When I first started reading Infinite Jest, I was really reading into it and trying to interpret or guess the meaning of certain events. For example, when Hal goes on and on about what a voracious reader he is and that he doesn’t just read, but he also thinks and feels, and it appears as though he’s having a seizure… Well, I immediately started wondering whether he was physically incapable of articulating all these thoughts. Instead, it seemed like his attempt to get this all out came out as a seizure. Hal then says he can’t make himself clear and says, “Call it something I ate.” We’re then told about an incident in which Hal was a child and unable to articulate his thoughts after eating a chunk of mold. I can see the symbolism, but I also wondered whether the eating of the mold caused some sort of lasting effect on Hal and ultimately caused his seizures. That’s when I started thinking, “Okay, I’m reading way too much into this. Why don’t I just wait and see what’s actually happening? Why don’t I trust the author like everyone has been saying?”

I stopped analyzing every little thing and went on with it, paying close attention but not looking for some deeper meaning to it all. Not just yet, anyway. More on the other characters tomorrow.

I’m not an expert, but the sciences, both physical and biological, have been an obsession of mine since childhood. I can confidently say that I have a better working understanding of physics, biology and astronomy (maybe some chemistry) than most non-science majors. (Of course, explaining some of these issues to the guy on Omegle, or anyone else trying to understand basic scientific principles, becomes difficult when they can’t grasp the math involved.)

He asked, “Can you give a single example in which mutation has shown an increase in genetic information?” I wasn’t born yesterday, asshole. The question is flawed because it presupposes the fact that it can’t be answered. (Much like the challenge “Prove to me there is no god.”) There are also elements of the question that need to be further defined, such as the notion of an “increase in information.” Luckily, an expert has already answered this question in depth for me.

I had to end the conversation. It was just another creationist masking his intentions by appearing to make a sincere effort in discovering truths when he was alluding to the fact that a god must have been responsible for all things living (and non-living).

Then it struck me.

Through the years, while examining every single philosophical and scientific argument for or against atheism, it dawned on me that I was clinging to facts that would never be accepted by a creationist or theist. It didn’t matter how much scientific fact I presented or studied. It also doesn’t matter that some of the questioned posed defied logic (from both camps for their own purposes). A creationist or theist is never willing to concede the possibility that they might be wrong. Never.

So, here is my concession: I give you theists everything. Evolution is fake – both micro and macro. The Big Bang didn’t really happen. Things didn’t just appear from nowhere; they must have been created. Christ really did exist and he really did perform miracles. Everything I have fought tooth and nail for, it’s yours.

Now, tell me, how does that prove there is a god?

Join us, won’t you?

The problem with bloggers, however, is that quality is sometimes lacking. Since anyone can own and operate a blog, content can become disorganized and spelling and grammar aren’t always perfect. Without editors and copy editors, you might be receiving your news from a 14-year-old giving his or her account of an event. Of course, larger and more reputable blogs have editors and capable writers, but they still sometimes suffer under the pressure of generating instantaneous news.

Blogs are fueled by the desire to consume news and information quickly and rapidly. This method of delivering content to the masses is flawed in that there is not enough time to gather data and check facts. Weight is given to speed and which blog can break news first. More hits means more revenue. Since many bloggers don’t carry the burden (or blessing) of journalistic integrity and ethics, they often fail to correct errors and mistakes.

The trouble with journalism is that by the time a story is written and passes through a copy editor, it can be considered “old” news by today’s standards. Of course, these standards are set by the impatient reader. This instant gratification nation wants its news and wants it now! Just look at how many times the media screwed up in delivering news about Natasha Richardson’s untimely death. First, they said she had a fatal head injury. Then word came that she was going to be okay. Finally, she wasn’t going to make it and it was only a matter of time before she passed. All these errors over the course of one day!

My bias is toward journalists and real journalism. I would rather wait an extra day for my news so that it finds its way through the hands of capable writers and seasoned editors. When I consume and digest the news, the quality will be more appreciated and it will likely be more factual than a blog. Some blogs produce great content and information, so they do serve a purpose. Typically, for me, blogs are a cure for boredom – that says a lot about how I read, or skim, through blogs.

Bloggers can convince me all they want that they’re real journalists, too. They deliver news just like journalists. Facts are often checked and many write without bias and a have a sense of neutrality. Sometimes, they correct errors and announce when they have made mistakes. They value their sources and avoid falsifying information in order to gain attention or more readers. Yes, bloggers can be journalists, too – sometimes.

And in other news:

Hipsters are considered apathetic, pretentious, and self-entitled by other, often marginalized sectors of society they live amongst, including previous generations of bohemian and/or “counter-culture” artists and thinkers as well as poor neighborhoods of color.

From Wikipedia’s entry on hipsters. Self-righteous bastards.

“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of the town. They shall say to the elders, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death…” (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

I describe this blog as “musings on multiple matters,” but somehow I’ve neglected to writing about my two biggest passions in life: Sports and music. So, I’ve decided to go ahead and include that here so that I can share some of the things I’ve learned and experienced with whoever reads this blog. I’ve played piano all my life, guitar and drums since I was 13, and I occasionally fiddle with the bass. For sports, I played basketball and volleyball in high school (had aspirations to play college and beach volleyball) and after high school I played competitive tennis. To start, I’m going to give a few tips on improving your piano ability so that you can enjoy playing a little more. So, hit the “more” link and let’s get started!

1. Relax, keep your fingers curved and keep your wrists above the keyboard

One thing that bothers me when watching beginning pianists is seeing their wrists go limp and sinking below the level of the keyboard. When you do this, you lose the ability to keep your fingers curved and relaxed over the keys. Now, this isn’t a hard and solid rule as we know greats like Cziffra played with his hands almost flat on the piano, but until you’re playing like him it’s best to stick to this advice. When you hold your hands out in front of you like you’re going to play, what happens to your fingers when you completely relax? That’s right, they hang with a natural curve. Your fingers don’t stick out and defy gravity, so don’t do this when you’re playing or it will make your forearms more tense. Keep your wrists above keyboard level to maintain this natural curve so that you are more relaxed, have better dynamic/volume/attack control, and keystrokes are more natural and flow smoothly.

2. Posture up, feet flat on the ground

This isn’t really a tip I should be telling you, but it makes me feel lazy just watching a hunched pianist with legs crossed underneath the bench. One you start hunching over, you’ll slowly start becoming lazy at the keyboard. Stay alert and attentive so that you play and practice with purpose. When your feet are not on the pedals, keep them flat on the ground. Don’t cross your legs or play around with your feet because it won’t help with your posture. Stay relaxed and keep good posture and you’ll notice a difference in the way you play over time.

3. Stay focused when you practice

If you’re not just toying with the piano and you actually sit down to practice, you should practice! Once you start becoming bored with a piece, get up and walk around or have some coffee or water. Remaining at the piano when you get bored will cause you to become distracted and next thing you know, you’ve been sitting at the piano for an hour goofing off without accomplishing much. There’s nothing wrong with getting in some time to play your favorite pieces or getting playful with some tunes, but if that’s not why you’re sitting at the piano it’s time to get back in focus. Half an hour of solid, productive practice time is better than two hours of practicing and just goofing in between your bouts of concentration.

4. Play slowly when learning new music and do not rush through the music or notes

When beginners start moving into the intermediate phase of piano, they grow impatient when learning new material. At this point, sight reading has become easier and correct fingering starts to come naturally. It’s easy to get ahead of onesself so take it easy and continue slowly. If you play through the same pages over and over again but you’re making a mistake or two here and there, those mistakes will stay with you and it will be hard to get it right. How slowly should you play? You should play as slow as it takes so you don’t make mistakes. We all want to learn the piece and move on already, but why not get it right? Playing piano involves a lot of muscle memory, and believe me when I say that the mistakes you make when learning new music will become a part of you if you don’t get it right. Play slowly and hit every note perfectly. If you make a mistake, keep going and go back to it later at a slower tempo. You’ll eventually get it and speed and expression will come later.

5. Use a metronome during practice!

With any instrument, a metronome should be used often during practice – especially on the piano. In the video I posted (sorry for the bad quality, it was on a camera phone years ago), I am playing Solfeggietto by CPE Bach. It’s not a difficult piece at all. It’s simply going from scale to scale and the fingering is very easy. However, I find that a lot of people completely ruin the timing for such a simple piece. The entire piece is played in 16th notes but a lot of beginners want to play it very fast and start sacrificing the proper tempo. Playing with a metronome alleviates these problems and also gives you a better sense of the music. You’ll also know that you’re playing too fast if you’re making too many mistakes and you can incrementally lower the speed by one or two beats-per-minute until you can play it perfectly. Once you do that, you can slowly bring the speed back up again until you’re playing it at the speed at which it was intended to be played.

Nothing I’ve written is groundbreaking information. The problem with these “5 easy steps” and “7 ways” and “20 tips” lists on the Internet is that they rarely offer anything of real value. Blogs and articles that start with a number and offers steps, tips and ways to do something is simply linkbait – maybe this is one of them. Remember, if you’re attempting something or working on a new project, there is no magic list of tips that will get it done for you. Always keep a solid foundation, practice correctly, and work hard. When it comes to learning a new instrument, no book, DVD, or list of online tips is going to make you an overnight sensation. Keep at it and stay patient and you will reap the rewards. Trust me.

We’ve come a long way since that ad above might have been acceptable. If it, or anything similar to it, were reproduced today, well, it’s pretty obvious that the backlash would be indescribable. There was a time when women weren’t allowed to speak in public, vote, or to work where men worked. Just this past election, a woman ran for the office of President. Times have changed and women are slowly, but surely, being recognized as equal to men. Or are they? Does sexism still exist when women can hold public office, lead companies as executives, fly into space, and serve as some of the most respected and iconic figures of our time? I was sparked to write this after reading a brief post on feminism from a site, appropriately enough, called Superfem. (Since a particular post moved me to writing this, I might be referencing it a few times and offer my opinions and disagreements.) The answer to the question about sexism is yes. Yes, sexism still exists and it’s much worse than we think.

Are Men and Women Equal?

The first thing to consider is whether men and women are equal. The simple answer is no, they are not. Other than extreme circumstances, if you can’t tell the difference between a man and a woman at first glance, there is a problem. Physically and biologically, men and women are very distinct and different. The roles of a man in reproduction are very different than a woman’s. Men are, on average, physically stronger than women. Women, on average, have better linguistic skills than men. Men might be better at having a sense of physical direction where women are better at remembering landmarks and points in space, on average.

The point is that there are clearly differences in men and women when grouped separately and talents and temperaments are pitted against each other and averaging them out. The problem is that many feminists insist that there are absolutely no differences between males and females. Those extremists are holding the feminist movement back and poisoning the basic and most fundamental ideas behind feminism – that women deserve equal social, intellecual, economic and political rights as men.

Nature vs. Nurture

Denying human nature does not help the feminist movement at all. To say we are born equal, having a complete blank slate, hurts us more than it helps. The notion that we are all born equal is enticing because it doesn’t put anyone at an advantage. Nurturists and feminists who deny human nature are fighting a cause that can’t be won because their foundation or basis is wrong. By now, it should be known to most academics that heritable traits are no longer just limited to physical characteristics. Behavior and intelligence is shaped by the environment, but it is equally molded by genetics. A pre-school teacher, who spends time with society’s least experienced humans, should know that not all the four-year-olds in his or her class are the same. Some kids pick up math better than others, while some can build a popsicle-stick house more beautifully than the other children.

What does this have to do with gender equality? Just as there are differences between all children in physical and intellectual capacities, there are also differences between boys and girls when those same capacities are compared with each other on average. This is clearly why there is such a disparity in so many professions. The fields of technology, science, and engineering are dominated by men. Why? Are women any less capable than men to excel in these fields? Clearly not. The writer of the article who spurred this blog of mine is clearly enjoying a respectable position in technology and media. Off the top of my head, there is also Marissa Mayer, Carol Bartz, Mary Lou Jepsen, Marie Curie, Barbara McClintock and so many others. These women have all shown tremendous excellence in the fields of science, technology and business and have gained recognition for their accomplishments and contributions to society.  If women are just as capable as men, why is there such a disparity?

People like to believe that little girls are raised on Barbie dolls and Easy-Bake Ovens, while boys play with toy soldiers, race cars, and little science kits. (I had to mention the latter since it comprised most of my play-things as a child. My parents refused to buy “normal” toys for me because I always took them apart – piece by piece.) The popular belief is that boys and girls are raised to engage in gender-specific activities, hence the disparity in career choices and professions between men and women as they grow older. Girls are encouraged to go into fields where women typically dominate and the same is done to boys. There are even institutions like Women In Technology that encourage women to enter the field of technology and who help them with resources and information. In the past, it was more difficult for women to enter fields dominated by men simply because there was a lack of resources such as WIT. But even with the rise in women in technology, science and engineering, why the obvious disparity in the men to women ratio?

I believe that some of those choices are innate and what attracts a boy or girl to certain things has more to do with biology than what their parents tell them. I happened to raise a girl who, at the age of 10 months, had more of a fascination with shoes and purses than I thought possible at that age. Nothing would pacify her crying fits except shoes! After giving her all the food imaginable and toys that were within reach, it seemed hopeless. I laid a blanket on the floor and put her on top of it while I searched for another toy to help stop the crying. With my head buried in the closet, the crying stopped completely. There was not even a whimper. As I turned around I saw her fiddling with two pairs of shoes – one was sparkly and red and the other was adorned with plastic flowers. She was completely engrossed with putting them on and taking them off. Without fail, whenever she cried, I would put out a few sets of shoes for her to toy with and it would calm her down.

Of course, the story or anecdote mentioned is only one case and it could simply be that keeping her busy was more effective than holding onto a teddy bear. I still have to wonder as this same girl, over the years, would often greet me at the door with, “Daddy, look at my shoes!” No hello, no “I missed you,” just the excitement of a proud owner of a new pair of shoes. That same obsession is just as intense for her fascination with bags and purses, but I guarantee I did not raise her that way. At first, I wanted a boy, so I bought boy-ish toys and tried to do “boy things” with her. She has little to no interest in sports, doing our little science experiments, or anything remotely close to the wants and interests of the “gross” sex. How can I blame her? She’s a girl!

In an opposite example, there was a case of a little boy who wanted to do the opposite of what his parents gave him. He only wanted to play with dolls and girls toys and he even wanted to wear dresses. Where could a child of just a few years possibly learn such behavior? No matter what his parents tried to do, and regardless of their efforts to make him more like the other boys, he simply resisted and wanted to be just one of the girls. (The case can be found in The Blank Slate, by Steven Pinker. It’s a great book on human nature and acknowledging the fact that we are not born completely blank and devoid of certain capacities and capabilities.)

While these are two small cases, it should reveal something about human nature and the role that it plays in the disparities in certain fields and professions. There is no denying that sexism still exists, or that areas of interest dominated by men can be intimidating for women, but I highly doubt that it is the sole cause of the stark difference in the number of men and women in science and technology.

Battle of the Sexes

In the Superfem post, the author writes, “It’s my hope that the gender war will be won this way.” I have to disagree with this statement not because of what it intends to convey (equality for women), but that feminism is framed as a gender war. However, it has been almost like a war for women in their struggle for equality. In many cases, women have suffered more than just harsh words or criticism from men, but calling it a war hurts a feminist’s cause more than I think it helps. The reason why the battle of the sexes is a failure is because these battles and competition for recognition will only take someone so far. Treated individually, the women who are smarter and more capable than men will always stand out, be successful and will serve as martyrs for the feminist movement. But what about the women who haven’t had the opportunity to shine because of suppression and repression? How does a gender war or battle of sexes help them? It doesn’t.

Once feminism becomes a battle or war against men, the movement becomes more destructive than it is constructive. Many would be surprised at the number of men who are willing to help the cause, rather than fight it. One thing that becomes forgotten in the feminist movement is that there are many men who are feminists, too. I happen to consider myself a feminist because I think that men and women should have equal rights. Like myself, many men would be put to better use in becoming active in the advancement of women in society rather than furthering their suppression by turning this into a gender battle.

Feminism Is Not Limited to America

Without trivializing women and the feminist movement in Western Civiliation, feminism is about females across the world, not just in our country. This is why I believe that sexism is far from over and that feminism and feminists have their work cut out. Feminists have come such a long way in receiving equal rights, but what about the women with no rights? How do women in other countries feel when they need to wear a veil in public? How are young girls affected when they’re told as children that their place in society is to the bidding of their husbands? Sometimes, I feel like the feminist movement is so limited to the West that it marginalizes women everywhere else, making the feminist movement more of a national one. Feminism should transcend cultures and fight to gain respect in every society. Feminist extremists, whose battle seems to be against men rather than for equal rights, are hypocrites in the sense that they couldn’t care less for the advancement of women everywhere or the liberation of those who are still wrongfully suppressed by men. As mentioned earlier, we’ve come a long way when women can start running for President, but what about those risk being beaten or killed for simply speaking in public? They need feminists more than ever.

I know I’m going to receive a lot of criticism for what I believe in and the things I write. Feminism is a delicate subject and there is so much more to be said. Of course, not everything can be covered in just a single blog post. It was difficult enough doing this without an outline or being able to organize my thoughts. Perhaps writing this in one sitting was not the best idea, but I believe I made a few solid points. In some places, feminists have made strides toward success in that they are being treated more fairly and as equals to men, rather than their subordinates. But in other places, the idea of feminism is blasphemy and women have a long way to go. It’s time to start helping those women instead of being fixated on a particular demographic. Feminism is about all women, everywhere.

]]> http://themotley.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/feminism/feed/ 5 marcflores http://themotley.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/aig-bonuses-lets-pay-them-or-not/ http://themotley.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/aig-bonuses-lets-pay-them-or-not/#comments Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:51:04 +0000 marcflores http://themotley.wordpress.com/?p=173 ]]>

Okay, so here’s the plan. You know that gazillion dollars (actual dollar amount adjusted for ridiculousnessocity) going to AIG for bonuses? The New York Times says we should totally pay them! Why? Well, it’s in the contracts! It wouldn’t bode well for other agencies and institutions if we started breaking these contracts for frivolous reasons (you know, like a shitty economy and a depressing financial climate caused by said agencies and institutions). So, if I hired someone to do some house sitting for me and I promised them $100 for it, I should have to pay it – no matter what. If my house is burned down by the house sitter by accident, I’ll pay anyway. A promise is a promise, right?

Thank heaven for The New York Times. For a second there, I was beginning to think that bonuses were typically performance based or a reward for performance – not a contractual obligation. So, if you fuck up somewhere along the road, maybe a bonus should be reconsidered. I guess you learn something new every day.

NYT also says we should pay because AIG, the ones responsible for a good chunk of the current financial hiccup, might be able to fix the problem. That’s right – the ones who caused a great deal of headaches are the same professionals that are best suited to get us out of this mess. We have every incentive to pay them these bonuses! Do you remember the house sitter who burned my house down? I should give him or her way more money to fix it and hope he or she doesn’t burn it down again in the future.

Get this garbage from Ed Liddy, AIG’s installed chief exec:

“We cannot attract and retain the best and brightest talent to lead and staff the company if employees believe that their compensation is subject to continued and arbitrary adjustment by the U.S. Treasury.”

Sweetness. Now do you see what I mean? Feeding these giants with taxpayer money is an absolute necessity and the evil government is arbitrarily adjusting their compensation. We don’t need to know what he means by arbitrary because to ask would be, well, arbitrary. Right? It’s only $165 million. Just let them have it already.

Remember, the executives who will be receiving $3 million each also have families to feed and children to send to college. Liberals need to stop their selfishness.

]]> http://themotley.wordpress.com/2009/03/17/aig-bonuses-lets-pay-them-or-not/feed/ 0 marcflores http://themotley.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/barack-obama-loves-animals/ http://themotley.wordpress.com/2009/03/10/barack-obama-loves-animals/#comments Wed, 11 Mar 2009 06:59:05 +0000 marcflores http://themotley.wordpress.com/?p=170 ]]>

I just had to post this picture because it made me laugh so hard. It’s great.