Tuesday links with Crazy Horse

At left: Mac Arnold and Plate Full O Blues at Fall for Greenville... he totally burned the place down! AWESOMENESS! I got more photos on my Flickr page, so be sure to check out my photos of Mac and his famous gas-can guitar.

INCENDIARY BLOOZ!

~*~




:: My favorite reading of the week is Thomas Frank's TED TALKS ARE LYING TO YOU, which is just so right-on. An excerpt:

Those who urge us to “think different,” in other words, almost never do so themselves. Year after year, new installments in this unchanging genre are produced and consumed. Creativity, they all tell us, is too important to be left to the creative. Our prosperity depends on it. And by dint of careful study and the hardest science — by, say, sliding a jazz pianist’s head into an MRI machine — we can crack the code of creativity and unleash its moneymaking power.

That was the ultimate lesson. That’s where the music, the theology, the physics and the ethereal water lilies were meant to direct us. Our correspondent could think of no books that tried to work the equation the other way around — holding up the invention of air conditioning or Velcro as a model for a jazz trumpeter trying to work out his solo.

And why was this worth noticing? Well, for one thing, because we’re talking about the literature of creativity, for Pete’s sake. If there is a non-fiction genre from which you have a right to expect clever prose and uncanny insight, it should be this one. So why is it so utterly consumed by formula and repetition?

Read it all! The next time you hear the word "creativity" spoken from a calm NPR-sounding voice (and my radio consigliere, Gregg Jocoy, can do a bang-up NPR-announcer impersonation!) --you should keep this essay in mind.

In fact, I may never watch a TED talk again! (Jimi Hendrix reference: "You'll never hear surf music again")

~*~

:: A nasty Georgia Tech frat-boy email has recently gone viral, since it's title--"Luring Your Rapebait"--was guaranteed to get attention. It's offensive, and appears to be one of those GAME things (more about which in due course) that plague the internet like winter head-colds.

Danny, who is no feminist, politely takes it on in his ever-graceful fashion. His post is titled Open Letter to a Frat Brother on the view of masculinity:

I can understand that sex is a desirable thing but I worry that you, just like many others, place too much priority on having sex with women as being a necessary part of masculinity.

Have you considered what affects this pressure can have on guys, namely guys who are in a position where they need to gain the approval of others? Don't you think that pressure can lead to them doing things that range from immoral to illegal in order to gain favor and approval?

Yes, you can say that "They choose to do that stuff." That would be true. But why do you exert such pressure in the first place? Why expect those pledges to be on such a vigilant lookout for sex partners? Why not just let nature take care itself and just throw a party and if people want to get together they get together on their own rather because they might get tossed out of the party and shamed for not looking for women?

Why, indeed?

Maybe because "looking for women" is the very DEFINITION of manhood, for these sorts of guys. The idea of NOT looking for women?!? Well, what ELSE would they do?

These men are conditioned from an early age, that this is "what men do." They don't know how to have a good time and just BE. The female equivalent are the Sex and The City gals who spend most of their evenings fussing over their appearance, and won't dance or get rowdy because they might sweat or mess up their hair.

Quite possibly, they deserve each other. I just wish they wouldn't clutter up the parties and fun spaces for everyone else.

~*~

:: If you need something to explain the government shutdown to you, have a look on my Tumblr, where I quoted from a great article on No More Mister Nice Blog, titled The Punishers Want To Run The Country or We Are All Tipped Waitstaff Now.

Check it out, it's a gem. It explains so much. (And if you are now/ever were a restaurant server, required reading.)

~*~

:: There has been LOTS of arguing in cyberspace over the "Pick Up Artist" (PUA) movement, men who claim to know all the evo-psych rules of just exactly what makes those stubborn, mysterious sexy ladies put out. It's called GAME, and they endlessly talk about it on their many forums and blogs (warning: those link are gross, but fairly typical). Like most evo-psych fans, they make everything that happens fit into their concept of GAME, which is damned annoying. (It's exactly the same way very religious people will inevitably see everything that happens as being an answer to a prayer.) This is why you can't argue with them using facts; they will simply claim that your facts prove --GAME is CORRECT!--right after they tweak them a few times, or twenty.

It gets old, so I stopped bothering some time ago... or even reading. If I see a male blogger refer to GAME, I reach for my mouse, clickety-click, gone, GONE WITH THE WIND.

But Echidne recently found an intrinsic contradiction in the statement of Roosh, one of the BIGGEST of the BIG GAME THEORISTS. Roosh went to Denmark (he writes books about how to apply GAME in every country; getting-laid travel guides for men), where apparently, he says GAME doesn't work:

Roosh calls [his book about Denmark] the “most angry book” he’s ever written. “This book is a warning of how bad things can get for a single man looking for beautiful, feminine, sexy women.”

What’s blocking the pussy flow in Denmark? The country’s excellent social welfare services. Really.

...

Danish women “won’t defer to your masculinity,” he writes. “They can fuck you, but no more. What they do have are pussies and opinions you don’t really care about hearing. That’s it.” Advocates of Nordic social democracy should be thrilled to discover a perk of gender-equalizing work-family reconciliation policies: they combat skeeviness.

Roosh comes to the conclusion that women who aren’t as dependent on men for financial support are not susceptible to the narcissistic salesmanship that constitutes phase one: “attraction.” That’s why Roosh fails to advance to the second level—”trust”—without being creepy. Thus “seduction” is almost always out of the question.

Wow, during this awful government shutdown, we see STILL ANOTHER great reason for the welfare state! Then again, haven't anti-feminist conservatives like George Gilder always argued that welfare services for women and children would inexorably lead to women becoming far more picky about who they, um, spend their time with?

The reality of WELFARE means women won't experience the material desperation men have always depended on, to make their case.

Echidne is all over it:

But that refutes his evo-psycho theories about what women want! If women were hard-wired to go for the dominant growling alpha monkey, then women would do that even in Denmark. That they do not suggests that dating rules and what appeals to people is also culture-dependent and affected by economic realities.

Whatever happened to Neil Young's "Welfare Mothers make better lovers?"

I guess the official PUA verdict is in: No they don't.

~*~

Speaking of which, I used to wonder if that was a sexist song or not. During the time *I* was a welfare mother, I remember feeling like persona non grata, not like I was considered a better lover or any kind of bargain. In fact, it seemed to me that this one fact about me would easily scare people away in droves, potential lovers and friends alike. (Maybe they were afraid I would ask them for money?)

I used to listen to the song ruefully and wonder JUST WHO he was talking about, hoping that maybe I was getting some good press in the bargain. But I was pretty sure I wasn't... hard to believe that love is free, now.

But whatever else, it sure does ROCK.

Welfare Mothers - Neil Young and Crazy Horse

Boycott Chick-fil-A: "Guilty as charged"

As a vegetarian, I have no trouble avoiding Chick-fil-A. Around here, they get a lot of respect as a company that hires "nice Christian youths" to work in their restaurants. These kids are well-known for their uber-politeness and lack of tattoos. Chick-fil-A is also one of the only companies that actually refuses money and closes on the Sabbath. In addition, they help with school fund-raising and appear to be civic-minded.

These factors cause the local religious folks to respect them and consider them "serious" Christians, well worth patronizing.

I have just read Monica's blog, about Dan Cathy, Chick-fil-A president (photo at left), and his proud anti-gay crap. What particularly gripes me is the specific wording of his crap.

From the Baptist Press (and where did you expect it to come from?):

CARY, N.C. (BP) -- Dan Cathy oversees one of the country's most successful businesses. As president and chief operating officer of Chick-fil-A, Cathy leads a business with 1,608 restaurants that had sales of more than $4 billion dollars last year. They sell chicken and train employees to focus on values rooted in the Bible.

His father, S. Truett Cathy started the business in 1946, when he and his brother, Ben, opened an Atlanta diner known as The Dwarf Grill (later renamed The Dwarf House). In 1967, his father opened the first Chick-fil-A restaurant in Atlanta. Today, Chick-fil-A is the second largest quick-service chicken restaurant chain in the United States based on annual system-wide sales.

Dan Cathy's success has not erased the biblical values he learned as a child in a Baptist church. He is a warm, common man who is deeply committed to being a faithful Christian witness. And he is fully involved in New Hope Baptist Church in Fayetteville, Ga. He drives Chick-fil-A's efforts to provide genuine hospitality, ensuring that customers have an exceptional dining experience in a Chick-fil-A restaurant. Based on Matthew 5:41, Cathy is on a mission to provide customers with "second-mile" service -- exceeding even the highest expectations of a typical fast-food restaurant.

...

Some have opposed the company's support of the traditional family. "Well, guilty as charged," said Cathy when asked about the company's position.

"We are very much supportive of the family -- the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that.

"We operate as a family business ... our restaurants are typically led by families; some are single. We want to do anything we possibly can to strengthen families. We are very much committed to that," Cathy emphasized.

These comments have sparked a national controversy, of course, which has now spilled over into the Huffington Post and elsewhere.

Here is what pisses me off: Do they think gay people sprang from the forehead of Zeus or what?

GLBT people came from, you know, FAMILIES, like everyone else. The major implications of his bigoted remarks: gays are not part of their families-of-origin (I guess it's understood that their nice Christian parents all decided to throw them out?)... as well as denying the existence of families of GLBT people who are now grown and themselves parents. POOF, erased, in one fell swoop.

To Dan Cathy, these families simply DO NOT EXIST. In fact, GLBT people in traditional families, apparently do not exist either. Where does Cathy think they all came from, in that case?

The ignorance, it burns.

Boycott Chick-fil-A! I know, easy for me to say... however, I do like those fries as much as the next person. But I think I can do without. Fries are easy to come by. I hope the rest of you will consider the fact that a chicken sandwich is easy to obtain in a thousand other venues.

Go there instead.

Wordless Wednesday: Lamb's Bread

Interior of Lamb's Bread vegan restaurant in Columbia. They have all kinds of amazing African statues, artwork and sculptures. Entering the establishment is like entering another world.

They make a fabulous vegan Reuben sandwich, to die for. The restaurant is one of the great hidden treasures of our State Capitol; if you are in town, check them out.

Wordless Wednesday - Smoke on the Water

... is a great song as well as the name of a restaurant in downtown Greenville, SC. This is their kiosk at Fall for Greenville (street fair) last month.

Breast-feeding protest at West Asheville Denny's

At left: Breastfeeding mother Crystal Everitt of Asheville, asked by West Asheville Denny's restaurant manager to cover herself or feed her 1-year-old son in the bathroom. Everitt declined and quoted the North Carolina law, which protects the rights of mothers to breastfeed in any public or private location. Denny's responded by calling police. Photo from Mountain Xpress.


Nurse-in ends in standoff
Mountain Xpress
February 22, 2009
by Jason Sandford

A group of about 25 protesters, including several breastfeeding mothers and chanting supporters, held a nurse-in outside the Denny’s restaurant off Patton Avenue in West Asheville on Sunday afternoon.

Outside the restaurant, a Denny’s official apologized to organizer Crystal Everitt regarding an incident two weeks ago that sparked the protest, but Everitt said his statement wasn’t enough.

Everitt says she was in the restaurant two weeks ago breast-feeding her 1-year-old son when she was asked by the restaurant’s manager to cover herself or move to the bathroom. Everitt says she declined, citing state law, which protects the rights of mothers to breastfeed in any public or private location.

Rick Pate, regional director of operations for the Asheville Denny’s franchise, said Denny’s “responsibility as a family restaurant is to provide a nonoffensive environment for all of our valued guests. Obviously, if any behavior or any practice that happened two weeks ago while she was in the restaurant — specifically us asking her to cover up — offended her in any way, we’re sincerely sorry for that. We apologize for that,” Pate said.

“My goal today was today was to come out and speak to everyone that was here to protest, with a desire to have them come in my restaurant and have lunch with us today,” Pate said, adding that breast-feeding mothers are always welcome.

Everitt said Pate’s statement wasn’t good enough. She said that the statement, which matches a statement she received from Denny’s corporate office, leaves it up to the discretion of the restaurant to determine what is nonoffensive.

“They’re putting in a discretion clause, and they might as well not have a policy at all,” Everitt said, while standing outside the restaurant and nursing her child. “Who is it that determines if I’m being discreet or not? ‘Discreet’ should not even be in there.”

“Their policy is not in line with the law, so it’s absolutely not OK,” she said. “They need to guarantee that moms will not be harassed.”

Standing alongside Regent Drive off Patton Avenue in a bracing wind, the group of protesters held signs that read “Breast feeding is not shameful” and chanted, “Breastfeeding’s not a crime. Why won’t you let babies dine?”

In South Carolina, they probably would have actually taken her to jail!

Video of protest-organizer Everitt:



Comments? Are you shocked by public breast-feeding, or do you consider such laws sexist, as I do? What are the breast-feeding laws in your state or area?

The Politics of Flair

Jennifer Aniston's boss in OFFICE SPACE asks her if she wants to express herself or not?


Saturday evening, our restaurant server took a crayon and wrote his name on the paper tablecloth, upside down. He wrote it that way so we could read it. Some trick, I thought. And then I wondered, okay, whose cute idea was this?

Some waiter or waitress somewhere in this middling-expensive restaurant chain decided to do this once, and now everybody has to.

Maybe she just wanted to have some fun or be different and unique. So, she took the crayon that you check off your order with (another cute idea?) and wrote her name, upside down. This was part of her shtick, so she could get more tips and try to enjoy her job a little more. And then, some boss said, hey, Suzie here has TEAM SPIRIT, and you ALL must do this dumb thing that she finds enjoyment in, or that she has made uniquely hers.

In short, management STOLE the idea from some waitress and then forced everyone else, even those not normally given to cutesy ideas (which worked perfectly well for Suzie, I realize) to write their names upside down. I imagine Suzie was not a popular character at her workplace, particularly with those people who didn't want to do this dumb thing that Suzie enjoyed doing.

Barbara Ehrenreich wrote about this copycat phenomenon in her book Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America, in which she posed as a real live working class person (I can hear the NPR listeners gasping!) and worked at Walmart and a variety of other places, including restaurants. At one point, to curb her boredom during slow times, she starts freshening up the salads on the buffet. She is complimented for this by management, and feels a silly sense of pride. Another waitress then intervenes and tells her to STOP DOING THAT. Why? Because if management likes it, they will force them all to do it, even when they aren't slow. The reader can feel Ehrenreich's momentary surprise, even though I knew as soon as she did it, that she should ask someone first. (You know you are working class to the core, when you know the rules for jobs even better than the one writing the damn book.)

A good measure of identity in the workplace is whether you are forced to wear flair or do something equally dorky, such as greet the customer as soon as they enter! (book/video store rules) And if you are truly allowed to wear what you want? Anytime? You must be somebody important. Do you wear a dopey name-tag with a little pin affixed, letting everyone know how many years you have been employed at said establishment? Do you have buttons on your officially team-colored smock, vest or apron, advertising various wares for sale?

How about a button that instructs people to "ASK ME ABOUT"--blah blah blah?

In the movie OFFICE SPACE, Joanna the waitress (Jennifer Aniston) is admonished by her boss that she isn't wearing enough flair. She is confused, since she is wearing the regulation X number of buttons (the definition of "flair")--so she wrinkles her brow--what is the problem? Her boss replies, sighing heavily at her obvious lack of team spirit, see Brian over there? He is wearing 37 pieces of flair! Now if you think the MINIMUM is good enough, well--(the boss shakes his head, disappointed) and Aniston is still puzzled: "More then? You want me to wear more?"

The boss sighs. Poor thing doesn't get it.

"You want to EXPRESS yourself, don't you Joanna?"

And yes, there it is. Expressing yourself, for a working class person, is doing what management tells you to do, even the dopiest, dumbest thing.

The first person who ever wore the 37 buttons, or wrote their name upside down, or wore the cutesy name-tag with cutesy shit attached thereon, WAS expressing themselves, most assuredly. However, where do they get the idea the rest of us want to express ourselves identically to this other person? Would we all decorate our houses the same way, wear the same shoes? Of course not. So, why would we all want to deck ourselves out for work the same, or do showboat things like write our names upside down on a paper tablecloth?

Before evilll Walmart invaded my neighborhood, I occasionally shopped there. There was one older woman whose blue Walmart smock was completely covered in buttons and pins; some represented products sold by Walmart, but some were about Jesus, and some were about Star Wars. And some were about stuff like the American Cancer Society, pink ribbon-symbols for breast cancer and all that kind of fund-raising, do-gooder stuff. I used to get in her line, just to read all the buttons. I told her how much I liked them, and she beamed--this was obviously a collection of long-standing. (I have also collected buttons and pins for many decades, and I have one hat chock-full of them too.)

Some time ago, I saw the same woman still employed at the Walmart. However, she had been reeled in considerably... her flair, her OWN FLAIR, the flair she collected for herself, was mostly gone. She had a few buttons left, the ones given the green-light by management: buy this, buy that, yada yada. I was saddened by that, although I had long expected it. Individuality in the workplace, actually "expressing yourself"? Ha. This is permissible only if you make a certain amount of money. Not for us.

But they had really gotten too strict, I thought. Yes, I fully expected Jesus to be gone, but was surprised Star Wars was gone, too. I mean, aren't Star Wars toys sold in the toy department; aren't the countless videos and video games sold at Walmart, too? Why get rid of those? I felt sad for my sister button-collector.

I got in her line, that day, as always. And I said to her, "I remember, you used to have all the buttons and pins on your smock."

She rolled her eyes at me, "Don't even get me started," she said, explaining they made her stop wearing them.

"Was it Jesus?" I asked, conspiratorially.

Her eyes flashed, "I have only got compliments from people, it wasn't any customer complaining. My customers love me," she said with a pride I recognize. Yes, I thought, my customers love me too, they wouldn't try to get me in trouble. And I knew instinctively that they loved this warm, friendly, southern grandma-type person.

Some manager came in from the home-office, and had a fit, she said. "They thought it was some terrible thing, that I had worn them all these years," and rolled her eyes again.

I'm sorry, I told her, I loved the pins. I collect them, too.

"Lots of women do," she replied, "and they all liked them, told me they enjoyed the fact that there was some originality around here!" She shrugged, shook her head, and then asked me to key in my PIN for my debit card.

And I left, walking past the identical smocks, with all the identical flair. For some reason, I just wanted to cry.

"You want to express yourself, don't you?"

Indeed, wouldn't that be nice?

Q-and-A with Daisy - Volume One

Answering some of my mail, which has accumulated.

Q: When you went to The Grit, did you meet anyone from Widespread Panic or REM? What's the best thing to order?

No, I didn't. I did see people talking about Bonnaroo and one kept saying "My band at Bonnaroo--" so people kept looking at him as if he was important and whispering, "Who is that?" but I don't think he was a star or anything. (Admittedly, if any of the WP guys cut their hair, I'd be easily fooled.)

The grilled vegetarian Reuben sandwich is to die for!!!!

Q: Which of JG Ballard's novels is your favorite? Which do you think would make the best movie?

I am passionate about Cocaine Nights, Hello America, Rushing to Paradise, High Rise and Super-Cannes.

Concrete Island would make a fantastic movie, but not over, say, 80 minutes. Optimally, it should be done swiftly, like an early-60s Twilight Zone episode, not a lot of introspection and talk. Done well, it could kick serious ass.

Ditto Running Wild, which needs to be carefully crafted to keep the very-obvious ending from being so very obvious. Whoever successfully does that?--could make a blockbuster, classic movie. Because the plot is just too fabulous.

Q: Which of PKD's novels-into-movies have you liked best?

I really liked Minority Report, although the ending turned all touchy-feely and was nothing like Phil. Yech. However, the mutants are portrayed perfectly; the whole plot is true to the novella up to the Dr Feelgood-lets-all-hug finale. Also, the subplot about Tom Cruise's son dying was an unnecessary addition, part of the touchy-feely thing. Blech. The F/X were fantastic!

The short story Second Variety was molded into a well-done fantasy/horror movie, titled Screamers. Again, they had to prettify the ending (which is right out of left-field and really makes no sense), but until then, good stuff. If you enjoy sci-fi/horror, look it up.

I loved Richard Linklater's animated version of A Scanner Darkly, but I don't know how enjoyable it is for folks who don't already know the story. I think it may well be hard to follow or understand. And I realize: animation isn't for everyone. The casting of Keanu disturbed me at first, but I now see the choice of NEO as nothing less than mythic. Keanu Reeves looks GREAT animated! (See photo, left.) Robert Downey Jr. is a genius, as we all know, and Rory Cochrane is a real gem. As usual, Woody Harrelson gives us another truly funny, inspired doper. However, Winona Ryder was ALL WRONG for her role as Donna, which demanded a more duplicitous, stab-you-in-the-back Brittany Murphy-type character. Moviemakers once again hedged and prettified a bit, turning mean Donna into a somewhat more sympathetic person... Cmon, we all know that there is NO SUCH THING as a sympathetic female character in a Philip K Dick novel.

To Linklater's credit, he left the novel's ending intact... pure magic!

Aside: I hate how they enforce happy endings in Hollywood, because my guys often don't do happy endings.

Keep those cards and letters coming in.

Edit #1: I did not mention Blade Runner in my above reply, because I think it's as much a creation of Ridley Scott as it is PKD, but let me assure everyone that yes, I adore it! (Once again, we see Sean Young's sociopathic character was considerably softened, although at least they left Daryl Hannah's killer female android alone.)

Edit #2: The female character of Angel Archer, in The Transmigration of Timothy Archer, is a wonderfully, painfully three-dimensional and sympathetic character... so there IS such a thing as a sympathetic female character in a PKD novel. However, that IS the only one I can think of, the exception that proves the rule.

And to be fair, his male characters aren't bastions of decency either, but usually more hapless than malicious.

----------------
Listening to: Lou Reed - I'll Be Your Mirror
via FoxyTunes

Hands off Asheville!

From Mountain Xpress comes the following:

Irresistibly vegan, or just some lame-ass squares?
by Rebecca Bowe on 11/08/2007

SuperVegan, a Web site and blog devoted mostly to informing readers about vegan restaurants in New York City, spotlighted Asheville after it was voted most vegetarian-friendly small city by GoVeg.com.

Food critic and blogger Laura Leslie dined at downtown Asheville’s the Laughing Seed, Rosetta’s Kitchen and Early Girl Eatery before turning up her nose up and concluding that she’s glad to be a spoiled New York City vegan.

While she did have praise for the Laughing Seed (it “totally rocked,” she wrote), she was less-than-impressed with the peanut-butter tofu at Rosetta’s. “Damn those hippies and their tofu cubes; I didn’t know anyone out there still ate like this,” she laments. “Nothing makes up for those lame-ass tofu cubes.” Nor was she pleased that the Early Girl doesn’t crumble the soybean curd in their tofu breakfast scramble, and wondered “on what planet does this count as scrambled?”

Does the critique signify a blow to Asheville’s vegetarian-friendly reputation? Or shall we just shrug it off and wonder, “On what planet would we actually care what some spoiled NYC vegan writes in her lame-ass restaurant review?”

----------------
Listening to: Nina Simone - Do What You Gotta Do
via FoxyTunes