Silver Adept (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
silveradept) wrote2006-08-17 11:17 pm
silveradept) wrote2006-08-17 11:17 pm
The oddities one finds around.
The BBC's official pronunciation blog, for example. Or that not everything you see on television is news. (Well, we already knew that.) Moreso that the FCC is finally investigating whether or not video adverts were packaged as news items. From, yes, the CBC in Canada. Anyone else see the hilarity here?
Regarding the article of the 13% who get pregnant, here is, as Paul Harvey puts it, the rest of the story. Comparisons between counties in South Carolina for the microvision, comparisions between the United States and European countries for the macrovision. Note that the United States has an extraordinarily high rate, nearly four times the Europeans. And finally, here's some insight into how Europeans look at sex, sex education, and prevention. Would that the U.S. could be so reasonable.
Our maestro of the church of Tina Chopp (remember your vegetable sacrifices) will be pleased to know that suit is being brought over an adherent of the Church of Body Modification's termination. Recognition may not be far off for the Tinites and Pastafarians.
A trinity of religious/spiritual/mythical related links - the satan got really bad PR (he was really just a functionary doing YHWH's bidding), Why won't God heal Amputees (which takes a look at the somewhat poor track record of prayers offered to requests granted ration from YHWH), and Dave's Mythical Creatures (which is by no means complete).
This has been all over the blog-waves. A judge in Detroit stepped up to the plate and ruled the warrantless wiretaps unconstitutional. The cynic in me says that the SCOTUS will overrule it and/or the president will ignore it and continue on as if nothing ever happened. The unitary executive and all that. Still, if this stands up, then there's a way that even the most spineless of representatives could hide behind in pushing through an impeachment resolution. Mind you, it would put Cheney in charge, but I don't think it would take long for him to run afoul of something that would get him thrown out, too.
I also got to see my first official sillything today. Someone filed in a comment card at one of my places of work, asking that a "Parental Advisory" sticker be placed on the picture book And Tango Makes Three, because of the subject matter that it discusses. Namely, two penguins who love each other very much, but both happen to be boys, the inventive zookeeper who gives them the egg they want, so they can raise a kid just like the other penguin couples, and the people who attend the zoo that don't notice or particularly care. (The penguins are cute. You wouldn't know they were boys without the narrative saying so.) This book obviously requires that we place something on it that shouts "Challenge me!" or "This library thinks you can't handle controversial issues with your children, so we're placing this sticker here to tell you this book is different!"
Yeah. The difficulty in crafting replies to this, whichever person is tasked with it, is to give a serious, earnest reply to what was a serious, earnest inquiry. Snarking them, while appearing eminently appropriate and reasonable, is not the correct thing to do. Instead, a well-measured, properly thought out and logical reason for why the library is denying such a request is in order. So now I've seen both ends of the spectrum of users, I think. Or at least examples of how both ends can react. Another year of schooling, and then this becomes part of my job. Hopefully I'm ready for it.
Regarding the article of the 13% who get pregnant, here is, as Paul Harvey puts it, the rest of the story. Comparisons between counties in South Carolina for the microvision, comparisions between the United States and European countries for the macrovision. Note that the United States has an extraordinarily high rate, nearly four times the Europeans. And finally, here's some insight into how Europeans look at sex, sex education, and prevention. Would that the U.S. could be so reasonable.
Our maestro of the church of Tina Chopp (remember your vegetable sacrifices) will be pleased to know that suit is being brought over an adherent of the Church of Body Modification's termination. Recognition may not be far off for the Tinites and Pastafarians.
A trinity of religious/spiritual/mythical related links - the satan got really bad PR (he was really just a functionary doing YHWH's bidding), Why won't God heal Amputees (which takes a look at the somewhat poor track record of prayers offered to requests granted ration from YHWH), and Dave's Mythical Creatures (which is by no means complete).
This has been all over the blog-waves. A judge in Detroit stepped up to the plate and ruled the warrantless wiretaps unconstitutional. The cynic in me says that the SCOTUS will overrule it and/or the president will ignore it and continue on as if nothing ever happened. The unitary executive and all that. Still, if this stands up, then there's a way that even the most spineless of representatives could hide behind in pushing through an impeachment resolution. Mind you, it would put Cheney in charge, but I don't think it would take long for him to run afoul of something that would get him thrown out, too.
I also got to see my first official sillything today. Someone filed in a comment card at one of my places of work, asking that a "Parental Advisory" sticker be placed on the picture book And Tango Makes Three, because of the subject matter that it discusses. Namely, two penguins who love each other very much, but both happen to be boys, the inventive zookeeper who gives them the egg they want, so they can raise a kid just like the other penguin couples, and the people who attend the zoo that don't notice or particularly care. (The penguins are cute. You wouldn't know they were boys without the narrative saying so.) This book obviously requires that we place something on it that shouts "Challenge me!" or "This library thinks you can't handle controversial issues with your children, so we're placing this sticker here to tell you this book is different!"
Yeah. The difficulty in crafting replies to this, whichever person is tasked with it, is to give a serious, earnest reply to what was a serious, earnest inquiry. Snarking them, while appearing eminently appropriate and reasonable, is not the correct thing to do. Instead, a well-measured, properly thought out and logical reason for why the library is denying such a request is in order. So now I've seen both ends of the spectrum of users, I think. Or at least examples of how both ends can react. Another year of schooling, and then this becomes part of my job. Hopefully I'm ready for it.
no subject
no subject
"It is unclear as to what aspect of the subject matter of And Tango Makes Three, you feel deserves attention. If it is the implied homosexuality and the links to gay adoption to which you object, the library does not believe that books dealing with such a topic should be treated differently from other childrens books relating to marriage, love and adoption. It is neither within the rights of nor is it proper that our institution as a collective should take a preferential stance against homosexuality. As an advocate of free and equal representation, we would need to turn down your request for flagging this book.
If your objection is to the portrayal of animals as homosexual, there is documented scientific evidence that such a phenomenon is widespread amongst the animal kingdom. (cite , if you want). As an educational institution, we find it irresponsible to censure a book solely on its basis in scientific fact.
The library uses "Parental Advisory" stickers on children's books that meet certain well-defined criteria. The advisory is given when the book contains language or images which considered obscene. Neither is present in this case. A book may also receive special attention when its subject matter is considered too graphic or frightening to young audiences, again a criteria which is not met in this case.
The library maintains that with all children's books that the parents take time to review each book borrowed and decide on an individual basis what is and is not acceptable subject matter for the individual child. It is also important to share in the reading of books with your children so as to explain difficult concepts to them. The "Parental Advisory" notice does not and is not intended to replace the important aspect of parental involvement in choosing what a child reads."
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject