon their reform in the company to support the gay community and to redeem the mistakes they’ve made supporting those groups.” Unfortunately, less than a month after that press release, the deal was off. Citing Target’s unwillingness to adhere to her strict pro-gray requirements, Gaga backed out of the deal.

So the boycott rages on.  My underwear collection is growing thin, and so too will my sock collection, but that’s a small price to pay for peace of mind.  Target is one of those stores where you can’t just go and get that one thing they need.  You’ll inevitably end up with pajama pants, a DVD or two, and a three-gallon tub of goldfish crackers.  So my boycott is not only saving me money, it’s also forcing me to reconsider what I actually need and where to buy it.  I recently discovered a Baltimore-based company called Ecosumo, which sells eco-friendly products from shoes to housewares to soap.  I’m guessing that they don’t have a comprehensive non-discrimination policy and parity in at least one transgender wellness benefit, but they are small (I think they have three employees, including the two co-founders) and local and eco-friendly.  So I can feel good about shopping there.

Religion is Here to Stay (or Physicists Should Only Model Particle Behavior)

In the 1950s and ’60s, social scientists predicted that organized religion would give way to secularism. Among the leading proponents of that theory was Peter Berger, well-known sociologist of religion, who in 1968 predicted that “people will become so bored with what religious groups have to offer that they will look elsewhere.” Simply put, the social scientists were all wrong. Religion did not give way to secularism, nor has it recessed to the hills, mountains, and the South. And, unlike the predictions of statistical mathematicians and physicists Daniel Abrams, Haley Yaple, and Richard Weiner, religion is not now on the verge of extinction either.

Abrams, et al., wrote a paper in January called “A mathematical model of social group competition with application to the growth of religious non-affiliation,” predicting the human tendency to migrate to larger and therefore more powerful social groups, in this case religiously unaffiliated. The paper is dense with applied mathematics and statistical equations, too thick for the mathematical layman, or anyone whose knowledge of partial derivatives is four years out of date (as mine now is). Since CNN posted the findings to their Belief Blog a little over a week ago, many people, from agreers to dissenters, the religious and nonaffiliated alike, have written their own opinions on the study. (This one, by a Unitarian Universalist minister, is my favorite.)