Who Can Handle the Contradictions?

Don't miss Maira Kalman's latest editorial.

The Science of Liberalism

Definitely check out Kristof's latest column. He explains that our tendency toward liberalism vs conservatism may actually be hard-wired, and that resulting everyday actions may align more consistently with one camp or the other. Or maybe that's not exactly what he's saying but I read it yesterday and I can't remember that far back.

Everything is Corrupt

AT&T, one of the biggest corporate sponsors of “American Idol,” might have influenced the outcome of this year’s competition by providing phones for free text-messaging services and lessons in casting blocks of votes at parties organized by fans of Kris Allen, the Arkansas singer who was the winner of the show last week... There appear to have been no similar efforts to provide free texting services to supporters of Adam Lambert, who finished as the runner-up to Mr. Allen.

The article goes on to say that the AT&T employees were invited by the fans to these gatherings. Bull. Shit. When you're having a viewing party, say, of the Super Bowl, do you call up the corporate offices of one of the advertisers and invite 'em on over for a product demo? Okay, yes if it's a beer brand, but a phone carrier? Puke. Unless they're giving me a free iPhone and including unlimited texting like TMobile, they are welcome nowhere near my living room.

PS when I grow up I want to be Simon Cowell.

Weiner Out! Scared of Possible Run by A Certain Mayoress???

This just in! Congressman Anthony Weiner, long the media darling to take out King Bloomberg, will NOT be running for mayor this year! What, he doesn't have ten billion dollars to spend on campaign? Lazy.

See his op-ed in the Times.

Well, you know what this means: time to officially endorse the one man who's shown he's up for the challenge, and who's spoken against the King's illegal activities since last fall:

The Mayoress Officially Endorses Bill Thompson for NYC Mayor 2009.

Obvs the headline in the Post tomorrow.

Sotomayor Trivia!

Courtesy moveon.org.

Ten Things To Know About Judge Sonia Sotomayor

1. Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the bench than any Supreme Court justice in 100 years. Over her three-decade career, she has served in a wide variety of legal roles, including as a prosecutor, litigator, and judge.

2. Judge Sotomayor is a trailblazer. She was the first Latina to serve on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and was the youngest member of the court when appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of New York. If confirmed, she will be the first Hispanic to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.

3. While on the bench, Judge Sotomayor has consistently protected the rights of working Americans, ruling in favor of health benefits and fair wages for workers in several cases.

4. Judge Sotomayor has shown strong support for First Amendment rights, including in cases of religious expression and the rights to assembly and free speech.

5. Judge Sotomayor has a strong record on civil rights cases, ruling for plaintiffs who had been discriminated against based on disability, sex and race.

6. Judge Sotomayor embodies the American dream. Born to Puerto Rican parents, she grew up in a South Bronx housing project and was raised from age nine by a single mother, excelling in school and working her way to graduate summa cum laude from Princeton University and to become an editor of the Law Journal at Yale Law School.

7. In 1995, Judge Sotomayor "saved baseball" when she stopped the owners from illegally changing their bargaining agreement with the players, thereby ending the longest professional sports walk-out in history.

8. Judge Sotomayor ruled in favor of the environment and against business interests in 2007 in a case of protecting aquatic life in the vicinity of power plants, a decision that was overturned by the Roberts Supreme Court.

9. In 1992, Judge Sotomayor was confirmed by the Senate without opposition after being appointed to the bench by George H.W. Bush.

10. Judge Sotomayor is a widely respected legal figure, having been described as "...an outstanding colleague with a keen legal mind," "highly qualified for any position in which wisdom, intelligence, collegiality and good character would be assets," and "a role model of aspiration, discipline, commitment, intellectual prowess and integrity."

Prom Niiiiight!

Interesting editorial in the Times on prom as social institution. I really liked what this principal had to say about his school's decision to cancel prom for the past four years because of the money it made kids spend - whether they had it or not:

The excesses surrounding the prom were contrary to the lessons we were teaching our students. That doesn’t mean that wealth is inherently evil. But there are two important questions associated with money whose answers are critical: How did you get it? And what are you doing with it? The prom experience revealed a wasteful flaunting of wealth that undermined the dignity of the young people attracted to its siren calls. Four years later, our school community is better off without the prom.

Lots of people seem to have had nightmare prom experiences -- of course they did, with so much pressure on one stupid night. The same stuff that drives women to bridezilladom. I had an awesome prom... actually, three. Two with my adorable high school sweetheart Greg, one with "Marq with a Q", and most importantly, all with dresses I LOVED. I'd put up some pics but I don't have a scanner. You'll just have to imagine the fabulousness... wait, I still have both dresses. 90's Prom Party, anyone?

This is why God invented Jameson

“The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness,” the subject of a provocative paper from the economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers... is fascinating not only because of what it shows, but because the authors deliberately avoid floating an easy explanation for their data.

Full article.

Oh, I thought I was unhappy because men in New York have stopped buying women drinks, I make entry-level salary, apartments in my neighborhood start at $700K, and bikini season is upon us. Sounds like an easy enough explanation to me.

*post title inspired by: you know who you are.

The Commercialization of Childhood

Interesting video - thanks to Diana for this one.

Coincidence? Or MegaFan Inevitability?

Try this one on for size: not only did I happen to run into Sam Waterston, Law & Order DA, trying to hail a cab on 7th Avenue yesterday (he totally turned and looked at me with a "whatareyagonnado" shrug - amazing), but when I got home, what was waiting on my desk but JURY SUMMONS for June 9!!! OMG so awesome.

They will probably ask me to be a judge or something.

FLOTUS in NYC Today!!!

Hey Michelle! I'm sure you forgot to call/text me bc you're so super busy but great news -- I'm free today! Wanna do happy hour or do you still need a plus one to the gala? Either way, just let me know!!! BTW love your dress!

Shock and Awe!

Thanks to Babs for this item!

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has admitted to using a paragraph virtually word-for-word from a prominent liberal blogger without attribution.

Full article

Note to Dowd: YOU ARE WELCOME TO PLAGIARIZE THIS BLOG ANY TIME.

Savage on the Dumb Bitch

From this week's Savage Love (what? you STILL don't read it religiously? what's it going to take, people??):

I've enjoyed your column for years and always found you to be well reasoned. That's why your agreement with Perez Hilton on Miss California was so shocking. I'm a straight guy totally for gay rights in all respects. Still, it's beneath you to call someone who disagrees with your position a "dumb bitch." You're better than that, Dan! Don't you see that you and Mr. Hilton are promulgating hatred against a person for that individual's beliefs, something you both claim to abhor?

Basically On Your Side

I don't think Miss California is a dumb bitch for her beliefs, BOYS, but for her actions. ("Love the sinner/dumb bitch, hate the sin/dumb bitchery.") For the record: There are lots of reasonable folks out there who oppose same-sex marriage, and I can interact with them in a civil fashion. Heck, I voted for an opponent of marriage equality back in November.

What sets Miss CA apart from reasonable opponents of marriage equality, BOYS, is her opportunism coupled with her stupidity.

I thought Perez Hilton went too far when he called Miss CA a "dumb bitch" after the pageant—and said so on my blog. But I started to come around to Hilton's POV after Miss CA, despite having said at the pageant that she thought it was "great that Americans are able to choose" gay marriage or "opposite marriage," joined a political campaign to deny marriage rights to gays and lesbians. Miss CA is leveraging her spat with Hilton for her own personal financial gain. Ghostwritten books, speaking gigs at evangelical churches, a potential guest-host gig on The View—beats work, huh? And so what if it oppresses gays and lesbians?

And that's when I thought, "Hmm, I guess she is a bitch."

And then came her interview on Fox News: "You know what, Greta? I don't have the answers to everything," Miss CA told Greta Van Susteren when asked about civil unions. And when Van Susteren followed up by asking Miss CA "what [she] thinks" about civil unions and gay people adopting children, Miss CA responded, "I'm not a politician, so I can't give you an answer to that." So seeing as she's not a politician, Miss CA can't be expected to know what she herself thinks about adoptions and civil unions.

And that's when I thought, gawd, she's dumb, too—and that's when I had to concede that Hilton was right.

Environment Report

So! Today I decided to take my inaugural ride on Jacqueline Mireille, aka my new awesome bike, all the way to work, suckaz. And when I hit the bridge I saw posters everywhere: Ride Your Bike To Work Day, May 15! Wha! I am so on trend without even meaning it.

Stimulus, Indeed

From Urban Daddy:

Free Viagra Courtesy of Pfizer
No, this isn't spam and don't say big pharma never did anything for you. Any recent pink-slip recipients taking Viagra can get a free year's supply, courtesy of the bedroom-friendly pill pushers at Pfizer. Finally, a stimulus we can get behind. 866-706-2400 to apply.

This is the first time I've ever wanted to date a man without a job.

Extreme Political Fashion Faux Pas Exposed!

I could not believe my eyes when I saw the clips from this year's White House Press Correspondents' Dinner. Is this woman kidding me?!


The hair was bad enough (and I was watching it from the South), but wait until you see the dress:


Full length see through skintight lace?! Over 40?? Achhhh puke get away from His Royal Pristineness you Monica wannabe!

Who is this lady and what was she thinking? She is dressed for a night in Vegas, not a night being photographed and televised sitting next to the POTUS. Even Donatella Versace looked more conservative.

(BTW - Welcome to the blogosphere DV! Link to Meet the Pressler!! Kthxbye!)

Official Offer: If you ever have audience with the president, I will review your ensemble - clothing, accessories, even hair - at absolutely no charge. I am not kidding. This offer goes to all politicians, foreign heads of state, presidential honorees, hell, even journalists.

***Counting to ten.***

Now let's all recalibrate with a photo of the Divine Mrs. O.


Ah, that's better. Sexy yet classy. B looks like he loves her so much, it's just all too adorable!

Lots more WHCD fashion photos here. Holy A-list.

Post-Obama Kegger at ASU!!!

Luckily stumbled upon Obama's ASU commencement speech post-L&O on CNN.

Obvs an awesome speech, I'd say the theme was personal responsibility and a charge to not judge your life's success by selfish pursuits, but by your body of work, which can affect others in many positive ways. Anderson Cooper made a good point that he took the [stupid] controversy about the fact that ASU didn't give him an honorary degree and turned it on its head by pointing out that his own work is far from done; that the title of POTUS isn't an excuse to not leave a legacy.

Thanks to Irene for finding the link to the full transcript.

In Which The New York Times Issues An Apology to The Mayoress. Not Joking.

This article on the Wesleyan shooting is fascinating for content, but before I was done reading the first page I was writing my first letter to the NYT news desk.

Journalism 101: objective reporting, right? And yes, we all know that humans are inherently subjective, etc etc, but in reporting, the effort should be made to present the facts simply and coherently.

Exercise! Can you find the proper "journalistic" way to report the following event?
A. The Red Sox announced today that their franchise would close in 2011.
B. The stupid Red Sox went bankrupt because they suck.
C. All Boston was abuzz with the stunning news that their beloved team sucked.

Not hard, is it?

So my brow kept furrowing as I tried to glide past phrases like "According to chilling new details" (unnecessary adjective), "his hair was unkempt" (by what standards?), "The lives of Ms. Justin-Jinich and Mr. Morgan had intersected briefly — and ominously — two years earlier" (take out the "ominous" part - that's for the reader to judge), and "There was no way to foresee the sudden, nightmarish sequel" (what is this, a review for High School Musical 2?).

Something had to be done.

At 01:29 PM 5/8/2009, you wrote:
Hi,
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/nyregion/09wesleyan.html?_r=1&hp
This article is the most subjective Ive ever read in the Times, including editorial. Nearly every paragraph includes narration fit for a novel, not a piece of objective reporting. More than anything, its just baffling that it was published by the NYT, not at all in line with the tone or type of articles normally in the paper/online. Strange and disappointing.
CP

From: G--- B---- [ mailto:senioreditor@nytimes.com]
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: Journalism?
Dear [Stupid Reader Who Is Wasting My Time Surfing Facebook]:
I am sorry you found our article so unfit and out of line with The Times's normal coverage.
As you now, what to cover and how to cover it is subjective. There is no formula or rules for what is right or wrong. However, this coverage of a human tragedy is not at all unusual for The Times. I have worked here only since 1995. But we have covered many tragic events like this through the years.
Thank you for reading The Times. I am sorry we have so disappointed you this time.
Best regards,
GB
Senior Editor

At 03:05 PM 5/8/2009, you wrote:
Hi [Don't F-ing Condescend to Me Just Because My Blog Steals All Its Content From You],
It was really kind (and unnecessary!) of you to write me back. Thanks so much. I was mainly trying to point out that it's a very different tone than the articles I've ever seen in a reporting section of the Times, at least in the initial 10 paragraphs. As a writer myself, I agree that even the way facts are organized can seem subjective in a typical story, but in a story where the suspect isn't even formally convicted yet it seemed more SVU than NYT to include so many adjectives, qualifiers, and speculative descriptions.
Thanks much and have a great weekend.
Ciara


From: Condescending but Now Repentant Editor Guy [mailto:senioreditor@nytimes.com]
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2009 3:17 PM
Very interesting. I will go back and look at it again. You are correct that it was a different approach. But that is not a license for us to sidestep the basic issues of fairness and not convicting someone prematurely.
best,
G


Mwah ha ha I am drunk with the power! What's next, CNN? Al Jazeera? Watch out Nancy Grace!

Okay that's it I'm going on vacation. Obvs much needed.

Sunscreen Sucks

The annual NY Times grad advice column is pretty good this year:

Avoid phony controversies. Especially ones over religion. Just now, there’s a perfect example of this in the kerfuffle of President Obama’s upcoming graduation speech at Notre Dame.

It is said that a handful of devout Catholics cannot bear to let the president of the republic speak at one of America’s great universities because Obama is pro-choice on abortion. What would Jesus do? Take a seat on the lawn and hear the man out.

Because What's More Political Than Sex?

Fascinating article on a new book about the fascinating Helen Gurley Brown, who I, until now, did not realize was fascinating because I'd deeply buried a disparaging comment from my mom (from at least 15 years ago) in my subconscious. While I can see why a mother would have wanted to keep her teenage daughter far from Cosmo, I must also ask you, dear reader, who wouldn't want HGB for - well, maybe not a mom, but at least that cool aunt that your mom is terrified to let you visit?

At her most radical, Brown was a subversive rather than a revolutionary; a sexual libertarian rather than a liberator; and an unapologetic partisan of free enterprise. (She once called Margaret Thatcher a “Cosmo Girl.”) “How could any woman not be a feminist?” she wondered, in 1985, in an interview on her twentieth anniversary at Cosmopolitan. “The girl I’m editing for wants to be known for herself. If that’s not a feminist message, I don’t know what is.”

I would also like to note that I happen to be wearing practically the same dress as the one in this photo.

On the Politics of 1967

I saw Hair on Broadway last night. Definitely enjoyed it and was on my feet dancing with the rest of the audience at the end, but something had been bothering me about the show, and not just the fact that every song was not sung by the showstopping Sasha Allen and that the nude scene was too lowly lit.*

The New Yorker review by Hilton Als may have hit the nail on the head:

I didn’t expect to take such a dyspeptic view of the show, and I was saddened by my response... I was disturbed by certain elements in Gerome Ragni and James Rado’s book and lyrics.

“Hair” was first produced in 1967, at the Public Theatre. (It went to Broadway the following year; the current production mirrors that trajectory.) At the time it premièred on Broadway, a mixed cast was still relatively uncommon. But that suited “Hair” just fine. Less a musical than a revue, it was meant to showcase those elements of society which the American stage had relegated to the margins: blacks and women. And yet there is not one believable black character in “Hair.” In fact, its strangled, hackneyed depiction of black masculinity is painful to watch. Compare how we meet the free-spirited white hippie Berger (the excellent and appropriately narcissistic Will Swenson) and the militant black man Hud (Nichols). Berger introduces himself and his tentacle-like sexuality—he wants to touch everyone he sees—by joking around and flirting with the audience. Hud, on the other hand, comes across immediately as one angry dude—and angry about just the things that white people might imagine he’d be angry about. Glaring at the audience, as he paces the stage, he sings:

I’m a colored spade, a nigra, a black nigger
A jungle bunny jigaboo coon pickaninny
mau mau
Uncle Tom Aunt Jemima Little Black
Sambo
Cotton pickin’ swamp Guinea junk man
shoe shine boy. . . .
And President of
The United States of Love I said
President of
The United States of Love

I’m sure the original creators of the show felt that they were treating these issues—the way a black man is perceived and the way he perceives himself—with “irony” and a healthy dose of liberal self-consciousness. But Hud is simply a construction, meant to validate the white hipness of the show. (He’s straight out of Norman Mailer’s 1957 treatise “The White Negro.”) The strain in the portrayal of blackness becomes only more evident and uncomfortable in the play’s second act, when a Tribe member (Saycon Sengbloh), dressed in an Abraham Lincoln-like stovepipe hat, joins Hud and four black men carrying spears to sing “Yes, I’s Finished on Y’All’s Farmlands.” In short, aside from the draft, all the “issues” in “Hair” seem to have to do with race, and the task of representing them falls on the overburdened black characters, who have to do almost everything here except tap-dance.

*I really am a gay man in the body of a straight woman, aren't I? So awesome.

The Most Stylish Do-Gooder on the Globe?

Big props to my friend Jess Neff, an NYC stylist to the stars and jewelry designer that could easily slide into the glamorous routine of openings, parties, and fashion shows with nary a thought about the non-Manhattan world, but, on a recent trip to Bali, fell in love with the country and has dedicated an incredible amount of time and energy to raising money for schoolchildren there. Way to go, Jess.

As you may know, I am currently in Bali volunteering at a school for impoverished kids that cannot otherwise afford to attend high school, which is not free in Indonesia. We recently ran a fundraiser in New York City, and with great success...$5500.00 !!! (Thank you to our wonderful Donors!!!!). However, we are still short of our goal of $10,000. Since arriving to Ubud, Bali, I have been able to meet with the head of the school and my American liaison, Rucina Ballinger, to discuss the school's needs. The school has doubled in size since last year, and so much is desperately needed!!!! Books, computers, school supplies, uniforms, teaching aids (maps, supplies, dictionaries, etc), and dormitory supplies, just to get started....

Soooo.....if you couldn't make it to the Books for Bali Sample Sale for Charity, and would still like to contribute, please log onto our website www.booksforbali.org !!!!

Many of you know me well, and know that I never give up!

Please, if you can spare a little or a lot, go to www.booksforbali.org and click to Donate....it's super easy!!!!

Or you can use the link below to go directly to Paypal....You do not need a Paypal account to donate....

https://www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=OibQRAfYooCJAG1iH6nLj5XqC8u2TYaqb7jxR-vqlyLRhVgsJNzAyxKMcAW&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f998ca054efbdf2c25fe4a05bcb33bff68c4fe49456517e3e

No donation is too small...or too BIG !!!!

(If you have already made a donation, Thank you so much for your generosity!!!!)

Thank you so much for your support!

The Actual NY Times Internal Memo on Pay Cuts

May 5, 2009

The New York Times Media Group

Dear Colleagues,

Now that those of you in The Guild have voted to accept the 5% reduction of
salaries for the remainder of the year, we wanted to take this opportunity
to thank everyone for their sacrifice. We know this is a very difficult
period, yet you have once again demonstrated your steadfast commitment to
The New York Times, to quality journalism and to the millions of readers in
this country and internationally who depend on what we have to say in our
newspaper and on NYTimes.com.

We had to take this step because of the unparalleled drop in advertising
revenues that we have suffered within the first quarter of 2009. As you
know, this is only one of a number of actions that we are taking to ensure
that we have sufficient resources to adhere to The New York Times's high
standards.

Getting this far required us to come together — news and business, print
and digital, management and union — to deal with the many challenges we
faced. We wish we could tell you when things will get better, but we
cannot. What we can say with confidence is that by supporting the larger
goals of our organization and each other, we will get through this period
and we will provide our audiences with the best news and information
available.

Sincerely,

Arthur, Scott, Bill, Martin and Andy

Someone Put Broadway Out of Its Misery

If this is what we're dealing with re Tony nominations, just shut down the Great White Way altogether now and leave it with a shred of dignity.

If you're not aware, the Tonys are pretty much the most BS awards out there because if you're produced, you're probably nominated. Because whereas there are hundreds, thousands of TV shows, movies, etc for the other big televised award shows, there are only a handful of B'way shows produced each year period, so a nomination isn't exactly a big deal. The nominees for best musical alone make me nauseous: two movies and a jukebox musical - three out of four without original content? Why nominate anyone at all?

I guess some naive part of me still thought that the Tonys aren't entirely political. But reading these noms shattered that -- the shows I've seen this year that have nominations are mostly entirely undeserved, i.e., Alison Janney was thoroughly entertaining in 9 to 5, but a Best Actress performance? Hardly. Her agent must know all the right people.

And who doesn't love Dolly Parton, but to put her in the category formerly graced by a genius like Sondheim is embarrassing.

I get it, Broadway needs a big marketing gimmick just like every other performing art, but lord, can we at least open it up to London, off-Broadway, and regional to make it an actual contest?

Feel Good Pic of the Day

Note to Bloomberg

WELLLL, look at this! N'awlins Mayor Nagin can't come back because of term limits. What are term limits, you ask? They're voter-approved initiatives that billionaire mayors can overturn when they don't feel like leaving office. Too bad Nagin isn't a billionaire!

Atheism as Serious Political Issue

Just kidding, I had to title this post that in order to make this video relevant. You're welcome!

It's Not Just Me. And You.

Sitting in my home office thanks to my newly enacted four-day workweeks (and corresponding salary adjustment) and what do I come across but an editorial on falling wages by Paul Krugman:

...And soon we may be facing the paradox of wages: workers at any one company can help save their jobs by accepting lower wages, but when employers across the economy cut wages at the same time, the result is higher unemployment.

Here’s how the paradox works. Suppose that workers at the XYZ Corporation accept a pay cut. That lets XYZ management cut prices, making its products more competitive. Sales rise, and more workers can keep their jobs. So you might think that wage cuts raise employment — which they do at the level of the individual employer.

But if everyone takes a pay cut, nobody gains a competitive advantage. So there’s no benefit to the economy from lower wages. Meanwhile, the fall in wages can worsen the economy’s problems on other fronts.

Didn't You Get the Memo?

A lovely satire piece by Manohla Dargis and my #1 literary crush, A.O. Scott. Do not miss this one.

To: Anxious studio heads

From: A.O.S.

Did you notice the last election? People paid a lot of attention, took sides, argued back and forth. As they had, come to think of it, for much of the previous eight years. And yet so many of your “serious” movies tiptoe around areas of real public concern, trying to be vaguely topical while strenuously working to avoid offending anybody. As a result, nobody bothers to go see them. So why not risk troubling the waters a little bit? A lot of the audience likes to argue about movies and also about politics. Why not feed that appetite instead of suppressing it?

In Which The Mayoress Agrees With a Republican

Letter to the editor concerning the review of 9 to 5: The Musical:

Mr. Healy writes that the character of Violet “emerged during the Reagan era as a symbol for women seeking equal treatment in the marketplace.” The character of Violet was created in December 1980, when the film of “9 to 5” was released, a month before Reagan took office... The implication that Violet became a symbol in opposition to the “Reagan era” is an example of the use of cultural narrative in the service of rather small-minded political partisanship.

You go, Mark Richard of Columbus, Ohio!

Something Not to Like About Amsterdam

The current most-read article on nytimes.com is about the Dutch Welfare state (check it out here.). Yeah, reading, ho hum, until:

I have two daughters, you see. Every quarter, the SVB quietly drops $665 into my account with the one-word explanation kinderbijslag, or child benefit. As the SVB’s Web site cheerily informed me when I went there in bewilderment after the first deposit: “Babies are expensive. Nappies, clothes, the pram . . . all these things cost money. The Dutch government provides for child benefit to help you with the costs of bringing up your child.” Any parents living in the country receive quarterly payments until their children turn 18. And thanks to a recently passed law, the state now gives parents a hand in paying for school materials.

***counting to ten***

I know this is not about the U.S., but you've got to admit we've got some similar financial policies in place (tax deductions anyone?). This is what makes me lean Libertarian. Privatize everything.

How do I say this without offending anyone? ...shit, impossible:

I do get some of the arguments for how things are now re kids: it is in everyone's interest to have an educated population, therefore, public education. Or, I went to public school, so now my tax dollars are paying for those 12 years. Or you're Bristol Palin and never had a choice and we'd rather have you and your offspring fed and sheltered than out on the streets.

But in general, having children is a choice. If you cannot afford one, perhaps do not have one. It continually baffles me that those of us in the default state, which is not married/no kids, get societal disadvantages. Shouldn't it be the other way around? If we are all equal, why incentivize choices?

This is a primary reason I am vehemently in favor of gay marriage. Hell, if we get special privileges via marriage, anyone should be able to marry anyone, I say. Back when I had a male roommate with a kickass corporate job and I was a waitress, I begged him to make me his domestic partner so I could get health insurance. How messed up is that?

I guess the thing that irks me the most is that this is one of those "third rail" issues -- my friends who don't want kids, for instance, are forced to whisper their opinions because it's not socially acceptable to even have a discussion on the societal impacts of children, families, marriage. Or get dismissed with "You'll feel differently when you have kids." It's the American Dream for heaven's sake! Don't criticize! Smile and help the lady carry her stroller up the damn subway staircase!

I apologize for the stream of consciousness here; I know my string of logic is not NYT Op-Ed worthy. But really - any thoughts out there on all this?

Supreme Speculation

Check out Slate's list of top Justice prospects - all chicks. I mean women.

I would not like the job, although I do enjoy wearing black.

I would also like to nominate Casey Novack, who continually kicks ass.

SVU in Real Life

A very important editorial from the divine Mr. Kristof:

Solomon Moore, a colleague of mine at The Times, last year wrote about a 43-year-old legal secretary who was raped repeatedly in her home in Los Angeles as her son slept in another room. The attacker forced the woman to clean herself in an attempt to destroy the evidence.

Tim Marcia, the detective on the case, thought this meant that the perpetrator was a habitual offender who would strike again. Mr. Marcia rushed the rape kit to the crime lab but was told to expect a delay of more than one year.

So Mr. Marcia personally drove the kit 350 miles to deliver it to the state lab in Sacramento. Even there, the backlog resulted in a four-month delay — but then it produced a “cold hit,” a match in a database of the DNA of previous offenders.

Yet in the months while the rape kit sat on a shelf, the suspect had allegedly struck twice more. Police said he broke into the homes of a pregnant woman and a 17-year-old girl, sexually assaulting each of them.

I assume you're as nauseous as I am that in some countries, women are put to death for being rape victims. But how far ahead is the U.S. if this is how we're dealing with our own?

Read full article.