Hiding in the Backwaters Just one more blog on the net.

25Nov/070

The Golden Compass

Yes, I'm reading The Golden Compass. I needed to some light reading in part to fill the times on an airplane I can't use my laptop and in part to break up all the high-falootin' reading I've been doing lately. One can only read so much scholarly literature before one's brain goes to mush.

In an approach pioneered by Cleary, Humphreys, Kendrick, and Wesman (1975), a regression model is applied in which a test or indicator variable serves as the predictor variable, and the score on some important “gold standard” serves as the variable to be predicted. In this model, an indicator can be considered fair or unbiased for both groups only if the regression lines are the same for the groups in question. Regression lines can differ in both the slope of the line and its intercept value. Different slopes suggest that the indicator is differentially useful across levels of the indicator for the groups, whereas different intercepts suggest that the indicator is systematically over- or underpredicting the gold standard for some group.

Snooze-o-rama.

I picked this up not so much because of the impending movie release as a blurb in this month's issue of Out. It mentions the existence of two gay angel characters in the second book. Naturally my interest was piqued. I'm curious as to how that is presented in the book. I'll let you know when I get there.

Second book? Yes, it's a trilogy, a fact missing from all the marketing hype. Is the movie only the first book or all three? I don't know. I sure hope it's only the first. You try and munge a whole series into one movie and you are asking for a flop. Just ask Disney (The Black Cauldron) and 20th Century Fox (The Seeker: The Dark is Rising).

If the movie powers that be have a brain between them (which is often open to debate) they have produced the first book and are waiting to see how much money the first movie makes before committing to the other two. If the movie is as entertaining as the book, they should do well.

Filed under: Books, MSW No Comments
25Nov/070

Department of Homeland Stupidity

Remember when it was enough to say "Restricted Area. Authorized personnel only?" Does anyone have any doubts about what "security breach" implies? You'll be kissing the iron deck before you can say, "Jack Robinson." (Anyone know who Jack Robinson actually is?)

Every time I fly I am reminded what a joke airport security is these days. I bought two small snow-globes while in NY this trip. We neglected to put them in our checked bag because 1. we just didn't think about it and 2. they wouldn't have fit anyway. They were confiscated. Apparently they were worried they were special Batman snow-globes that would have filled the plane with acrid smoke had I thrown them down on the floor and shattered them. They were in D's backpack, who ended up in a different line than I, so I wasn't there for it. Probably just well. I think I would have had a hard time containing my contempt. I doubt there was even 3 oz. of liquid in each one. One of these days some damn fool is going to use his shoe laces to threaten a passenger or crew member with strangulation and no one will be allowed to wear lace up shoes on a plane anymore.

Is this really what we've come to? Does everyone feel safer now?

18Nov/070

N*W*C

Went and saw N*W*C a few weeks back. Posts like this one tend to sit for a while so I can make sure I'm saying what I want to say. Still feeling a little trepidatious about this one, but it's time to put a fork in it and call it done.

After the show I participated in a discussion group at a local coffee shop where I was one of three white people at a table of 9. I was, however, the only white person who was talking. I go to these things because I want to try and broaden my understanding of the human experience, but I usually end up walking away feeling like an ass. Not because of anything stupid or insensitive that I have said. I'm smarter and more aware than that. I walk away feeling like an ass because, regardless of my personal beliefs or my personal politics, I am white (and middle class male, to boot), and that automatically makes me one of them, one of the oppressors. I suppose I internalize those kind of messages way too easily, but that's a topic for another day.

Apparently N*W*C is quite controversial. Groups on campus really had their panties in a knot about the show. There were several power guest speakers that came in to "deconstruct" the play even before the curtain went up. From what I've been able to gather, people are upset because it takes too soft a stance on racial inequality. They spend a lot of time poking fun at stereotypes and I guess folk think that will give the masses permission to join in. I suppose I can see some rich, clueless white kid taking it the wrong way, but I find it hard to believe people would walk out of the show thinking it's okay to call a black man a n*gger. I thought it was pretty clear that is still not okay.

Some were uncomfortable or offended by how often n*gger, wetb*ck and ch*nk were said during the show, mostly (if I understood correctly) because of the comic context in which they were used. I really don't get that. Have you ever seen Chris Rock live? He drops the n-word all the time. "But he's black. That's different." Well, they each kept to the slur that fit the color of their skin. You didn't hear the Latino using n*gger, nor did the black man use ch*nk. So what's the big deal? Is it the venue? If the show were at a private theater and not a university campus would that be different? Think about comedy in general. If you pay attention, it's all about stereotypes. When the Asian fellow says, "Oh! And Asian people do know how to drive! We're just cautious" we all laugh because we know exactly what he's talking about. Because of the comic context I'm not sure it reinforces stereotypes nearly as well as getting stuck behind a car going 45 in a 55, finally being able to pass, and glancing over to find it piloted by an Asian person.

The more I think about it the more it sounded like the message was "we are more alike than we are different and we need to get past these rigid, ridiculous definitions of race." Not sure what the problem with that message is. Just because we aren't there yet doesn't mean we can't dream. And if no one dreams...well, how is it supposed to happen then?

There was a segment where each of the three--a black man, a Latino, and an Asian--took turns talking about the things in other stereotypes they wished they could be. For example, Asian men are often viewed as asexual. Hence, the Asian fellow talked about how he wanted to be seen as a mysterious, sex machine with the guaranteed ability to drive his woman to distraction in the bedroom. ("Big penis" was a running joke throughout the show: black = have, Asian = have not, but more on that in a minute.) That seemed to be one of the sticking points with the discussion group (which was primarily Asian for whatever reason). It seemed they didn't like the idea that not all stereotypes are bad and that some people might actually want to be seen that way.

The topic of passing came up since I, being gay, am "other" but can fake it if I want to. Thus my experience coming to terms with my sexuality can't compare with the experience of someone of color realizing the the color of their skin means something, and not something nice. We both had to come to terms with our position in society, but unlike me, a person of color can't usually pretend to be white. I didn't bring it up at the table and maybe I should have, but, honestly, I'm not sure that's an asset. Having to decide every single time if it is worth it to out yourself to some random sales clerk who assumes the flowers you're buying are for your wife gets old. Tiresome even. Most of the time I don't bother. I suppose I could camp it up like a friend of mine whose outrageous behavior is at least in part telling the world, "Don't you dare assume I'm straight." I could don glittery silk shirts and and rhinestone Elton John glasses. But none of those things is really me and would feel phony and affected. Sometimes I do wish I didn't have the choice to make and would prefer the stares and jeers of the uncouth.

Of course then you'd have the flip side of that coin. One of the young ladies at the table who is of Korean descent told the story of an experience in the hospital where a nurse entered the room and started making conversation based on all kinds of (incorrect) assumptions about her likes and dislikes just because she is Asian. Again, I probably should have asked if she corrected/educated the nurse and if she didn't then why not? Would it have been worse if the nurse had assumed she was white?

Right on the heels of that discussion came ex/non-Mormons. Some have likened their adjustment to living in a predominantly Mormon society to the oppression people of color feel. Several of the folk at the table take offense at that. They felt it devalues their experience. I could wade into treacherous territory here, but I'll just say I'm not sure how I feel about that. I don't feel its any more appropriate for me to assume the young lady at the table who self-identified as LDS is a repressed, homo-hating, pill-popping Mormon than it is for me to assume someone has grilled puppy for Sunday dinner because he is Korean. Is the distress a person of color feels worse than the distress of a white person in a minority? I don't know. Don't suppose I ever will.

Oh, getting back to "big penis." The ladies tired of the joke pretty quick. I didn't think it was excessive, but then, I'm a man. One lady said she wanted six people on stage three men and three women and that would give a more accurate picture. Accurate picture of what? Sorry, but that is the male experience. Having six people on stage would give a view of male/female interaction in the context of race, but if it were three women on stage it would give a completely different view. I'd be willing to bet they'd have been talking about boobs or Aunt Flo or something like that. The men in the audience would have tired of menstruation jokes just as quickly as women tired of penis jokes. Is one better than the other? I don't think so. Just different. The male experience is different from the female experience is different from the male-female experience.

Does all this have a point? I don't know. Probably not. Just ruminating on the experience.

Filed under: MSW, Sociology No Comments