the vagina monologue

Does Mr. McCain really think that because his vice presidential pick is a woman that all women who are "disenfranchised" Hillary supporters are going to flock to his ticket and vote for him? Does he REALLY think that women are that stupid? Does he really believe that we will look at her and think, "gee, I really relate to HER, she's a mom and a WOMAN!" and we'll happily make that big check mark on the Republican ticket come November?

Personally, I am insulted on SO many levels by his choice. First, it is SO obvious that she is not a qualified candidate by any measure to be one heartbeat away from the most important elected office in the world. Second, because she isn't qualified, there must be some reason he picked her...hmmmm...what could it be? What is it that the 18 million voters who cracked that "glass ceiling" were voting for? Was it JUST because Hillary was a woman? Or rather, was it because there were 18 million voters out there who believed that the policies of the current administration AND their party are taking our country down a disastrous path. Does his party really, REALLY believe that just because he parades a woman out as his VP choice ("look...we can think women are smart too!") that we (those of us with vaginas) are going to fall in line and think THAT is a brilliant idea?

At least, at the very least, he could have picked a woman with a better resume, someone who actually hasn't only been in state-level elected office for under two years, and just a month ago was asking (on a broadcast interview, no less) that someone should please explain to her exactly what it IS the vice president does on a daily basis? Are you frickin' KIDDING me? Are there really, truly NO other qualified women in the Republican party? Is it her adorable little glasses and puffy hairdo? Is it the fact that she is the mother of five? Well, so is Nancy Pelosi...get over yourself about that. If breeding children is an qualification for being the president of the US (remember, she could be just a breath away) then I would rather vote for "Kate" of Jon and Kate Make Eight.

And yet, the GOP seems to think that I WON'T be insulted by this choice?

Yes, yes, there are women out there who are as solidly in line with the GOP as I am with the Democratic Party, and they are probably giggling amongst themselves about how John sure did pull a fast one on those Democrats...NOW look who has a woman on the ticket!! But sadly, they miss the point. They TOTALLY miss the point. The fact is that all women...all of us who are mothers, or grandmothers, or sisters, or wives, or daughters...should be thinking just how critical this election is to our very existence...and the future of our own children. The next president MUST tackle the issue of global warming. We are on the cusp of it being too late as it is...we cannot waste another four years on this issue. The next president MUST restore our standing in the world community, and not get us involved in any more hostilities. Our next president MUST make affordable healthcare for ALL citizens a priority. I promise...it will be absolutely the thing that finally caps off the middle class of this country if we don't change how it runs now.

The GOP talking heads are all raving about how she's "pro-life." Great. I won't argue her right to think that women shouldn't have abortions. But here's an idea, Sarah. It's all fine and well to protect the rights of the unborn, but what about the born....what about the babies of parents who can't afford to take them to the doc to get checked for bronchitis or pneumonia? What about the toddlers who are diagnosed with Autism who can't get the help they need because their school districts or communities offer no help for this disorder, and their parents can't afford help. What about the fact that our own children face a world of food shortages, and new diseases that will be brought on by climate change? What about all those babies (born and unborn) in Iraq who have been killed or injured for NO reason other than greed for oil and revenge for Daddy's failures by Shrub?

I'm a Democrat, I'm a woman, and I AM Pro Life--PROtective of the lives suffering in our midst now. I believe that the abortion issue (which I honestly have very personal mixed feelings about) should NOT be the deciding factor on every other important issue before our country and world right now. I believe that if you are "pro-life" you ought to be aggressively seeking ways to feed, house, educate and care for the millions of children in our own country who are living in poverty right now.

Don't pander to me, Mr. McCain. Don't think that your "trophy" VP pick will appeal to average women any more than your beer-heiress, multiple-house owning wife does. Most women are NOT life-long members of the NRA, most women haven't been (or wanted to be) beauty queens. Most women ARE smart enough to see though your veiled attempt at placating the Hillary supporters. And most women think it's poor indication of your own judgment.

les Miserables

One of the fun (ironic use of word here) things about people chatting on their cell phones in public places, is that those of us who aren't part of the conversation get to listen to just one side of the story, and make assumptions about what is going on.

I was in a waiting room this morning, and while attempting to read a book, was so distracted by a one-sided conversation I couldn't help but overhearing, that I don't remember a word I read. A woman in her mid-60s, and with an obnoxiously loud voice with a strong South-in-the-mouth drawl, was informing the poor person on the other end of her phone conversation about all the horrible things going on in her family. One family member had died of a heroin overdose two years ago; another had loaned money to someone claiming to need it for tuition, but of course (I'm quoting here) "you know where it went...to WEED." The woman complained about another relative who was living with her boyfriend, and how her own sister wouldn't loan her any money, even though she "had $1600 to have a tree cut down at her house in Florida." This woman was apparently having trouble paying her bills, to which I wanted to point out that rather than borrow money from her Florida sister, maybe cutting back on cell phone usage might be a step in the right direction.

Oh, this woman was chatty, and obnoxious, and literally had a cloud of disappointment and misery floating around her. You could just feel the negativity vibrating from her...even across the room.

Either she was filling in her phone friend with the latest details from her favorite soap opera (which is what this all sounded like), or she truly can't find any single thing in her life to report to her caller that was positive.

Thankfully I didn't have to listen long, but her conversation obviously stuck with me. It makes me wonder what the person on the other end of the call was thinking. I hope whoever it was just tolerated her unpleasant phone call and got off the line as soon as gracefully possible.

Whatever happened to the good old days of the relative privacy afforded by phone booths?

Yes, but is it art?

This was the question that a Drury art professor posed to me and my classmates during our project "show and tell" time each week. In this particular class we were presented with an art "problem" and told what materials we could, and couldn't use to create a work of art to "solve' the problem. It was a great class, and taught me a lot about how to look at everyday objects differently, and with the idea that anything can be made into art, as long as there is intent and follow-through from the artist. It was a concept I already understood, but this particular class, and the repeated question of "It is nice, but is it art?" at the end of each critique made me see that some art really IS art, and a lot of it is bullshit.

So The Reenactor and I took T1 and T2 to St. Louis today to enjoy the cool dinosaur exhibit at the STL zoo (very, very cool...especially if you are geeky enough to like animatronic dinosaurs) and after a few hours looking at animals we went to the STL art museum, just up the hill from the zoo. We had come armed with sketchbooks, pencils and crayons, and The Reenactor left the three of us there to enjoy art (and do some sketching) while he went to the nearby MO History Museum for an exhibit on the lives of Lee and Grant. We lead an exciting life, no?

So we started in the downstairs galleries, where I've taken the kids several times, and they know all the rules about not touching the walls (or the art) and being quiet and calm so as to not alarm the guards, and they enjoyed sketching their versions of some of the paintings...mostly from the classical period...in their drawing books. We finished up down there and still had some time to look around, so we went where I've never taken them before...the third floor modern art wing. Well, this was a whole new world to T1 and T2...they were amazed at the difference in what was on the walls, and the floor, in that wing. We browsed through a gallery of pre-WWI German modern paintings---who knew the Germans were so colorful and fun before the Great War? Then we went into a gallery that housed several large paintings that mostly consisted of industrial themed drippings of paint and other materials on very large canvases. While T1 and T2 were NOT impressed, I still tried to explain that this was in fact art, and in some circles was very respected and admired. On one wall of this gallery were four panels, each approx. 6 x 12 feet vertical rectangles...all four matching sheets of glass with charcoal gray paint covering the back side. They had an odd mirror-like quality to them, and sure enough, when I read the description of them, the artist intended that they be "mirror-like" yet with a diminished quality so that the reflection isn't true. Well, okay....good for you. Your big gray shiny squares are in a major gallery. Woohoo!

THEN we came to the room with two object d'art displayed...one was a "quilt" made of hundreds or thousands of bits of metal from cans or boxes held together with small metal brads. It was interesting in a funky sort of way, although T1 was very dismissive of it...said it was a "quilt made of junk." AND in the middle of this room was a ring of rocks. Yes, a ring I'm guessing 15 feet in diameter, and approximately mounded up to 2 feet tall, with a ring width of 3 feet or so, of limestone rocks...a smaller version riff-raff like you fill a ditch with. It was just a ring of rocks. T1 and T2 were appalled. WHY is there a pile of rocks in here, they demanded. After shushing them, I explained that someone had thought to make an artistic statement with those rocks, and therefore, there they were.

Of course T2, in spite of being warned repeatedly to stay clear of them, managed to snag his foot on one of the rocks in the ring, dislodging it and moving it about 2 inches, and just as I was readying to ease it back into place with my foot, the VERY snarky guard in that room yelled at me to LEAVE IT ALONE. I imagine I would get snarky too if I had to guard a circle of rocks all day, but this guy got hysterical with several visitors over their camera usage, and yelled at T1 because she "walked too fast" through the gallery. Damn. You're ruining this whole modern gallery thing for us, dude.

Which brings us back to the original question...is it art? Within feet of this ring of rocks are paintings and sculptures by the likes of Warhol, Rothko, Matisse, and those cool German artists I had never heard of but really liked their stuff. I overheard a woman in the gallery (after having been shrieked at by the guard to not even dare to use her flash to photograph the Rothko painting) observe of the rocks, "well I guess someone thinks it is art, but it looks like something I could have done at home." THIS is my point. I always feel like I have been duped when I see something like this in a gallery. I call bullshit. What, exactly, is the point of the circle of rocks? Is it supposed to make us feel the hollowness of our existence? Is it meant to represent the circle of life---as seen through the eyes of a person who has been doing a lot of landscaping with limestone recently? Hmm? I have seen beautiful art made simple natural elements, and I understand that sometimes a simple visual element can make a powerful statement, but I just never got past the fact that this was just rocks.

The Reenactor asked me when I was relating this story to him what the rocks were meant to represent. I said I thought it represented that some bullshit artist had convinced a wealthy art patron that his circular pile of riff-raff was worthy of purchasing and donating to a major museum.

I realize that many of you who read this blog are artists, or involved in cultural activities to the extent that you might find yourself defending the circle of rocks artist for his right to represent his art in this manner. All I know is I saw no technique, no use of creative skill, no real intrinsic beauty in it. It didn't move me emotionally...either positively or negatively..it just was there. And no, my critique is it ISN'T art.

I can see clearly now

To those of you not of the virtual family campfire here's the scoop. Our beach week was cut short because I got a call from my eye doc asking if I would like to move up the Lasik surgery I had scheduled for mid-August to Friday of last week, and in the process, get to be "cut" by a better machine, AND save a thousand bucks. Hmmm...let me think about that and get back to you.

Had it done yesterday....$1000 is too good a savings to ignore. Things still a bit hazy, and a bit gritty feeling. I can see clearly out of my left eye, but the right is still a bit blurry...but hopefully that will clear up in a few days. But, for the first time since I was in high school I drove a car today without prescription glasses on my face.

Now THAT is something to be thankful for.