We Are Become Shiva, Destroyer of Worlds*

Sometimes I think we deserve exactly what's coming to us.

This makes me physically ill:

Matt Yglesias tweets:

Yes, I think converting Medicare into a straight cash grant to seniors makes sense.

They might rather have a servant, or a better car, or an apartment which doesn’t require them to drive, or to eat a better diet or join a better gym. Or maybe they would rather live it up, travel, and perhaps die at a younger age. That’s what pro-choice means.

That's not what prochoice means. Prochoice has to do with giving women control over their own bodies. It does not mean giving people the choice to die unnecessarily young because they hoped that this year they wouldn't get too sick, so this year they'd buy actual food and turn the thermostat up to 58. Sorry about that heart attack, better luck next year.

Medicare is for two groups: people over 65 and the disabled. These are not groups known, by and large, for having servants and "better" cars or going to the gym. Or "living it up". Seriously, it's like he's describing rich frat boys.

On the public choice side, this suggestion would turn seniors into an active constituency for health care cost control.

You think they're not already? Even if seniors are all "Let it all burn, I want 28 MRIs! Whooo!", this has the flavor of letting a toddler stick their hand in a fire so they learn that the pretty orange flames aren't something you touch. Sure, it would work, but no, that's just not cool. There really are other ways to teach someone that lesson.

Nonetheless I propose a more modest version of the idea. When people turn a certain age, allow them to trade in the current benefits package for a minimalistic package (set broken limbs and offer lots of potent painkillers), plus some of the rest in cash, doled out over the years if need be. For some people, medical tourism will fill the gap.

Painkillers are hilarious! HAHAHAHAHA!

But if a person wishes, he or she can keep the extant benefit structure and forgo the cash altogether. No one is forced to take this deal.

Really? No one will be forced to take this deal. Forced. Forced. Forced by the government at gunpoint, probably not. Forced by circumstance? Oh, yes, there are many who will be forced.

Do you know how many seniors there are right now choosing between food and heat, between medication and shelter, between electricity and running water? Right now that is happening. Probably within a 50' radius of you. Now imagine telling that person who freezes through every winter, who starves at every meal, who is in treatable pain that they can have some extra money. All they have to do is cut back on their health care.

This idea is so breathtakingly evil, I have to wonder if someone resurrected Mengele to come up with it.

Now imagine the other group on Medicare: the disabled. I know disabled people on Medicare. They're getting a minimal SSDDI check, Section 8 and food stamps. Rolling in dough, they are not. And the ones with children? They spend every day ashamed and stressed out that their illness impacts their children's lives so constantly. They don't want their children to work nearly full time. They want to let their children participate in extracurricular activities at school, but they can't afford the uniforms and fees and such. They want to buy their children the latest clothes, the coolest cell phones, and all that other stuff so very important to teenagers, but they can't. They hope that their children will get scholarships to go to college, because otherwise it's not happening.

Now offer that parent this choice: cut back on your health care and your child can cut back on their work hours. Cut back on your health care and your child can have a pretty prom dress. Cut back on your health care and your child can join softball this year. Cut back on your health care and die a little sooner and your kid can go to college.

This choice will kill people. I'm sure our Randiot friends will tell us that they chose to die and that's prochoice, but no, we will have killed them. We will have killed the most vulnerable among us and we will call it a triumph.

We are beyond wicked.

*Supposedly, that was what Oppenheimer said when he saw the first test of a nuclear weapon. This probably isn't true, but I like the quote.

Oooh! A Test! Did I Pass?

Yes, I was one of the freaky weirdos who liked tests. Because I test well and tests were always a nice pat on the head for me. And really, I didn't have a whole lot going on in the whole self esteem department, so there you go*.

Anyway, the Boot Camp for Girls (previously discussed here) has a "final exam" up, so I thought I'd take it and see if I still have it.

Attention, Girls! The exam is open-book, take-home, more homework than test, and more guidance than testing. Completion will make you unique among female peers.

Oooh! Unique! I feel special already!

Boyfriend has a greatest fear. You can avoid yours by helping prevent his. Do you?

Is it spiders? Because that's what my greatest fear is. Is there any place on earth that doesn't have spiders? *whips out some googlefu* Hmmm, Antarctica. Well, that's a little extreme even for me, so no, I don't.

Commitment makes a man use his head about you. Devotion makes a man use his heart about you. Which do you prefer?

That's like asking if I want chocolate or strawberries. Fuck that, I'm dipping the strawberries in the chocolate and calling it a party.

You habitually seek Full Disclosure under the mistaken idea that it bonds a couple. Not so! In fact, you tell boyfriends far too much about yourself, don’t you?

I am a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a black sheet. I haven't even told my husband my name. He's not entirely certain where I live. I am the ninja of relationships! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Female qualities generate attractiveness for more than sex. Do you possess enough of the right virtues?

Is snarkiness a virtue? What about the ability to raise only one eyebrow?

Feminine mystique captures the kind of male attention that more easily turns into devotion. Do you capitalize on mystery?

MySTerY? Mystery?

Happiness flows from gratitude. Are you grateful enough?

I . . . what definition of happy is that?

Relationships often split over misuse of two terms, ‘compete’ and ‘cooperate’. How do they work successfully in male/female relationships?

In male/female romantic relationships, male/female work relationships, male/female friendships? Do be more specific.

Prettiness, self-confidence, and happiness shine from the mirrors in your life. Have you put it all together yet?

Yes! I am the prettiest frog in this entire pond! I hear the loons!

Some female personality traits turn off males and shift their focus from you as person to you as sex object. Are you guilty?

Sure. Now who wants to punish me?

Teen sex shapes an adult’s life. Have you figured out how to handle it? Can you fulfill your hopes and dreams in adult life?

20 years later, I think I'm okay.

Female uniqueness starts with female modesty. Are you unique enough? You become embarrassed under certain circumstances. Do you appreciate what a blessing that is?

Ahem. Unique: Being the only one of its kind, Without an equal or equivalent; unparalleled. "Unique" is a superlative. Just as one cannot be "best enough", one cannot be "unique enough". One is unique or one is not.

You know you’re pretty, but can you be sure? Yes!

Oh, thank you creepy, misogynist, binary gender complimentarian! Truly, I needed your assurance, man who has never seen me before, that I'm pretty. Now I can truly live!

So, how'd I do?

*Now I play video games and work on achievements, and feel absurdly accomplished when I get one. Same thing, different format.

Promoting Modesty in Toddlers

This is not sexy. I feel dirty even pointing that out.

If you spend any amount of time in fundyland, even just as an internet tourist, you know how obsessed fundys of every religion are with the female body and how it should be covered. There is no end to it. (Even the Catholics are back to arguing over head coverings in church- for women, of course.) And here is the natural progression of that obsession: concern over whether or not toddler girls are sufficiently modest.

Anyone who has spent any amount of time with small children knows two things: 1) Toddlers find no shame in the naked human form, and 2) most children prefer to be naked. I can't say I blame them, to be honest. Most clothing is constrictive and itchy to me*, it's probably at least as uncomfortable for small children with their sensitive skin and inability to communicate effectively.

Toddlers are not sexual in any way, shape or form. Toddlers masturbate because it feels good, not because they want to have sex. Toddlers get naked because that feels good, not because they want to entice anyone. Should we teach toddlers to keep their clothes on, at least in public?Absolutely. But only for the same reason we teach them not to hit people and to pee only in certain designated areas- so they can interact properly in society. Not because they might entice people to lust.

Here is a question for you. How do you promote, encourage and even enforce modesty in your toddler girl?

Some of us are born with girls who have no problem keeping their clothing on and even don't care whether you put them in a dress or a jogging suit.

Some are born with girls who are fashionistas at birth and have very strong opinions about what to wear, even if it's just fairy wings.

Some have little girls who can't seem to keep clothing on! Or at the very least, they have no problem lifting up their dresses or shirts to show off tummy or more! And there's always the potential for a dripping wet streak out of the bathtub, or the fanny flash off the potty training toilet.

A part of me thinks that they're just 2 (or 1 or 3) and they have no idea. They're just babies, so who cares about their nudity. Another part of me knows that modesty must start somewhere and there are just way too many perverts out there, or even people who simply do find it some form of a stumbling block. [emphasis added]

Anyone who finds a naked toddler to be a "stumbling block", i.e., a turn on, is a pedophile, as in the aforementioned "pervert". Pedophiles are sick and they don't need a fanny flash to get turned on. The rest of us look at a child streaking through Walmart naked** and think, "Man, I do not miss those days." Never mind the fact that she's only concerned with female toddler nudity, as if pedophiles are solely attracted to girls. They are not. (See: pretty much every molestation accusation concerning Catholic priests.)

Seriously, your religion is making you sick if you think of nude toddlers in terms of sex. You are beyond sick if you think the problem is with the toddler.

*I think my increasing sensitivity to everything is just an outgrowth of the chronic pain, but it's gotten seriously obnoxious to have to put back 90% of clothing that fits me (which is hard enough to find) because it's scratchy or constrictive, knowing full well I'm the only person on Earth this irritated by it.

**Trufax, this happened to me. I turned my head for 20 seconds in the frozen foods aisle to find the pizza we like and turned back to see a pile of clothes where my 2-year-old niece had been.

Yes, but What Does He Think?

Today, because it's Monday, and it's 3F (around -17C), and my superpigbirddeathflu has moved on to congestion so severe my left eye is visibly swollen and I'm not annoyed enough*, I clicked on a discussion of gender neutral names for girls.

I should know better.

First of all, multiple studies have shown that gender neutral names are advantageous for women. When compared to women with obviously female names (like mine), women with gender neutral names are more likely to get that first interview, get into college and be elected as a judge. Why? Because neither resumes, college applications nor ballots have any listing of gender on them and we live in a patriarchy. So, if you want to give your girl that little added edge, name her something not obviously female**.

That, however, is not the advice given. Nor is the advice given that it's your child, and unless you feel compelled to name that child "Hilter Motherfucker", you should name them whatever you like.

We named our daughter Kennedy for her first name and Devyn for her middle name. We now realize that when just hearing her name, no one knows if she is a boy or girl, because both first and middle names can belong to a girl or a boy. Did we make a mistake? Should we change her name while she is still very young?

Why is this even an issue? Can anyone think of a situation in which it would be vitally important that a person seeing this person's name, but not seeing them, would need to know their sex? I thought of maybe this girl being put in the boys' dorm at college, but student housing applications include a question about sex, so that still wouldn't be an issue. Really, it's a nonissue. Not to the answerer of the question, who suggested replacing "Devyn" with something girly, as if anyone anywhere is intimately familiar with everyone's middle names. Not in real life. How many people's middle names do you know? I don't even think my husband remembers my middle name. (And I know for a fact he can't spell it when he's reminded of it.)

The comments, however, really put it over the edge. (Some of the comments. A good portion of the commentors were very supportive of little Kennedy Devyn.) Science help you if you give people a moment's doubt as to your sex, apparently.

Yes duh, you gave her two boy names. Imagine she starts dating and her boyfriend starts telling his guy friends that he is dating Kennedy? Think about. Also would parents name their sons Jessica, Brittany, Tiffany, Bianca etc? Kennedy or Devyn isn't a unisex name and if it is eww.

Well, yes, when thinking of girls, we should always consider the men in their lives, even those men that don't exist yet. Pity the poor man who will, 20 years from now, be forced to explain that he is dating a female Kennedy, not a male Kennedy (or one of those Kennedys).

Why would you do this to your poor daughter? I am a teacher and it already gives me the heebe-jeebe's just thinking about calling her a boy's name. It is a detriment, believe me. There is nothing pretty about the name Kennedy for a girl. It is just weird in my opinion. Yuck.

So, in all of the difficulties of teaching, the worst is the visceral pain of calling a girl BY HER NAME.

Yes, you made a mistake by naming a girl Kennedy Devyn. With all the lovely girls names to choose, it was a stupid choice. Typical trendy name.

There are girly names you could be using, idiots! Gah!

Honestly.

*Heehee! Runons!

**The Hubby and I spend an inordinate amount of time naming children we will never have. I have staked out the girl's name, a version of my mother's name, and he will name any boy we don't have as a superhero. (Not "Batman", but a name like "Clark Kent" or "Bruce Wayne". He has this all worked out.)