Eye Contact

Have you ever noticed that people feel they can do the most awful things to you, as long as they don't make eye contact?





I'm walking down the street in downtown Flagstaff, AZ carefully picking my way through ice, snow, and frozen puddles. I arrive at an intersection with traffic lights and dutifully press the pedestrian button. At this particular light (Humphreys and Columbus for those who know the area), traffic going my direction has a green left turn arrow before the pedestrian light signals me to cross. Most of the traffic driving north on Humphreys turns left at Columbus and much of the traffic coming east on Columbus turns right on Humphreys. As I am on the southwest corner of the intersection, this can present a problem for me. I watch in disgust as the folks turning right onto Humphreys don't even pass a glance at the sidewalk before speeding through their right-hand turn. My light is still red--so that's fine--sort of. As my light turns green I tentatively step into the street. It never fails that some right-turn vehicle will speed up to the intersection upon seeing me and quickly make his (or her) turn. The same goes for those who want to turn left but missed the green arrow. Even if I am in the middle of the intersection, they will zoom by me if they can---as long as they don't have to make eye contact.

It's like , as long as this is the case--you are virtually invisible to the person you are accosting. I have tried jumping up and down, waving my hands like a lunatic to get their attention--sometimes it works and they are forced to look at me. At this point they will stop. But if it is a particularly heavy traffic day--forget it. I could drop my pants right there in the middle of the intersection--they might turn their heads for a fleeting glance at my rear--but if they are in a hurry--I don't exist from the waist up.

I'm sure I engage in this practice as well--not running over pedestrians--but reserving eye contact for pleasant interactions. I tend more toward the shy side in social situations so making eye contact is sometimes quite difficult with strangers. But I'm pretty sure if I had to fire someone at work--I would do my damnedest not to meet their gaze. It's really off-putting to me when someone looks me right in the eye and lies or says something nasty. Without eye contact--I can take it--sort of like an unwritten rule. No eye contact= "I feel really bad about what I'm doing and I know its wrong--forgive me, ok?" Eye contact = "you are slime and I am taking great delight in crushing you." Ever try to get your dog to make sustained eye contact with you? Mine won't do it. The minute I give them a hard stare, they immediately avert their eyes. I can actually hear them whisper under their breaths "asshole".

Then there are people who obsessed with eye contact--like they feel they can really "get you" if they pursue your gaze endlessly. I'm sure you've met these people--maybe you are one. I feel like they are zombies trying to steal my soul. I can actually envision my soul exiting my body through my eyes and being sucked into theirs--kind of like the little girl into the TV in Poltergeist. The nice thing about these people is that you can really tell if you've offended them--you can just see that little flick away of one pupil--and the spell is broken. Don't they realize that people like me will say anything to get them to stop. They probably walk away from such conversations whispering "asshole" under their breaths--when really all I was trying to do was save my soul. Honest.

organizational skills

It always amuses me to see how groceries stores organize their goods. Today I was in pain. I was suffering from my monthly bout of (sorry if this alienates my male friends) PMS!!! Its actually not PMS but more like During MS.

Grocery stores vary in where they put pain killers directed at suffering women. Most of them that I've visited place the pain killers conveniently next to the tampons and maxi pads--the FEMININE HYGIENE PRODUCTS. (Which, sadly, are often found right next to the diapers--yes, thank you male-dominated society for reminding me that I may as well wear a diaper as a maxi pad.) I can understand the theory behind locating pain killers with tampons. You generally need one about the time you need the other. Other things to find in this section? Vagisil is generally tucked in --ok it is a feminine hygiene product perhaps--but not necessarily related to the other two. You can also usually find douches--seriously do people still use those? And if its like the store I was in today--you can also find condoms--which depending on the preference of your significant other may or may not make sense (in my opinion, these should be located smack-dab in the middle of the diaper section). I was thinking to myself--they should really put the chocolate in this section. I am much more likely to buy chocolate and midol cramp relief than I am to buy condoms and midol. I often think it's funny to buy things according to these stereotypes--a big bottle of midol, a value pack of tampons, and a 55-gallon drum of chocolate ice cream--oh and a caffeine free diet coke (I feel bloated--do I look fat?). I can just see the knowing look of the check-out girl. Or better yet, add to that a box of condoms and get in the zit-faced teenage boy's checkout line and watch him avoid your gaze! Whichever line you're in--you can guarrantee that you will get a bag--no questions asked (how discrete).

Speaking of discrete, notice how there aren't any speciality boutiques for women in my situation. I mean, they have "mother-to-be" stores, why can't they have stores for women who have elected NOT to be "in a family way". Ok so I have to note my hypocracy here. About two months ago I would have gone on a rant about why should women who get knocked up get special treatment, while women who act responsibily and not over-populate the world get zip. BUT in the past few months many of my friends (even the tree-hugging hippies) have had or will soon have "bundles of joy." Watch out world, liberals have learned how to populate! "Pregnancy, not just for dumb Republicans anymore."

Anyway, back to the topic--I think I'm going to open a speciality store "All things Menstrual." I will carry all manner of speciality feminine napkins (that is such a hilarious term--"oh you have something on your chin, here use my feminine napkin"), drugs, heating pads, bubble bath, massage thingys, sweat pants, stress balls and, of course--chocolate. The store bags will just say "I'm on my period" in big bold letters. Let's NOT be discrete. Maybe I could call it "Freedom to Bleed" and right next door I would have a maternity store called "Freedom to Breed". We'll be in strip malls all across America--right next to the honey baked ham. Maybe men who come into the store will receive honorary Red Wings badges --or am I going to far? That might be considered adult content.

Back to my pain and suffering though. Even though I know I could just go to the regular pain killer aisle and buy advil or aleve, it somehow makes me feel better to get something "made for my situation." Not to mention I like the packaging and the names. My favorite is Pamprin. Where did that name come from? Is it from pamper--like you're pampering yourself by taking this horrible medication--give me a break. Or is it to make you think of Pampers--like "ha ha you're wearing a diaper and you feel like crap--here's some stupid medicine". My guess is the latter. There used to be a limited number of options, now there are shelf-fuls. "Midol for cramps", "Midol for headaches", "Pamprin for bloating and mood swings", and "Tylenol that will knock you out for an entire week while you overload your Kotex with Wings." Ok enough. Lest you think that I'm some feminist that revels in my ability to embrace my "monthly visitor"--forget it. I'm just feeling particularly bitchy right now. I wonder why.

(thanks to the publishers weekly blog for the image)

a little perspective

I read today that poor people in Haiti are eating dirt in order to survive. I swear when I read the headline I thought that I had accidently clicked on a link for the Onion. But according to USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-01-29-haiti-dirt_N.htm?csp=34), the empoverished in Haiti are eating cookies made from dirt because food prices have increased thanks to higher prices in oil, fertilizer, etc. The really amazing thing is that not only are these people eating dirt, they are paying to eat dirt. The article says that the amount of clay used to make 100 cookies costs about 5 dollars. So how many million acres of this country are being used to create ethanol and high fructose corn syrup while these people are eating clay?

Another thought to ponder. Aristide was originally brought into power by the U.S. (along with the U.N) in Operation Uphold Democracy--sounds familiar. Thanks to this figure head being forced on the people, his government was powerless and Haiti plunged into the depths of poverty from which they have never been able to escape. Are there any examples of forced "democracy" bringing a country to prosperity?

a country I have loved

I'm going to take a little time to comment on the situation in Kenya. I had the opportunity to spend a semester of college in Kenya back in 1995. I fell in love with the country, with the wildlife, and with the people. Most of all with the people of Kenya. After the program was over, I traveled both with friends and alone throughout the country and had very few negative experiences. Once I had someone reach into my pocket at a nightclub. I'm sure he was disappointed to discover this mzungu (white person) was traveling light.

Sadly, I have kept in touch with very few of my Kenyan friends. I knew Kikuyu, Luo, Masai, Samburu, and Swahili peoples (probably more whose tribes I did not learn). I had no idea an election could cause these people to turn on one another. I knew a little of the dispute--the dislike of Kikuyu and there were certainly hints of government corruption, but perhaps it was my youth and my naivety that allowed me to envision this country as a peaceful, tribal, melting pot.

Its hard for me to reconcile these two images. On one hand the image of our school "caravan" arriving into a town with a bunch of white people in land cruisers greeted by smiling children and adults shouting "wazungu!" On the other hand, in some of these same villages into which we traveled, neighbors are taking up crude weaponry and killing the "other."

Where is the breaking point? How much hunger, injustice, pain must one suffer before he is ready to kill? In this country, most of the educated are so disenchanted and disgusted by politicians it is hard to imagine organizing a manhunt on one's behalf.

As sick as it seems, sometimes I am envious of such people. Not the killing or the violence, but the passion that they must feel for something.

My memories of Kenya have been changed forever. It has been so long, I don't know if I'll be able to look back and see with newly found hindsight that this current situation has been a long time coming. I hope not. I hope very soon peace will be restored and I will be able to understand these terrible events.

Migration pathways

Something that I've been thinking about lately--but haven't really been able to sus out my thoughts is how people pick the places they live and how that's affecting our communities and the way we look at our environment.

In my parent's generation, the sense of place that people felt in their hometowns came mostly from the people around them. People stayed close to their families and their neighbors were all their friends. I think a little later I think people chose where to live based on work. So the sense of place came more from work relationships --and in place of family came the niceties that one could buy from having a good job.

People of my age (early-mid 30s) seem to place more value in the physical environment of a place when choosing where to settle (or maybe this is just my friends). The "feel" of a town and the recreational opportunities seem to have as much to do with where we live as whether we have friends or family. I think my generation more than any before or after, places a much lower value on income (than probably we should). Again, maybe this is just the granola hippie freaks with whom I associate, but I'd like to think not. I think we watched the baby-boomers retire early and move to places with good climates and other benefits, and we said, "hey wait, why should I wait until retirement?" In my opinion, with that, came a greater sense of awareness of the natural environment. Because we made so many choices based on physical environment--we also have a greater interest in protecting that environment. We've replaced family with trees and mountains--we get our human companionship from the internet. Although on the other hand, I would think that if we still all lived where are family had lived for generations, then we'd have a vested interest in not polluting the physical environment.

I don't know, the more I read myself think, the more I think I'm full of shit.

Mortgage "Crisis"

Ok, as I stated in the introductory post, I recently bought a house. Yes, I bought just before the "bubble" popped. I swear, with my luck, people should have paid me NOT to buy. Anyway, now as we hear 75 times a day, the mortgage industry is in crisis, foreclosures are on the rise, and our new fed chairman has lowered interest rates AGAIN. How does this help me? Not a bit.

Here's the situation. I got two loans when I bought my house. One for 80% of the value and one for 10%. The mortgage broker told me that I could refinance in 9 months and consolidate the loans into one because "housing prices in Flagstaff are guaranteed to go up." I'm not sure why I listen to these people---lesson to all you out there who have not purchased a house--if you are smart enough to program your VCR, chances are, you're smarter than the average real estate agent or mortgage broker! Do not take their words for anything. Not only that, but he talked me into an interest-only loan for the 80% which means I haven't built up any equity--wise choice, genius!

So now that home prices in Flagstaff have gone down, there is no chance I will be able to consolidate the two loans--so what about just refinancing the bigger of the two loans? Well the problem there is that there is a chance that the value of the home has dropped so significantly, that what used to be an 80% loan, is now a somewhat larger percentage--so I would need to come up with money to make it equal to 80%--plus I would owe the previous loan company the difference. So I thought maybe I could pay off my smaller loan with my mutual fund money and then refinance the bigger loan. Wouldn't you know it, now the stock market is plunging into the depths of hell and if I sell my mutual funds now, my return would be less than ideal.

So what's a girl to do?

Politics of Fear

I can't resist talking about politics since the airwaves are jammed with the upcoming election.

I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and I'm not ashamed to say it. One of Nader's phrases that resonated with me was "Vote your hopes, not your fears." Call me naive but I really respect that sentiment--especially in the primaries. One of the things that always bugged me about the Democrats post Election 2000 debacle was their insistence that people like me lost the election for Al Gore. But rather than come to folks like me (whacko liberals) and ask us what it was that we didn't like about Gore's campaign and how could they bring us into the fray--they chose to use guilt and fear. "If you don't vote for the democrat in 2004, you'll get another 4 years of Bush." Ok, so most of us did and look where it got us. Why? Because the republicans are way better at fear mongering than the democrats. Be afraid of the flip-flopper--he might actually re-think a bad decision one day.

But now, with the 2008 election approaching, fear is the dominant force again. First it was "don't vote for Hillary, she'll never win the general election." I admit, I probably had that thought--but it took a back seat to my general dislike for her. Thanks to the media--who couldn't wait to pit a woman against an African-American--we overcame that fear. Then, it was Hillary's campaign that joined in the "fearleading." Even though Joe Biden and Bill Richardson are WAY more qualified and WAY more suited to lead this country--we can't vote for them because they are second tier candidates--they don't have a chance to win the nomination--the media says so. So many people interviewed in Iowa and New Hampshire leading up to the caucus and primary said "well, I really prefer Biden, but I'll vote for Obama because he had a better chance at winning." or "Bill Richardson is obviously the most qualified, but I'm going with Hillary because she has more money." Voting their fears. I fear my chosen candidate won't have enough support--therefore I vow to make it so. I'm not going to go into the media's role in all this--that will be another day's rant.

When did our hopes take a backseat to our fears? How did this happen? Don't tell me 911--because it started way before that?

Introduction

Recently, I've been plagued with thoughts, ideas, and complaints about work, politics, culture--you name it. So I've decided to create an outlet for myself to vent. Maybe others will participate and a discussion will be born--or maybe not. Perhaps my thoughts will be left dangling like so many participles in blogs and emails.

In the past, I've tried to create a blog. Unfortunately, it was titled Ike and Rita's adventures, and sadly after a trip to Thailand, Ike and Rita decided to buy a house instead of embarking on another adventure (not that buying the house wasn't an adventure). You can see the blog at http://www.ikeandrita.blogspot.com/. I decided not to set my sights so high this time--just rants that's all I need.