because its friday

I am Tweety. I am cute, and everyone loves me. I am a best friend that no one takes the chance of losing. I never hurt feelings and seldom have my own feelings hurt. Life is a breeze. I am witty and calm most of the time. If I just keep clear of back stabbers, I am worry-free.

Get your two-minute psychologicartoon profile here. Thanks to the faithful penguin for showing the way.

doing taxes made a little easier...

...with the right music running in the background. Thought I'd share the online music "radio station," Pandora. I don't know how I lived without it. You plug in your favorite artist or your favorite tune. Pandora does the rest. Plays a few songs by your favorite artist then searches for like-sounding tunes, music with the same tonality and tempo. Most of the time I hear artists I've never heard before so its fresh. And I've got a "CDs to Buy" list going. No obligation to buy anything, by the way. You can mix up the artists on one "station" (chosen by you). Right now I'm listening to my Beth Orton / Allison Krauss combo. And at this very moment a new favorite (thanks to Pandora), Deb Talon. It allows you to nix tunes you're not fond of -- you won't have to listen to that one again. And best of all, no commercials. Life is good. Now back to the taxes.

are you a closet homophobe?

Think you are free from negative biases? Believe you make no distinction between gay/straight, fat/skinny, old/young, or dark/light skin? Want to test that? Go to Harvard's Project Implicit here and take a simple 5-minute demo test to see if you are honest with yourself or others about your conscious or unconscious biases.

we're not in new hampshire anymore

Just saw blurb on CNN that the New York Times has endorsed Hillary.

You go girl!

And here's to the voters of the low country. We're watching and waiting.

bush: liar in chief

Ever wondered how many lies were told by the Bushies in their drumbeat to the Iraq war? The Center for Public Integrity did and took on the tedious task of counting them. Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith logged in 935 false statements told by G. W. Bush and his officials (Cheney, Condi, Rummy, et. al.) for the two years following 9/11. Lies about Iraq and Saddam's regime, weapons of mass destruction and ties to Al Quaeda. Read the report here. And check out this photo montage of Bush comprised of, well, assholes.

favorite so far

remember to remember

How often have you had the thought, "Do I remember that time I was four or do I only remember the picture?" These kinds of doubts, was it real or was it kodak, have increased exponentially over the years, leaving me to assume that its simply the corrosive aspects of aging. Neuroscientist, Joseph Ledoux, however, offers an intriquing explanation of memory that helps explain this phenonemon. Most of us think that memory is something stored and then later accessed as needed. Like a dresser drawer with clothes, say. We open the drawer, wear the shirt, then put it back until we need it next time. However, Ledoux talks about a lab study indicating that each time a memory is pulled into conscious awareness, "it has to be restored as a new memory in order to be accessible later. The old memory is either not there or is inaccessible. In short, your memory about something is only as good as your last memory about something."

So when you're looking through the photo album and you "remember" wearing those pajamas, jumping on that bed, you only retain that which you remember via the photograph. All of the "real" memories, not captured by camera (laughing, the bed squeaking, mother's perfume) get replaced by the single snapshot.

Unless, I assume, we put the picture down and allow our minds to recall those fuller details, allowing the rich tapestry of our "real" memory to go back into the memory capsule.

This new concept of memory suggests there's a distinctly negative side to taking so many still life and video pictures. One the one hand, we see a picture and are "reminded." But on the other hand, our ability to once again retrieve the fullness of that memory becomes short-circuited. Something to think about the next time you're looking through the photo album.

mature audiences

<<“Everyone wants to read about sex!” Lucia Perillo writes in her essay in “Do Me,” an eclectic literary anthology dedicated to sex in all its glorious — and not so glorious — iterations.>>

This opening sentence of a recent NYTimes book review reminds me why I started this blog. Well, one of the reasons. I was searching for blogs with frank and mature discussions about sexuality. Not mature, as in, "for mature audiences only" but mature, as in, intelligent, informed and oriented toward loving, caring, needful, healthy sex. I don't need to expound on the seedy results of my surfing adventure. Fortunately, I have been finding a few blogs with potential, so all is not hopeless. Recommendations welcome. Meanwhile I plan to check out "Do Me" and see what it does for me.

shifting sands of time

As per the GOP's masterful tax plan, the estate tax is shifting like the sands under a serpent's belly. In 2007 the federal estate tax kicked in when you inherited $1million. In 2008 it doubles to $2million. In 2009 it jumps to $3.5million. In 2010 it rises to no estate tax (getting right to the point). In 2011 it falls back to $1million. The repugs couldn't make it permanent so they settled for one year of unchecked inheritance? Or more likely, expecting future elections to bring the additional votes needed to secure permanent death to the death tax. But here's a thought: What does it say that the two wealthiest Americans, Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, defend the estate tax? Here's an exerpt from Gates' interview with Bill Moyers, aired on PBS.

GATES: Well, you know, it just...to my eye, it's just a question of fairness. It
disturbs us, for example, that here we have a significant ingredient of the
Federal revenue stream which people are taking away at the very time that our
government is going to need revenue at a level that is unprecedented. We're
talking about $200, $300 billion deficits now. And the notion of repealing a
tax in the midst of that situation leads inevitably to the proposition that some
other tax is going to have to take its place.
MOYERS: And your case in the book is that if the wealthy don't pay their share, then working people have to pay a larger share.
GATES: That's it exactly.

no intelligent answer

One of my 9-year old daughters loves to come into the bathroom and watch while I put on makeup for an evening out. (The other prefers to wear brother's handmedowns, not giving a flip for anything girly-girl, yay). I don't wear much makeup on a day to day basis, so its quite high on her entertainment meter. She intently watches me apply each of my beauty wands, asking, "what's that for?" The other evening she asked, "why do you wear makeup at all, Mumsie?" and I was stumped. I had no intelligent answer, at least not one that promotes the image I'd like her to emulate. "Because I'm not confident enough to buck the modern feminine expectations?" I didn't want to put a pall over the otherwise warm mother-daughter bonding. And because, let's face it, I want her to learn the subtle methods of cosmetics rather than copy the dracula-esque junior high girls she so longingly admires.

This exchange with my daughter reminded me of one of the landmark books of my personal feminist odyssey: Femininty by Susan Brownmiller. In fact, I think about Brownmiller's words each time I stand before my mirror, debating whether to waste any more time applying my "war paint." Her book outlines chapter by chapter, various aspects that define what it means to be feminine. Pinker cheeks and lips, that's feminine. Dark lips of the nether region signifies arousal, Brownmiller argues. Perhaps we are unintentionally advertising our sexual readiness for prospective mates. (Most men in my acquaintance say they find makeup a hindrance. "Who wants to kiss sticky, red lips and get it all over my clean white dress shirt?" )Brownmiller says that feminine equals softer, fuller hair, sweeter smelling skin, longer, leaner legs and higher buttocks displayed to their fullest with high heel shoes. More prominent breasts. Quieter voices. Thinner waistlines. And on and on.

So why do *I* bother? Who am I trying to impress? My husband prefers me without. Am I trying to be pretty for my women friends? Why? I don't when I meet up with them for our gab sessions. I mostly seem to care when we go out in public or to mixed company affairs (men included). Do I want to attract a new mate? I don't think so. In fact, no. I can barely balance my marriage let alone add a tawdry affair on the side. I occasionally wear make up to the office. No rhyme or reason there, except that I think it helps me excude a more "polished professional" image. It's largely a mystery as to why I dab away, adding smudges on the edge of my eyelash line, shading to the side of my nose and under my cheekbones. And I'll stop trying to teach my daughter some ultimate feminist message during these make up moments. I'm going to work on just revelling in the fact that, for now, she cares what I think and wants to learn something from me. As Claytie Williams, the once-Texas gubernatorial-candidate-who-lost-to-his-female-opponent said on the eve of his defeat, "Its inevitable, so lay back and enjoy it."

maiden voyage

ah. my maiden post. read, very first blog sentence. momentous, if not downright earth shattering, given my lack of tech proficiency.

I don't read many blogs (trying to improve on that, my new year's resolution) so please excuse the inaccurate bloggo-babble.

I may post on such topics as: political rants (original, huh?), psycho-social-feminist commentary, health, all things family, including headaches and heartwarming side of parenting, marital angst, sexuality and the middle aged perspective (young hardbodies need not apply), balancing family life with career in head shrinkery. Yup, I'm all over the map. Gotta work on narrowing down. Maybe that'll be next year's resolution.

alrighty, lets see how this ship sails.