Traffic Jams

There seems to be allot of traffic out there, as more and more people own cars and drive them everywhere they go. In China last year, a 120 kl. (75 miles) traffic jam lasted 11 days. As many as 10,000 vehicles, mostly trucks, were crammed fender to fender along the north-south Beijing-Tibet expressway. No joke And that is not unusual in the world's most highway congested nation. Yes, it was 11 "days" at that one in China , not 11 hours. During that time, drivers stuck in the mess played roadside card games, entrepreneurs sold everything from water (a bottle of water was selling for 10 yuan, 10 times the normal price), to instant noodles to cigarettes, and some of those always present bad guys and girls robbed drivers and tried to siphon gas from others.

Someone once said that, "Freeway congestion is getting so bad, you can change a tire without losing your place in line." I believe it. Everywhere there are masses of people there are major traffic jams. In Beijing traffic levels have increased by 130 percent from 2009 to 2010. More affluence equals more cars on fewer roads, that are often partly closed due to needed construction. Drivers attentive to their cell phones and not the road are just one of the distractions that make highway driving torture in many places. Maybe we should leave the cars in our garages and bring the horse and carriage back?

In Germany (they drive like maniacs there!) the latest research shows that people caught in a traffic jam for an hour have a three times greater increased risk of heart attack than non traffic jam drivers. I wonder if the next big technological stress will be from too much traffic on the roads. Our high tech autos are useless if they can't move and if violence breaks a out among the stranded and stressed drivers it could get messy. No matter if we use buses, drive our own cars or depend on public transportation the back-ups will be inevitable. Maybe we should start walking or pedaling a bike more..or maybe the solution to handling traffic jams is what this guy did
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn9YEDpEHRI

Be careful out there on the roads when driving.

Lying

Mark Twain once said, "When in doubt, tell the truth." I think he had the right idea about doubt because we rarely ever hear the whole truth anyway. Sometimes I wonder if a "lie" isn't wrong. Social lies are surely less hurtful than truths. "That sweater you bought is awful", is what we are thinking. But socialization teaches us to say, "What a lovely sweater!. Ho devious, a lie wrapped in truth and innocence.

I try to tell the truth in every possible situation, apart from the common social lies everyone tells. It's why some say that I am too blunt or candid. Sometimes, however, the price of the price is too hard on myself or the recipient of the "lie" I would utter. So I have to say what I know isn't true, but will cause the least amount of hurt. There are degrees of lies, some are acceptable, even favored (the social lie) and others are grievous. Lies told to help oneself or injure others are never seen as good. But what is maddening to us all is the half truth (lie).

We hate half truths because they are so hard to detect as lies. Politicians and salesman live in worlds of half truths. That's why we so distrust them. I think we are fooled by politicians as much as by any other profession. That's why we expect them to lie when ever they open their mouths, and it's why they think their lies are harmless.. But why are we angry with them for fulfilling our expectations that they are liars?

I have good instinct and can tell who is lying most of the time, by their look, tone of voice, by remembering their previous statements, and just by "feeling" they are lying. Ironically though, the people we are closest too and most trust are the hardest to detect as lying. Our faith in them blinds us to the possibility that they would betray our trust by lying to us. So we are gullible when someone we like or trust, lies to us and overly suspicious when politicians speak the truth (well, rarely, they do that).

I'm not sure what the point is of my rant here about lying. Uh....you'll just have to "trust" I'm not lying to you about it.

Going To The Dogs

I thought I had heard of every type of crime, until today. It seems a woman named Jennifer Thomas in nearby Woodland, Washington claims her pet bulldog, Jagger has been kidnapped and held for ransom. But it's not just money the dog nappers (I wonder if that is word?) want. They demand both $1000 and the owner's prescription medications. Jennifer was in an accident that left her in a wheelchair and dependent on the medicine the dog nappers want.

Hmmm Well, this is all according to Jennifer's claims. She also said the thieves will torture her dog to death and send her a video of it if she reports the threat (she obviously has reported it to police and the media because I know about it to report this to you ... and I don't nap dogs for money and drugs). It makes me wonder a bit, not that I might be kidnapped, because no one would bother and no one would pay a ransom. In kidnap priority I am way below dogs like Jagger.

But I wonder about the perpetrators (if this story is real and not just in the imagination of Jennifer). How stupid must they be? Or perhaps they are just drug addicts acting irrationally in response to the need for a fix. It's weird someone would risk going to jail for stealing a dog, threatening to torture the dog and trying to extort money from the owner. Don't they have a ski mask and a gun they can use to rob a bank?

If caught and convicted the dog nappers will be sent to prison, but how will they explain their incarceration to the other thugs inside? There is a priority of respect one gets from the type of crime he or she committed that led to the incarceration of the convict. For example, the murderer is taken more seriously than the person who molested a child (who usually are molested themselves by some of the other prisoners as a sign of disdain for the crime they committed, since even prisoners don't like that kind of crime and have some crimes listed as unacceptable).

I wonder what the other cons will think of the dog nap, ransom and extort for drugs who took Jagger from Jennifer. They may see it as more equivalent to child molesting than as a "real crime". So what kind of crime are the dog nappers committing against Jennifer? Is it a crime of desperation for money, drugs or both? Is it a crime of stupidity
(amateur wanna be criminals trying to commit a lame crime)?

Or perhaps kids attempting a bad joke toward Jennifer? It just makes me want to bite somebody (but then that's a lame crime too)...

Changing Moral Codes

I read a commentary today and it had ideas I wanted to pass on to you. So here goes. Essentially, it involves moral thinking, specifically how troubled young people are today at thinking and talking about moral issues they face. University of Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith led a research team that conducted in-depth interviews with 230 young adults from across America that asked them open ended questions about right and wrong, about moral dilemmas and about the meaning of life.

Almost all of the young people, aged 18-23, failed to say anything sensible on these matters. The study's author said, "When asked to describe a moral dilemma they had faced, two thirds of the young people either couldn't answer the question or described problems that are not moral at all, like whether they could afford to rent a certain apartment or whether they had enough quarters to feed the meter at a parking spot."

Kind of sad to see them so lacking in any cultural tie to a set of ethics. Smith said that most of them hadn't even given serious thought to some of the principal ethical questions they would face in life. "When asked about wrong or evil, they could generally agree that rape and murder are wrong. But, aside from these extreme cases, moral thinking didn't enter the picture, even when considering things like drunken driving, cheating in school or cheating on a partner.", said Smith

A typical response to the questions was that they hadn't thought about it before or that the answer depended on what the person being asked felt (what in the 1960's was termed "situational ethics"). The conclusion of the study is that for most young people believe that what is right or wrong is not determined by the moral code of the culture, but rather by the individual choosing what he or she thinks best. The "Who am I to say what's right? It is up to the individual" was a typical response from among those people interviewed.

So are young people just doing what makes them feel good or makes them happy instead of learning the society's code of ethics and applying those? As Smith said, "They have not been given the resources by schools, institutions and families to cultivate their moral intuitions, to think more broadly about moral obligations." But that would be the fault of society for trivializing itself to them and for not inculcating them.

I wonder if in fact this generation has not learned the culture's ethics, that for them, the moral precepts of the past have become separated from moral sources, and instead are replaced by the individual doing what "feels" good. This would imply the individuals have replaced the society's models with the individual model for moral choices. Morality has always been inherited and shared, but is it true that now the younger generation thinks of ethics as something that emerges in the privacy of his or her own heart? If that is true, it is a moral dilemma for us all.

Death Of Breakfast

Did you eat breakfast today? Most people eat or drink something in the morning that one could define as breakfast, but most of us don't eat the old style heavy breakfast meals that the generation of physical workers did. Work today doesn't require consuming a large volume of food and calories to keep us going because most of those who work today are working at white collar or service industry jobs. What we eat for breakfast has changed as fast as your changing technologies.

I can't speak for other cultures on this, but I would think that the west is not the only one that has a smaller, less nutritious breakfast meal as the standard today. In the west, most people no longer eat the old style breakfast meal of stacks of pancakes, sausages, toast and jam, coffee and orange juice. They don't have the time to cook it or eat it, don't need it to function at work or school and have been bombarded with quick fix smaller plate alternatives.

I think that along with tea, juice or coffee, cereal might be the most popular breakfast food today. It's light, easy to prepare and eat and so sugary and addictive it's like having dessert for the morning meal. We get addicted to those cereal meals by our childhood fascination with the, TV advertisers endless sugary cereals to kids as they watch their morning cartoons on TV. That translates later in life to their eating phony "fiber", "natural", "multigrain" or other alleged "healthy cereal" that are, in reality, just a variation of the non nutritious, sugary cereal of their childhood.

If the breakfast diner doesn't like cereal there is usually a substitute made of a bagel, donut or sweet roll, or fruit in place of the cereal. Consistency in the breakfast meal is the norm. We seem to eat mostly the same few things for breakfast each day. The only time we have an old style "big breakfast" is on weekends (when we have the time for it) or when eating breakfast out.

I wonder if breakfast is not just down sizing, but disappearing for many. Some people actually drink a cola or other soft drink each morning and call it breakfast. They seem to function as alertly and efficiently at school or at work as those who eat a bigger breakfast. This makes me think the old adage about how eating a good breakfast makes us do better at school or work to be a myth. Whatever, breakfast is now the least important meal to most westerners. It may eventually become as unpopular as wearing a wrist watch is today.

Chasing Hotel Buffets

You know what is happening more and more in American hotels and motels? Partly because of the bad economic times today, more and more people are stealing breakfast and lunches, dining for free at the hotels by pretending to be paying hotel guests. They simply walk into the free breakfast or lunch buffets at the hotel and chow down, sometimes also even taking doggie bags of food home with them. Forget wedding crashing! Now it is hotel free buffet crashing.

Many U.S. hotels do not ask the guests to show their hotel key or key card before sitting down to the buffet. It is at those that most of the buffet crashings occur. In the past this "don't ask " policy has been effective, given most people are not dishonest. The theory of the hotel that doesn't ask for proof before feeding has always been not to "offend" the guest by requiring he or she show that they are registered and paying guests of the hotel.

In the past in most hotels that offer free breakfast buffets, this has been only a small problem for years. But economic times are tougher now, people in the U.S are used to getting freebies from the government, and the people who buffet crash are hungry and sometimes too lazy to work to support and feed themselves. They're trying to beat the system and save a buck because most hotel policy about buffet crashers is to not cause a scene when they are discover non guests stealing hotel food. The first time the hotel will generally look the other way, but now with the problem growing and cheaters dining regularly on the buffet crash circuit, the second and third time they are asked to leave or the police are called to arrest them.

Bizarre stories of people wandering in off the streets to gorge on free food and then filling Tupperware dishes with leftovers is not uncommon now. Also some genuine hotel guests from other nearby hotels who prefer the buffet of a second hotel, can now be found eating at the other hotel's buffet instead of their own hotel's. Some hotel buffets are beginning to resemble food kitchens for the homeless.

But I think the bad economy isn't really the fault. Instead, it is probably the excuse people use to steal, a way of lessening guilt about what they are doing when taking the food. In fact, they may be too lazy, too cheap or too dishonest to not buffet crash until forced to stop. Hmmmm This is making me hungry....I wonder which hotels near me have a free buffet with blueberry pancakes..

The Best Temperature

It seems to me that the reaction people have to temperature is as much a relative as a physical one. It must be, because two different people entering two showers flowing water that is the same temperature are as likely to have opposite reactions to whether it feels hot or cold. I think most people anticipate whether they will be hot or cold and convince themselves they are right about it. That's why they like hot or cold more or less. (Put me down for liking cold temperatures far more).

My E mail friends in hot and humid Indonesia, for instance, will say it's "cold" if the temperature drops below 22 C or so, as it rarely does there. But those I know who live in Finland will go out in short pants and T shirts to celebrate the hot spell when it is 22 C. There is a physical conditioning to temperature that allows us to fool ourselves and imagine hot and cold differently than others. I'm sure that the Indonesian who complained about it being cold at 22C would change his or her perspective and think that temperature hot if he or she moved to and lived in Finland long enough to re-condition to the temperatures there.

So how come we can't adjust as easily to things other than temperature? We adjust to temperature but not, for instance, to personal dislikes. I hate to dance and refuse to do it, so that's why there is not adjustment to it. If I am out and people are dancing I'll watch, but never dance. No matter how many times I am there I won't dance because I already have determined that dancing is not interesting. You may hate sports or a particular sport and refuse to watch it. If so, no matter how many times "the game is on TV" and you are in the room where it is showing, you won't watch. Temperature is an external stimuli. We can't refuse to adjust to it, but much of what we do is under our own internal controls. Those things that give us a choice in adjusting we don't adjust to well at all.

Age or experience also often keeps us from adapting to new things or differences. Older people invariably are "old fashioned" because they simply reject any accommodation to newness...unless (as in the case of adapting to temperature) they are forced to adapt. When we are used to an experience we have had regularly over time, we more often resist change because we see change as a threat to the comfort we take in what we already like. On the other hand, the younger or less experienced person is much less set in a routine and the less likely to resist adaptation to the new. It's why Lady Gaga is the flavor of the month for the young while Frank Sinatra is the flavor of life for older adults.

Anyway....it's getting hot in here. I will open the window and enjoy the snow.

China Censors Video Games

Chinese Premier Hu recently warned his political party of danger from the west. Uh, not military danger, but rather the danger of video games. Yes, video games are now seen as a threat to the dictatorship in China. He announced in a speech that was publicized widely by the Chinese press that "international hostile forces use thought and culture to Westernize and split China."

I guess he is right if you define "hostile forces" as the movement to more freedom in China and "westernizing and splitting China" as allowing ideas to enter China without censorship by the government. The Chinese dictators have always censored speech and ideas, even the most innocent music (they once banned a syrupy Backstreet Boys tune). But the fact that non political video games is on their list shows they are losing the battle between dictatorship and democracy.

Since opening the country to capitalism, China has tried bring economic gains without the political and personal freedoms that are attached to them. That can be achieved for awhile, but as the economy grows more and more, democratic cultural and personal freedoms are put on display, and the dictators will gradually lose control. Through massive government investment in China and attempts to censor anything that is contrary to the Communist party line, the dictators think they can control the culture in China and steer it to acceptance of the dictatorship. It is doubtful that will work. Essentially, the dictators have to either reassert total control over the population and deny any freedom at all, which endangers the economic growth, or they can continue to open China to whatever cultural contamination (the freedom) that comes into China along with the economic benefits.

Recently the dictators banned about 2/3 of the Western and Chinese created copies of Western entertainment shows on Chinese TV (silly, harmless stuff like American Idol style shows) because it was claimed that they are "excessive entertainment and a trend toward low taste. They are probably right on both counts. Western TV shows are mostly mind mumbing drivel. But people everywhere do want to decide themselves whether to watch that mess or find more enlightening alternatives.

In fact, this nervous reaction against harmless western influences shows that the Chinese government is worried that the "Arab Spring" revolutions might eventually spread to China, endangering their control and eventually mean they would be overthrown and replaced with some form of less restrictive government. The Chinese dictators have always believed that the citizens can be controlled by controlling the culture. But is it possible to control that now, in the age of multi communication devices that spew forth any idea one is curious to see or read about?

Too, the dictators think they can solve China's domestic problems by manipulating the culture and information it allows the residents to hear. But the manipulation and control is also why China is such a non creative society that produces little cultural products (art, literature etc.) that other societies want. No doubt lessening the control today in China would regenerate today the once great cultural contributions China gave the world, pre Communism. But then, dictators are only really concerned about keeping control, not strengthening the cultural identity of the nation.

So the struggle between economic prosperity and freedom versus dictatorship is heating up in China. Has the government opened the door too widely to close it again? We may find out sooner than later.

Napping, Napping, Napping, Gently At My Door

I like to take naps whenever I feel the need. I haven't yet napped while writing here, but it might be a good idea for both of us if I did. I could wake refreshed and you might not receive the nonsense I write because I will have forgotten what I was writing about in the first place. This is proof that naps are a good thing for both of us.

I think the reason I take naps is because my sleep apnea only allows me about 5 hours sleep each night. So I need to nap in order to make up for the lack of sleep. The sleep experts term my kinds of naps, which range from 10 minutes to about 40, as "power naps". I like this term because I am mad for power, not only when awake, but when asleep. That power nap is a one that is used to compensate for sleep deprivation (I wish they would call it "power sleep deprivation" so I could be even more powerful).

Power naps are those which end before the onset of a deep sleep. This keeps the person who is power napping from sleeping deeply, which would interfere with his or her normal bedtime sleep. It also allows the napper to feel refreshed, almost as if mimicking a deep sleep. I write all of this so you will know I am a power napper, who is sleep deprived and therefore, not responsible for the stupidity you read from me. I take my power napping to be sort of like the insanity plea that a mass murderer uses to escape punishment. Gee, I really am not guilty of stupidity!

I also like the association with the famous people who also power napped. This probably won't rehab my bad reputation, weak character and general indolence, but it surely makes me feel better about myself. Winston Churchill was a power napper. Hmmm Maybe I am as good as Winston was. Well, I think I am showing another of my deficits, that of irrationality and inability to make analogies or sound conclusions. Winston would probably slap me for even suggesting we are alike. If I were lucky he would be too tired to slap and, instead, just take a power nap.

Other famous people who regularly power napped every day just like me (yes I know, but were altogether superior to me) include former President Lyndon Johnson; Napoleon Bonaparte; former President John Kennedy; the world's great inventor, Thomas Edison; painter Salvador Dali; and one of my least favorite presidents, Ronald Reagan.

You may be tired now and need a night. I just hope after reading this drivel your nap doesn't turn into a nightmare.

Too Hard To Open

I just had armed combat with a container of gelato. And it was all about opening the thing. I couldn't get it open and no matter how hard I tried to figure out the method, I resorted to a wrench and pried it open. My reward was the Tiramisu gelato was outstanding, a lucky find in an upscale grocery store, it was imported from Verona, Italy and it was as creamy and as nice as many gelato ice cream servings I had there. But, Sigh, even the Italians seem to have a proclivity for making products which are way too difficult to open.

Have you noticed how hard it is to open things you buy at stores? They are either so complicated as to the way to be opened or too tight to open. What happened to twisting or tearing something open. If you try to twist open a top now, you have to be a circus strong man to do it. And those cardboard drink cartons......how many times do milk cartoons not open with the push up direction given on the container. You end up prying it open with a screwdriver and find that in doing so you have created a drip every time you pour a glass of milk.

What about the plastics that they use to seal products, like the cable you buy for your computer. They never pop open as directed. I always wind up giving up and just cut through them with a knife or with scissors. Who ever invented those packages and the plastic snap package they use to enclose baked goods at grocery stores, should be tried and executed immediately. I think that if a person were lost in a forest and had one of those snap close package of rolls in his backpack, he or she would probably starve to death because of the impossibility of opening the package.

Why do they make boxes and packages so hard to open? Even opening the standard the Fed Ex boxes now requires a plan, patience and luck. I guess they make them that way so no one can tamper with them in stores or when in transit, and because it protects the product from damage while in transport. The contents of the packages are protected by the packaging way more than I want.

It's for their convenience, not the consumer's. I wonder if Microsoft designed those packages. I may be paranoid but it reeks of their brand, the "Let's see how un necessarily complicated we can make this" style. Don't those medicine bottles that are "childproof" remind you of opening Windows 7?

I don't mind taking a chance that a product can be tampered with. Just give me a package I can easily open. Oh, if this rant on bad packaging was difficult to open, please send your complaint to microsoft, not me.

Snowy Days

We had our first snowfall of winter today. Being from Louisiana it's not a familiar site either to me or to many in Portland, as snow in Portland itself is rare (though it snows often just outside the city in the hills and mountains surrounding it). Being a snow amateur I have some amateur observations about the reactions those unfamiliar with snow have to it.

People here react hysterically, excitedly, with great anticipation when told that "snow is on the way". It mirrors how people on Louisiana react to news of an impending hurricane. In both cases there is both a practical dread of damage or inconvenience the storms may cause and a child-like desire to see what the snow or hurricane will do. They love and hate it. Wait, I thought passionate love and hate was only in romantic relationships... Anyway, it's the psychology of irrational reaction to an impending event whose effect is unknown.

When I was doing my usual morning grocery shopping trip yesterday I saw mobs of people excited, their eyes glowing widely with wonder, about the "big snow" they just knew was coming. Uh, problem is, the "big snow" was forecast to be nothing more than a trace or light dusting (In the end, it was a little more than that). The anticipated bigness grew from the citizens' wants, not from the meteorological science. It seemed that everyone in the grocery store bought supplies in a volume that they would never need (I saw one shopper buy three loves of bread), purchased I think as a kind of motivation for the snow to be as big as they wanted.

Hmmmm If we buy extra supplies the snow would not dare disappoint us by not showing up for the party. A local newscast report stated yesterday that sled sales had skyrocketed in hope that the snow would allow winter fun. Snow tire chain sales wee breaking record yesterday. You get the idea. We want to play kin snow and will do anything, including being irrational, to get it

Well, meteorologists and their TV stations also love to fan the flames of snow events because the ratings go up when people believe there could be snow and that they must be "ready" for it. In New Orleans, whenever a hurricane is even many days away TV stations there also practice the "scare them" method by broadcasting a every doom and gloom possibility that the hurricane might have if it happened to hit the city in the most unlikely scenario possible. I think TV weather casters love storms more than anyone.

Another thing that happens when it may snow, almost snows or snows is that people drive their automobiles as if they were racing to a hospital emergency room. There is a sense of urgency to their speeding in two opposite directions. First they drive recklessly because they are afraid they will miss the snow the so badly want to see. They want to make sure they are out of their cars when it comes. The other speedily , reckless snow drivers seem to be trying to get where they want to go before the snow impedes them. "I have to drive like a fool and put everyone's lives in danger so I won't put myself in danger by driving on top of a few drops of snow." It makes no sense.

So, If you happen to hear it's going to snow, I suggest you hop on a plane and rest a while in the tropics.

What To Do With The Dead

I just read that 75% of all people who die are still buried somewhere in the world in caskets in the ground. With only 25% being cremated I wonder if there will eventually be no more room to bury everyone who wants a casket. The world population is over 6 billion now, which is more people than have lived previously in all the time humans have been on earth. But there does seem to be a trend away from burials. And I wonder if being buried is really the best way to remember those who die.

If you ever visit cemeteries (most people bury and then rarely ever return to the burial site of their loved one) you know first hand that most graves are neglected or altogether forgotten. It's not because of a lack of love or thought about those who have died. I think it's probably because visiting often would make us feel sad and not allow is to move forward with our lives. Too much grief is a psychological killer for the living. Humans must live in the present and future or they wilt in the past.

I also think people today are too busy to deal with death in the ways we dealt with it the past. We have lost the privilege and convenience of "doing nothing" because there is so much stimuli for us to deal with every day . Just like not being able to stay home on Sundays and lazily rocking on the front porch or rocking in a hammock in the back yard, today our lives are governed by the forces and demands of modernity.

We no longer have time to pay homage to the dead the way in which it has traditionally been done. But humans must remember those who came before them. We do it more with our thoughts about them than via our cemeteries anyway, so perhaps changing the ritual from burial to cremation is a tend that is not so bad. But technology gives us a a better way for honoring those who have died that might make the departed longer a part of the living world . It might be better to stop burying and start recording ourselves or gathering written records left behind by the deceased. Why can not a written and recorded journal about our lives be an alternative to burying and forgetting the deceased?

It's frustrating for anyone who wants or needs to know his or her family genealogy. Other than my daughter, who has no interest in family history, I am the last survivor of my family, and what records, pictures, documents and words from long gone family I have is an incomplete one. I think most people have a similar gap in their own family histories. But the power of modern communication makes it easier to avoid that gap.

Even something as insignificant as what I write here is a revelation about this author that could be a posterity more noticeable than a grave site. Whatever reciord we leave behind gives us evidence of who we are and that can influence the living still.

We need to know our roots in order to have a stable foundation. Cemeteries are good reminders of those roots, but are insufficient in revealing the branches that make the family tree. Perhaps we should replace those graveyards with a written and recorded cemetery.

Celebrity Endorsements

Celebrity endorsements are getting out of hand. While in a drug store the other day I saw evidence of it. The product endorsement for sale was for an " Electric Justin Beiber Singing Tooth Brush". I'm not kidding. The only thing electric that I would buy that is tied to that Beiber kid would an electric chair with which to electrocute him. But what does that kid have to do with teeth? It seems a lot more celebrities are endorsing products a that they have no knowledge about.

Celebrity endorsements are a good way to sell a product, but it only works if the right celebrity is paired with the right product. If a star athlete is promoting an exercise product it makes sense. But if the athlete endorses a cigarette brand it's not. But some companies attempt to get around this problem by picking a celebrity that has absolutely nothing to do with their product (Justin Beiber's toothbrush), and the commercials that result from these combinations are weird or out of step with logic.

Eva Longoria in advertisements for L’Oreal or Jennifer Lopez’s latest perfume might be ok because they at least feature products that the consumer believes the celebrity herself uses. But rocker Ozzy Ozbourne's butter commercial strain my imagination. Do rock stars also make their own butter? Probably not. No doubt Ozzy will endorse any product that pays him enough to fawn over it. Hmmmm I'm not celebrity but I'll to a commercial praising Justin Beiber's toothbrush if the price is right.

So it gets down to the consumer responsibility. Why do consumers respond so often to celebrity affiliation with a product? Consumers do buy more of the product, whether or not the product is good or bad, after a celebrity endorses it. In advertising the process of a celebrity endorsement selling the product is called 'transfer'. That is, the like-ability or recognize-ability of the celebrity is enough in itself to make the buyer purchase a product that the celebrity endorses. This might be because people feel "closer" to celebrity status themselves when they use a product they think the celebrity uses.

Celebrities endorsing brands has been steadily increasing over the past few years. Marketers acknowledge the power of celebrities in influencing consumer-purchasing decisions. But I didn't see any of those Justin Beiber toothbrushes missing from the sales rack on which they sat at the drug store. I don't think any endorsement can sell that.

To Cut Or Not To Cut

It happened again...the male nightmare. Another crazy woman chopped off her husband's penis with a pair of scissors after he passed out from a night of drinking and taking pills. Hmmm, drinking and taking pills is almost normal these days in this age of irresponsibility. But cutting off love muscles is way too much abuse.

The woman is from Vietnam and her identity is vague. But we do know her husband is Taiwanese and that the cutting happened in Taiwan. I guess publicizing her name could increase the sales of scissors so much in Taiwan that it's best to keep it a secret and not exhaust the scissors supply. Press reports identify her as 'Pan' and she is being charged with assault that could lead to as much as 12 years in prison if she is convicted. The woman claims that the relationship with her Taiwanese husband was one of infidelity and abuse , and that is what led to her remove his favorite body part. She does not regret it in the slightest.

Uh, I assume he has plenty of regrets. But shouldn't she have known he was a substance abuser and a loser before she married him, or did he become like that only after they got married? Maybe she drove him to his bad behavior? Who knows? Anyway, she says that she's glad for what she did, and she feels that she taught him a lesson.

The woman told police that her husband, whom she'd been with for two years, was 29-years old and unemployed as well as a frequent user of illegal drugs. He also had an affair with another woman, which "Pan" says he did not try to hide at all. This was the straw that broke the camel's back. So, he got to say so long to his penis when she sawed if off with the scissors and threw it into a river. It looks like it became fish food. Poor fish.

It seems that the publicity about penis cutting has started a wave of it. Just last month a California woman drugged her husband before cutting off his weapon of love and then throwing it in their garbage disposal....all because he filed for a divorce. It's odd to hear that cutting off a penis is a trendy fad. In ancient times armies were sometimes known to sever the penises of their enemies to count the dead, as well as for trophies, In China long ago castration and penis removal was one punishment for sexual crimes. But the practice is being revived in some countries. From 1973 to 1980 one hundred cases of Thai women cutting off their husband's penises were recorded. In Asian cultures the practices is far more widespread. Hmmm I am scratching Thai women off my dating and marriage list.

Anyway, Pan's man will end up a eunuch, and she will spend sometime in jail, not a very nice approach to a problem. One lesson to learn from it is, if you are male and you marry, remove the scissors from your house and try to find an extra penis for disguise just in case.

Multitasking

Humans really don't do many things at once well, because that's not how most human brains are structured to work. When we multitask, we split our time across all the different things we're trying to do. And there are two problems with that. One problem is that there's a cost to switching back and forth between the things you're trying to do, and the other is if you're participating in some kind of event that's unfolding in time, you're going to miss things when you switch your attention away from that event. If you're checking your e-mail at the same time you are trying to converse with a person standing in front of you, you're not really doing both things at same time (multitasking), you're doing a little bit of e-mail and a little bit of talking and very little thinking. Much of the real time conversation you having consists of looking at the the e-mail or doing some other multi task you've just missed.

So why is multitasking seen as a good thing, and why is it seen by so many to be higher level of functioning? I have opinions about this (I have opinions on everything) as to why people seem to want to multitask. One reason may be social pressure to conform to the technological mania in the world today. It's the three blind mice predicament. Technology has been defined by society to be superior to non technology, a definition that unfortunately does not include the role of how we use the technology when defining it. The fact is that much of our personal use technology is primitive, misguided..uh disgustingly rude and anti intellectual. Still, social pressure tells us we must be robots. We must be multitaskers or we will be viewed as odd. We must be like the three blind mice who simply do as others do without thought about the usefulness of doing so.

A second reason people multitask with their technology is that technology is addictive. Addicts don't realize or admit they are addicted, technology addicts included. Society is past the point of realizing that a person should first see a "need " for technology or a reason to use or own it. Instead, we use it robotically, and this makes us think less deeply. Thinking less deeply when multitasking affects our intellect's use and growth by deadening it. How can one give deep thought to a concept when engaged in the many small thoughts required by multitasking with technology? Yet we multitask confidently, contending that we are alert on all fronts as we do it. But, for example, we would be repulsed if the physician operating on our heart were to send and read E mails and listen to an ipod while doing the surgery. With each task engaged in at the same time as others our proficiency level falls as we are distracted by them all.

Another reason we blindly, happily, multitask our way through the day is the notion that in doing so we are trendy and out front. He or she who has not the latest electronic gadget is seen as "out of touch" with the modern world. And the non multitasker is indeed out of touch. But for multitaskers this concept of being in touch is with the electronic world, not the human one. In fact, those with an electronic orientation are the ones who most often divorce themselves from reality (by changing real world into electronic communication).

So now you can denounce me as being a fossil, one who fights technological "improvement". Or perhaps you were multitasking when reading this and, as a result, haven't got a clue as to what I wrote.

Let's Get Rid Of January

My favorite month December, has come and gone. I waved good-bye to Santa, bought some extra Christmas sweets for later indulgence, and grimaced as boring January appeared. Hmmm Maybe we have one month too many. I refer to January. It might be better to just take those 31 January days (why do they always give the worst months the most days?) and drop and drag them (and you thought I was low tech!) into December. Surely, Santa would love the extra time for delivery and the world's bakers, caterers and restaurants would make a fortune on the extra holiday food binges in which we all love to participate.

If you think January is exciting and I am loony, I dare you to find the holidays in January we can have fun celebrating. Just take a look at what January tries to pass off as holidays.

Jan 3 Humiliation Day- I humiliate myself ever time I write stupidity here. I don't need a day to celebrate it.
Jan 4 Flower Basket Day- I'll only celebrate that when women start to give men flowers.
Jan 6 Cuddle Up Day- There are some people I absolutely don't want to cuddle with. Hmmm Better lock myself inside that day.
Jan 8 Bubble Bath Day- What do people do if they live in a place with no tub. Can you take a bubble bath in the shower?
Jan 10 Houseplant Appreciation Day. Time to tell your ficus plants you really care.... if all the flowers you got on Houseplant Appreciation Day haven't already died because you forgot to water them.
Jan 11 Step in a Puddle and Splash Your Friend Day. This, I believe, is followed by Push Fred off the Cliff Day or some such other violent act against those we love.
Jan 13 Blame Someone Else Day and Friday the 13th Day. Hmmmm Don't we blame someone else every day, and what month would be so boring as to celebrate the unlucky Friday 13th?
Jan 17 Ditch New Years Resolutions Day. I made one about 7 the morning of New Year's Day and broke it at 7:01 am That's about normal for resolutions
Jan 24 Compliment Day. It's my favorite holiday ever......so where is my compliment? I guess I ask too much....

I did leave out a few holidays that are significant, Chinese New Year and Tet Day for example, but they fall in February as much or more than in January. So, have I made my case about the end of January? Are you ready to transfer January into December?