remember that research paper i was going to write? well, i found that there are several fine reference books on the very subject, which would be good if i wanted to summarize other people's research, but i sort of wanted to write something original... and since the original things have been written... well... i sort of lost my motivation.
not that i even know how to go about doing original research on the history of organized sports for elementary school girls. i read the ymca's "about us" web page, but they didn't exactly specify when they transitioned programs for girls from gray-y cheer squad to soccer. and... that was the extent of my research.
when i was in college, i did this stellar research paper on types of commercials shown during children's cartoons. i literally taped literally hours of cartoon shows, fast forwarded through the shows, and tabulated commercial subject matter. of course, i compiled some of the existing research and whatnot, but the core of the work were these tabulation charts and graphs -- all recorded and plotted and drawn by hand on quadrille paper, mind you. by hand because (in case you didn't pick up on this from the fact that i literally taped the television shows) this research took place back in the day, before literally everyone had a computer at their disposal.
measure. notate. compare. conclude. chart. report.
a reasonable person would sort of think i had enough work at work without making up work hobbies, but there's something rewarding about actual first-hand data collection.
15 October 2014
09 October 2014
PTO
they used to call it vacation time and it worked like this:
salaried employees and hourly employees both get vacation time, and vacation time is used to take vacations.
if hourly employees need personal time to take care of personal business such as going to the doctor, or picking up their kids on an unexpected snowday, or whatnot, they either clock out and go without pay or they use vacation time. if salaried employees need personal time, they simply go - no clocking out, no need to use vacation time.
the tradeoff, of course, is that when hourly employees work overtime, they get paid for those hours, usually at a rate higher than their normal hourly rate (e.g.: "time and a half"). salaried employees don't get paid any extra for overtime, which means there essentially is no overtime when you are a salaried employee.
when you're hourly, the more you work, the more you get paid per hour. when you're salaried, the more you work, the less you get paid per hour.
i have never met a salaried employee who put in less than a 40-hour week, and i have also never met one who resented the arrangement. knowing that if they consistently put in 45, 50, 60 hours each week, they could occasionally leave early to see their kid's soccer game.
when i worked hourly, i put in all the hours i could, and i was fine with it. knowing that i could have that much effect on my paycheck was empowering.
so. that's how it used to operate.
now, where i work, we are all on PTO - paid time off. vacation? PTO. leaving early for a facial? PTO. doctor visit? PTO. mom sick? PTO. we are all in the same boat - hourly and salary alike. PTO for all!
however.
hourly employees still get credit for overtime in the form of (generally higher than norm) payment for their time. salaried employees get no credit for overtime -- worked 60 hours last week and want to leave early this wednesday to go biking with friends? PTO.
ergo: the incentive for salaried employees to put in long hours is gone. don't even start with your "love the company" bullshit because no one (save entrepreneurs, who don't get paid at all) loves the company they work for that much. people want a little give & take - i do a little extra for you, you compensate me accordingly. people want to feel that their efforts are noticed and appreciated.
i'm on PTO tomorrow and monday. last tuesday when i went for a facial in mid-afternoon, i turned in a PTO card. but yesterday when i went for a longer-than-usual lunchtime run, i took my time with the run and the shower and the whatnot. they can have my obvious PTO. i will comply with the letter of the law. but if they won't give me what i think i deserve, i will take it.
here's a shamelessly ripped-off cartoon to illustrate my point.
salaried employees and hourly employees both get vacation time, and vacation time is used to take vacations.
if hourly employees need personal time to take care of personal business such as going to the doctor, or picking up their kids on an unexpected snowday, or whatnot, they either clock out and go without pay or they use vacation time. if salaried employees need personal time, they simply go - no clocking out, no need to use vacation time.
the tradeoff, of course, is that when hourly employees work overtime, they get paid for those hours, usually at a rate higher than their normal hourly rate (e.g.: "time and a half"). salaried employees don't get paid any extra for overtime, which means there essentially is no overtime when you are a salaried employee.
when you're hourly, the more you work, the more you get paid per hour. when you're salaried, the more you work, the less you get paid per hour.
i have never met a salaried employee who put in less than a 40-hour week, and i have also never met one who resented the arrangement. knowing that if they consistently put in 45, 50, 60 hours each week, they could occasionally leave early to see their kid's soccer game.
when i worked hourly, i put in all the hours i could, and i was fine with it. knowing that i could have that much effect on my paycheck was empowering.
so. that's how it used to operate.
now, where i work, we are all on PTO - paid time off. vacation? PTO. leaving early for a facial? PTO. doctor visit? PTO. mom sick? PTO. we are all in the same boat - hourly and salary alike. PTO for all!
however.
hourly employees still get credit for overtime in the form of (generally higher than norm) payment for their time. salaried employees get no credit for overtime -- worked 60 hours last week and want to leave early this wednesday to go biking with friends? PTO.
ergo: the incentive for salaried employees to put in long hours is gone. don't even start with your "love the company" bullshit because no one (save entrepreneurs, who don't get paid at all) loves the company they work for that much. people want a little give & take - i do a little extra for you, you compensate me accordingly. people want to feel that their efforts are noticed and appreciated.
i'm on PTO tomorrow and monday. last tuesday when i went for a facial in mid-afternoon, i turned in a PTO card. but yesterday when i went for a longer-than-usual lunchtime run, i took my time with the run and the shower and the whatnot. they can have my obvious PTO. i will comply with the letter of the law. but if they won't give me what i think i deserve, i will take it.
here's a shamelessly ripped-off cartoon to illustrate my point.
07 October 2014
oy! gerroff me lawn!
sometime before the song was recorded in 1972, steven tyler wrote "dream on". mr tyler was born in 1948, so he would have been 24 years in '72, and younger than 24 when he wrote the song.
The past is gone... it went by like dusk to dawn.
paul mccartney's song "yesterday" was released in 1965. mr mcartney was born in 1942, so in 1965, he'd have been 23. the song bounced around a bit before its release, so one surmises he was younger than 23 when it was written.
Yesterday love was such an easy game to play. Now I need a place to hide away.
jackson browne, like mr tyler, was born in 1948, and he wrote the song "these days" in early 1965, when he'd have been 16.
These days I seem to think a lot about the things that I forgot to do, and all the times I had the chance to. Don't confront me with my failures -- I had not forgotten them.
barry gibb, born in 1946, along with his younger twin brothers robin and maurice (born in 1949) had written "i started a joke" in time to have it on an album in 1968, when he was 22 and they were 19.
I finally died, which started the whole world living.
the incredible thing about all this isn't purely the writing of songs. i mean, hell, taylor swift can churn out the songs, and she's, what, 12? 13? children write poetry and songs all the time. it's not that unusual.
what's unusual here is the depth of feeling, the empathy, the foresight expressed by teen boys and young men. i mean, there's the decline of civilization right there, in a nutshell: kids nowadays are about as deep as a mudpuddle on a sunny day.
even ms swift, who is undeniably prolific, only goes so far as to bad mouth her exes and deny her critics. i'm not saying standing up for oneself isn't worthy. of course it is. the thing is, though, why stop there? why not dig a bit deeper than the shallow grave in which society is attempting to bury your standing-up-ness alive?
i'll tell you why not - because it's a waste of time. there's nothing there.
back in the day, kids read books, talked to intergenerational families and neighbors, went to church.
no, i am not going to get started on church because there's a box of pandora worms if ever there was one. it's just that church is exemplary of a shared experience that encourages people to think outside themselves. school, also, used to encourage kids to see themselves as part of a whole, not as the entire self-contained whole. and, nothing says, "whole" like multiple generations of the family all under the same roof.
the problem is, we've gotten busy catering to the self-esteem of each individual child, telling each child how important they are, that we forgot to tell them that the other children matter, too.
The past is gone... it went by like dusk to dawn.
paul mccartney's song "yesterday" was released in 1965. mr mcartney was born in 1942, so in 1965, he'd have been 23. the song bounced around a bit before its release, so one surmises he was younger than 23 when it was written.
Yesterday love was such an easy game to play. Now I need a place to hide away.
jackson browne, like mr tyler, was born in 1948, and he wrote the song "these days" in early 1965, when he'd have been 16.
These days I seem to think a lot about the things that I forgot to do, and all the times I had the chance to. Don't confront me with my failures -- I had not forgotten them.
barry gibb, born in 1946, along with his younger twin brothers robin and maurice (born in 1949) had written "i started a joke" in time to have it on an album in 1968, when he was 22 and they were 19.
I finally died, which started the whole world living.
the incredible thing about all this isn't purely the writing of songs. i mean, hell, taylor swift can churn out the songs, and she's, what, 12? 13? children write poetry and songs all the time. it's not that unusual.
what's unusual here is the depth of feeling, the empathy, the foresight expressed by teen boys and young men. i mean, there's the decline of civilization right there, in a nutshell: kids nowadays are about as deep as a mudpuddle on a sunny day.
even ms swift, who is undeniably prolific, only goes so far as to bad mouth her exes and deny her critics. i'm not saying standing up for oneself isn't worthy. of course it is. the thing is, though, why stop there? why not dig a bit deeper than the shallow grave in which society is attempting to bury your standing-up-ness alive?
i'll tell you why not - because it's a waste of time. there's nothing there.
back in the day, kids read books, talked to intergenerational families and neighbors, went to church.
no, i am not going to get started on church because there's a box of pandora worms if ever there was one. it's just that church is exemplary of a shared experience that encourages people to think outside themselves. school, also, used to encourage kids to see themselves as part of a whole, not as the entire self-contained whole. and, nothing says, "whole" like multiple generations of the family all under the same roof.
the problem is, we've gotten busy catering to the self-esteem of each individual child, telling each child how important they are, that we forgot to tell them that the other children matter, too.
05 October 2014
stars are just like us!
so we're watching jimmy fallon the other night and jennifer garner is on. she's bubbly and sweet and cute and funny and just seems 100% normal. she is, of course, not "normal"... being a television and movie star and the wife of academy award winner ben affleck.
but still.
she does this hilarious impression of ol' ben -- just like any wife would. well, any wife who is capable of being hilarious. she completely mocks him in a totally loving way. i know you know what i mean. if he had been there, he would have been laughing too.
she goes on to tell the story of when she, ben, and their kids had lice. lice! the shampooing, the piles of laundry, the hassle, the annoyance, the itching. she tells it all in a hilarious and very relatable way.
the best part is when she and jimmy are just cracking up over the story, and she turns to jimmy and goes, "stars are just like us!" HA! and A-HA!
i mean, she is a star. jimmy is a star. of course stars are like just like us when we are stars -- and that's the point. she owns her stardom. it's immensely appealing when people own who they are. i mean, humility and whatnot, sure, that's all good, but false humility is gross.
it's gross because it's false, it's self-denial. you're a star, we know you're a star, we know you know you're a star. what's the point in denying it? that sort of self-denial is usually designed to elicit praise. don't make me praise or reassure you - you're a star for godsakes.
jennifer owns her stardom - doesn't deny it - but at the same time, she's not saying her stardom put her above anyone. she is simply taking ownership of who she is. her claiming her stardom defuses its power to make her different than us.
AND, she IS "just like us", sitting there telling a story about having lice, of all things. actually, by telling a lice story, she's more "us" that most of us will even admit to. there are normal, everyday, non-stars who would never admit to having had lice or their children having had lice.
there's no duplicity. her words align with her actions. she claims her stardom while simultaneously demonstrating normalcy.
stars are just like us? hell, in this case at least, the world would be a better place if we were more like the star.
but still.
she does this hilarious impression of ol' ben -- just like any wife would. well, any wife who is capable of being hilarious. she completely mocks him in a totally loving way. i know you know what i mean. if he had been there, he would have been laughing too.
she goes on to tell the story of when she, ben, and their kids had lice. lice! the shampooing, the piles of laundry, the hassle, the annoyance, the itching. she tells it all in a hilarious and very relatable way.
the best part is when she and jimmy are just cracking up over the story, and she turns to jimmy and goes, "stars are just like us!" HA! and A-HA!
i mean, she is a star. jimmy is a star. of course stars are like just like us when we are stars -- and that's the point. she owns her stardom. it's immensely appealing when people own who they are. i mean, humility and whatnot, sure, that's all good, but false humility is gross.
it's gross because it's false, it's self-denial. you're a star, we know you're a star, we know you know you're a star. what's the point in denying it? that sort of self-denial is usually designed to elicit praise. don't make me praise or reassure you - you're a star for godsakes.
jennifer owns her stardom - doesn't deny it - but at the same time, she's not saying her stardom put her above anyone. she is simply taking ownership of who she is. her claiming her stardom defuses its power to make her different than us.
AND, she IS "just like us", sitting there telling a story about having lice, of all things. actually, by telling a lice story, she's more "us" that most of us will even admit to. there are normal, everyday, non-stars who would never admit to having had lice or their children having had lice.
there's no duplicity. her words align with her actions. she claims her stardom while simultaneously demonstrating normalcy.
stars are just like us? hell, in this case at least, the world would be a better place if we were more like the star.
29 September 2014
almond cookies
almond cookies on amber plates.
auburn hair across her face.
autumn breeze. it's getting late.
and she wonders where you are. where you are.
pine trees green around the year.
paper airplanes. you are here.
pealing bells. you disappear.
and still she wears your sweater.
woodsmoke wafting in the wind.
she's wandering down that path again.
water cannot wash her skin.
you are here. you're gone again.
and still she wears your sweater.
auburn hair across her face.
autumn breeze. it's getting late.
and she wonders where you are. where you are.
pine trees green around the year.
paper airplanes. you are here.
pealing bells. you disappear.
and still she wears your sweater.
woodsmoke wafting in the wind.
she's wandering down that path again.
water cannot wash her skin.
you are here. you're gone again.
and still she wears your sweater.
22 September 2014
domination
uproot!
yank, yank, yank.
uproot!
strong twisted roots resist yet
in the end they're out.
uproot!
remove
things that want to grow.
embed
things that (we) want to grow.
and so we sit in judgement over plants.
"approbate the appropriate."
"opprobriate the odd."
dislodge sycamore saplings.
evict viney clover.
pick poke sallat.
and so we sit in judgement over plants.
cultivate sturdy nasturtiums.
grow profuse roses.
plant pretty pansies.
and so
we sit
in judgement
over
plants.
yank, yank, yank.
uproot!
strong twisted roots resist yet
in the end they're out.
uproot!
remove
things that want to grow.
embed
things that (we) want to grow.
and so we sit in judgement over plants.
"approbate the appropriate."
"opprobriate the odd."
dislodge sycamore saplings.
evict viney clover.
pick poke sallat.
and so we sit in judgement over plants.
cultivate sturdy nasturtiums.
grow profuse roses.
plant pretty pansies.
and so
we sit
in judgement
over
plants.
16 September 2014
building birdhouses
so i'm here at starbucks where the people come with their books and highlighters and spirals and whatnot. there's one guy here with a calculator and notebook and his computer open and his noise-cancelling headphones and he just randomly dropped a big pink eraser on the floor and grabbed it back up.
see, that's what i want. books and papers and a big pink eraser that i sort of absently knock to the floor when i reach across the books and the papers to pick up my highlighter, or reach for a sip of coffee, or change the music coming into my noise-cancelling headset.
okay, obvs, i could purchase those items. so it's not simply the having of them. no, that's not all. it's the having of them AND the using of them. but... durr, i could acquire those items and use them. i could get some paper and pencil to write stuff and then erase it and i could get a book in which i could highlight passages. but that's not the point, either, is it? no, it is decidedly not. it's not the having of them AND the using of them for their own sake. the point is to have them and use them for a sake other than the mere having and using.
what's the point of having a hammer if you're not going to drive nails and what's the point of driving nails if you're not going to build a birdhouse? there's got to be something more, something to give meaning to the tools. you've got to have a purpose. it's not about having a hammer and it's not about driving nails. it's about building a birdhouse.
books. paper. pencils. noise-cancelling headphones. a highlighter. a pocket calculator. a big pink eraser. of what purpose are these tools? these are the tools of learning. add index cards, and you have the tools of a good old fashioned research project. a "term paper" as it were.
i wonder if i am capable of this... i once was quite good at it. can i, am i still able, to write a term paper?
i guess the first step is to pick a topic.
what do you think?
i think i need to purchase some note cards!
see, that's what i want. books and papers and a big pink eraser that i sort of absently knock to the floor when i reach across the books and the papers to pick up my highlighter, or reach for a sip of coffee, or change the music coming into my noise-cancelling headset.
okay, obvs, i could purchase those items. so it's not simply the having of them. no, that's not all. it's the having of them AND the using of them. but... durr, i could acquire those items and use them. i could get some paper and pencil to write stuff and then erase it and i could get a book in which i could highlight passages. but that's not the point, either, is it? no, it is decidedly not. it's not the having of them AND the using of them for their own sake. the point is to have them and use them for a sake other than the mere having and using.
what's the point of having a hammer if you're not going to drive nails and what's the point of driving nails if you're not going to build a birdhouse? there's got to be something more, something to give meaning to the tools. you've got to have a purpose. it's not about having a hammer and it's not about driving nails. it's about building a birdhouse.
books. paper. pencils. noise-cancelling headphones. a highlighter. a pocket calculator. a big pink eraser. of what purpose are these tools? these are the tools of learning. add index cards, and you have the tools of a good old fashioned research project. a "term paper" as it were.
i wonder if i am capable of this... i once was quite good at it. can i, am i still able, to write a term paper?
i guess the first step is to pick a topic.
Title IX Trickle-down:
How the Summer of '72 Changed Opportunities
for Elementary School Girls
to Play Organized Sports
How the Summer of '72 Changed Opportunities
for Elementary School Girls
to Play Organized Sports
what do you think?
i think i need to purchase some note cards!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)