Look, I am not a hockey fan. To me, the hockey season just started because the playoffs are the only thing that matter in an 82+ game season. I think Friday night was the first time I realized it was a penalty to clear the puck from your goal in hopes to run down the clock (icing, which seems like an idiotic penalty). But if there's one thing I know about hockey, it is this: I don't want to be a Penguins fan, or more appropriately: I don't want to be a Penguins fan if there's an option to be a Flyers fan. This really comes down to one reason: toughness.
Hockey is a contact sport. In fact, hockey is probably the contact sport. Hockey is more fast-paced than (American) football and has harder contact than basketball and soccer/football. Baseball has no real contact (one slide into home plate every 43 games doesn't count), and no other sport is popular enough to warrant mention. Hockey is also the only sport that allows fighting. Sure, you may get penalized for engaging in the timeless art of fisticuffs, but there's a good chance you're not getting ejected and suspended for a quarter of the season (and if you're an NFL player, you'd probably have to go to a six-week seminar on concussion education and if your name is James Harrison you'd get fined $400,000 (OK, now I'm just complaining)). It's for those reasons I mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph that I'm going to root for one of the (if not, the) toughest team(s) in the league (Hey, it works for the NFL, why shouldn't it work for a tougher sport?)
Now, I'll make a concession here. I can't continue to be a Steelers fan (and maintain my belief that they've become the greatest franchise in the NFL) and tell you that the Flyers are a better franchise than the Penguins. It cannot be true because the Penguins have more Stanley Cup victories than the Flyers (and all of them more recently than the Flyers' last one). So the Penguins franchise may be a better franchise now than the Flyers (and it's been true for a number of years), but they certainly are less respectable as a franchise.
Why do they deserve less respect? It's because of toughness. No one questions the toughness of the Philadelphia Flyers. Everyone is free to do so with the Penguins. Sure, a single Penguin (by the way, that's a fantastically fruity mascot if you ask me (although, to be honest, paper advertisements (Flyers) aren't too scary either)) player may accidentally be tough once (I mean, look at Malkin, he's an ugly Russian, I'll give them that), but the team is far from tough. Watching the playoff game now, I can see the Penguins with their playoff "beards"; they each look like they can grow a beard as well as I can (that's an insult to them, or it should be). The face of the franchise, Mr. Sidney Crosby (no surprise that he has a unisex name...), would probably lose a fight to a Care Bear. I think the only battle that co-owner and previous face of the franchise, Mario Lemieux, won was the battle to open his container of hair gel this morning. On the other hand, when you look at the Flyers, you get a group of guys with shovels as faces. I think the entire team combined has fewer teeth than I do. Bobby Clarke's image makes toddlers (and even some of the weaker adolescents) cry.
So Penguins fans, when you call us "Philthy", we take it as a compliment. Also, please stop pointing out small exceptions to the rule: just because a Penguin has a single tough moment, doesn't mean your franchise is tough. No one questions the toughness of the Broad Street Bullies. Well, no one has and lived to tell about it.
15 April 2012
08 April 2012
Complaint #029: Politics
I hold this truth to be self-evident: that all men (and women) were created equally. When we force an imbalance upon this, I think people don't know how to appropriately cope. Yet, we, as a society, feel the need to impose a hierarchy upon ourselves. Why we feel we need this, I'll never know, but we do. As if we needed confirmation on this, I'm going to give it to you: besides the fact that every major society in the world (that I know of) has some sort of governmental structure, let's look at the Israelites. Despite having a perfect leader (God) and a series of judges, after having been redeemed from an oppressive leadership, the Israelites demanded a king (if this notion is unfounded to you, try First Samuel 8).
The problem that arises when we elevate people into positions over us, is that we expect them to be better than us and forget that all men (and women) are created equal and none of us is perfect. Take a look at the American government: we put a singular man (ok, this time I don't have to say "or woman" yet) in a specific elevated position, demand him to solve unsolvable problems, and when he doesn't live up to our astronomical expectations and despite the 400-some-odd other men we elected in Washington, we kill him (not literally, of course, although some people who take politics wwwaaayyy too seriously, sadly, I'm sure would like to).
The problem with human leaders is that the people most qualified to lead are the same people smart enough to avoid being leaders. If you don't believe me, take in the following wise words:
So let me get to the main reason that I hate politics (because mainly I don't give a crap and just ignore it/them (I'm not quite sure if "politics" is plural)). Here's politics in a nutshell: people argue about problems that can't be solved, and the best we can do falls into two categories and personal preferences/priorities define which option is better and then people just continue to try to push their preferences and priorities on others and they don't have the authority to do so (basically, politics is subjective and we treat it as objective).
People may find me stupid or inconsiderate, but that's the way I feel about it. So I find politics not only annoying, but mainly immaterial (or, at least, of lesser importance than I need to worry about). I don't inform myself and I'm pretty sure I'm giving it up all together (it's probably better for the uninformed to not vote anyway).
Let the boys play their games, I'll work on bettering my own world and focusing on the true leader of my life.
The problem that arises when we elevate people into positions over us, is that we expect them to be better than us and forget that all men (and women) are created equal and none of us is perfect. Take a look at the American government: we put a singular man (ok, this time I don't have to say "or woman" yet) in a specific elevated position, demand him to solve unsolvable problems, and when he doesn't live up to our astronomical expectations and despite the 400-some-odd other men we elected in Washington, we kill him (not literally, of course, although some people who take politics wwwaaayyy too seriously, sadly, I'm sure would like to).
The problem with human leaders is that the people most qualified to lead are the same people smart enough to avoid being leaders. If you don't believe me, take in the following wise words:
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them. To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
– Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe
One day the trees went out to anoint a king for themselves. They said to the olive tree, "Be our king." But the olive tree answered, "Should I give up my oil, by which both gods and humans are honored, to hold sway over the trees?" Next, the trees said to the fig tree, "Come and be our king." But the fig tree replied, "Should I give up my fruit, so good and sweet, to hold sway over the trees?" Then the trees said to the vine, "Come and be our king." But the vine answered, "Should I give up my wine, which cheers both gods and humans, to hold sway over the trees?"
Finally all the trees said to the thornbush, "Come and be our king."
– Judges 9:8-14
So let me get to the main reason that I hate politics (because mainly I don't give a crap and just ignore it/them (I'm not quite sure if "politics" is plural)). Here's politics in a nutshell: people argue about problems that can't be solved, and the best we can do falls into two categories and personal preferences/priorities define which option is better and then people just continue to try to push their preferences and priorities on others and they don't have the authority to do so (basically, politics is subjective and we treat it as objective).
People may find me stupid or inconsiderate, but that's the way I feel about it. So I find politics not only annoying, but mainly immaterial (or, at least, of lesser importance than I need to worry about). I don't inform myself and I'm pretty sure I'm giving it up all together (it's probably better for the uninformed to not vote anyway).
Let the boys play their games, I'll work on bettering my own world and focusing on the true leader of my life.
25 March 2012
Complaint #028: Buses
Let me be honest with you for a little bit: I started this blog and consequently, the "Your Complaints" page, with the full intention of taking your complaints as inspirations for posts of mine. However, I haven't really gotten a suggestion about which I felt inspired enough to write an entire post (although I have touched on some of them). But Refining by Fire Hall of Fame reader and commenter Chelsea Gillus deserves to have at least one of her topics written about on here. So I'm going to write about one of her suggestions and it'll snowball into this full topic on buses.
Chelsea, at one point, said I should write about the other people on public buses. Now as a bus rider, by definition, I am one of those other people of the public bus, but I'd like to think I follow bus etiquette quite well. I imagine she (along with myself) is not fond of people who don't heed the following rules:
Now I'll be even more honest with you guys and tell you that I feel insecure about how people perceive my transportation situation (the fact that I don't drive) and even though I shouldn't care what mere humans think of me (the only judgment I need be concerned with is that from above), I feel the need to prove that I am self-sufficient even without a driver's license (never mind the fact that ten months ago I moved a thousand miles away from any place I'd ever lived before which required the use of my parents' ability to drive). Because of this, I am reticent to complaint about buses at all, but I also feel the need to be honest, open, and realistic to everyone (in an overall and general sense, not just in the blogosphere), so here goes:
There is an inherent unfairness to the fact that if a person is late (or even sometimes on time) to a bus stop, he/she must wait for the next bus, but buses are free to be as late as they want. Or, in the rare case, they are early and screw over people who were just on time.
One thing I miss about the Pittsburgh bus system is that you could essentially get a bus from anywhere to anywhere whereas out here in Madison you often need to transfer once or twice to get where you need to go. Example: From the point I moved until this past Friday (I'll talk more about that later) I was taking three buses each way to and from work. One bus to the transfer point near my apartment, another to the transfer point across town (because the bus to work only took off from there), and then the last bus to work (and the reverse on the way home).
This stacked up to a whopping 75 minute trip each way which I will admit, is a bit ridiculous. Now, I feel the need to justify this "wasted time", so I will say that it was a great time to do some reading. Reading is one of those things I love to do, but only when it doesn't take away from my normal life activities. If I have the opportunity to watch a movie or waste time complaining on the internet to the fifteen people who will read it, those are the things I'm going to do rather than read. However, over the past ten months I've read probably more than my entire life up until that point (31 books since I moved, according to my count) which I think is great.
Fast forward to tomorrow: Madison Metro and my great employer, Epic, have heard the cries of their people (mainly Epic has heard the cries of losers like me that the bus is overcrowded, although I don't think I ever explicitly said anything) and have started a new bus route. It just so happens to go right near my apartment complex and looks like it'll save me about an hour a day in the morning, so I'm curious to see how well I spend the time I've "saved".
Chelsea, at one point, said I should write about the other people on public buses. Now as a bus rider, by definition, I am one of those other people of the public bus, but I'd like to think I follow bus etiquette quite well. I imagine she (along with myself) is not fond of people who don't heed the following rules:
- If anyone (besides the person that you are talking to) can hear you, be quieter
- If anyone (besides yourself) can hear your iPod, make it quieter
- Have your bus fare ready prior to boarding the bus
- Bags/Purses/etc. are free to have a seat until critical mass is hit. Critical mass is defined as the point at which each person has a free seat next to them.
- Be at the bus stop prior to the scheduled bus arrival time
- Don't wave down the bus at a place that isn't a bus stop
- If you requested to get off the bus and if possible, make attempts at being at the door prior to the bus stopping
Now I'll be even more honest with you guys and tell you that I feel insecure about how people perceive my transportation situation (the fact that I don't drive) and even though I shouldn't care what mere humans think of me (the only judgment I need be concerned with is that from above), I feel the need to prove that I am self-sufficient even without a driver's license (never mind the fact that ten months ago I moved a thousand miles away from any place I'd ever lived before which required the use of my parents' ability to drive). Because of this, I am reticent to complaint about buses at all, but I also feel the need to be honest, open, and realistic to everyone (in an overall and general sense, not just in the blogosphere), so here goes:
There is an inherent unfairness to the fact that if a person is late (or even sometimes on time) to a bus stop, he/she must wait for the next bus, but buses are free to be as late as they want. Or, in the rare case, they are early and screw over people who were just on time.
One thing I miss about the Pittsburgh bus system is that you could essentially get a bus from anywhere to anywhere whereas out here in Madison you often need to transfer once or twice to get where you need to go. Example: From the point I moved until this past Friday (I'll talk more about that later) I was taking three buses each way to and from work. One bus to the transfer point near my apartment, another to the transfer point across town (because the bus to work only took off from there), and then the last bus to work (and the reverse on the way home).
This stacked up to a whopping 75 minute trip each way which I will admit, is a bit ridiculous. Now, I feel the need to justify this "wasted time", so I will say that it was a great time to do some reading. Reading is one of those things I love to do, but only when it doesn't take away from my normal life activities. If I have the opportunity to watch a movie or waste time complaining on the internet to the fifteen people who will read it, those are the things I'm going to do rather than read. However, over the past ten months I've read probably more than my entire life up until that point (31 books since I moved, according to my count) which I think is great.
Fast forward to tomorrow: Madison Metro and my great employer, Epic, have heard the cries of their people (mainly Epic has heard the cries of losers like me that the bus is overcrowded, although I don't think I ever explicitly said anything) and have started a new bus route. It just so happens to go right near my apartment complex and looks like it'll save me about an hour a day in the morning, so I'm curious to see how well I spend the time I've "saved".
18 March 2012
Complaint #027: Ice
Look, I enjoy a nice cold drink as much as the next guy, but only to a certain cost. That cost is something less than putting ice cubes in my drink. It just isn't worth all the toil and unpleasantness. However, there are some solutions that lessen the pain.
Problem number one: this isn't a huge issue, but when you place ice into a drink, you violate the integrity of the drink by watering it down. I wanted to drink lemonade, not 95% lemonade with water in it. This is probably the reason people don't put ice in their milk or orange juice. Wake up people, it's no different from throwing ice into Coke or the poorly named "iced tea" (which, obviously, I prefer without ice).
Problem number two: creating ice. Again, not a big deal, but a minor annoyance if you don't own one of those fancy dancy refrigerators that makes its own ice. Having to fill up ice cube trays every twelfth cube, balance the tray perfectly back to the fridge from the sink, and set it on a perfectly level surface in your freezer is a bit toilsome.
The big problem: ice floats. This causes enormous issues: the first of which is that the cubes bang against your lip and front teeth every time you try to take a sip of that delicious beverage. This is painful to those of us with sensitive teeth (I think, I don't really know, it's been so long since I've actually had a drink like this). Not only that, but the cubes get in the way of you gulping down that liquid delight and you end up sucking in about four milliliters after trying to drink for the past 85 seconds.
Simple solutions: I don't mind getting ice in my drink while I'm at a restaurant because they give you the magical ice-problem destroyer: the straw. It won't solve problem one, and problem two is on the restaurant management, but it definitely eradicates the big ice problem.
Also, I love iced coffee. This is probably because I have managed to burn myself on every hot cup of coffee from which I've ever had the displeasure of drinking. Also, most iced coffee comes with that fantastic invention mentioned above.
Final point: we need a good way to invent cold, non-floating ice capsules that do not water down drinks. C'mon scientists, you owe us this one.
Problem number one: this isn't a huge issue, but when you place ice into a drink, you violate the integrity of the drink by watering it down. I wanted to drink lemonade, not 95% lemonade with water in it. This is probably the reason people don't put ice in their milk or orange juice. Wake up people, it's no different from throwing ice into Coke or the poorly named "iced tea" (which, obviously, I prefer without ice).
Problem number two: creating ice. Again, not a big deal, but a minor annoyance if you don't own one of those fancy dancy refrigerators that makes its own ice. Having to fill up ice cube trays every twelfth cube, balance the tray perfectly back to the fridge from the sink, and set it on a perfectly level surface in your freezer is a bit toilsome.
The big problem: ice floats. This causes enormous issues: the first of which is that the cubes bang against your lip and front teeth every time you try to take a sip of that delicious beverage. This is painful to those of us with sensitive teeth (I think, I don't really know, it's been so long since I've actually had a drink like this). Not only that, but the cubes get in the way of you gulping down that liquid delight and you end up sucking in about four milliliters after trying to drink for the past 85 seconds.
Simple solutions: I don't mind getting ice in my drink while I'm at a restaurant because they give you the magical ice-problem destroyer: the straw. It won't solve problem one, and problem two is on the restaurant management, but it definitely eradicates the big ice problem.
Also, I love iced coffee. This is probably because I have managed to burn myself on every hot cup of coffee from which I've ever had the displeasure of drinking. Also, most iced coffee comes with that fantastic invention mentioned above.
Final point: we need a good way to invent cold, non-floating ice capsules that do not water down drinks. C'mon scientists, you owe us this one.
11 March 2012
Complaint #026: Kony 2012
If you have not seen this video yet, I'd rather you spend your time doing so than reading my little rant (although reading my post is a nice afterthought).
That being said, I do not want Joseph Kony brought to justice. You read that right, I do NOT want Joseph Kony brought to justice. Do I want his crimes to come to an end? Yes. But do I want him brought to justice? No. Before you get out your pitchforks and torches, let me explain why.
I'll first define what bringing him to justice means. I'm thinking it; you're thinking it; we're all thinking it, and even if someone weren't, I'll prove, to the best of my ability, that to bring justice upon him is to kill him. He deserves it right? I mean, he's killed and raped large numbers people, abducted tens of thousands of children and forced them to act as soldiers, and he has displaced millions from their homes. The only thing worth doing to him is ending his life, correct? The wages of sin is death therefore he deserves to die. The problem is that we all deserve to die. We have all chosen a path that leads to death: me, you, Joseph Kony, and yes, even Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. We have all chosen to sin and deserve death for that. We are all sinners to be stoned, and none of us is worthy to throw the first stone.
Take a look at your Bible. It's written by a bunch of murderers. Moses, who wrote the entire Torah, killed an Egyptian. David, a man after God's own heart, had an affair with a woman and had her husband killed to hide the resultant pregnancy (you could probably categorize his sexual intercourse with her as rape, as well). Paul, writer of much of the New Testament, was the leader of a group that hunted down and slaughtered Christians. Would you have brought these people to justice for their crimes? I'm pretty sure I would have, but it's not the mentality I should have.
No man is beyond redemption. This is why we should love the sinner (hate the sin? yes, but more importantly, love the sinner). This is why we are not worthy to cast the first stone. This is why an eye for an eye leads to the whole world going blind. This is why Atomic Opera, in their song "Justice", sung "I pray that I will never ask for justice". Yes, this does mean that Joseph Kony, Osama Bin Laden, Muammar Gaddafi, Joseph Stalin, and Adolph Hitler do not deserve justice served to them from fellow humans. Just because each treated others without regard to their humanity does not give us the excuse to act that way towards him. Justice comes from the King on High and He has already sent someone that redeemed all of us from our crimes.
So don't get me wrong, the video is fantastic. The plans it lays out are good, but let us focus on stopping these crimes for the sake of saving those being terrorized and not on bringing Joseph Kony to justice.
That being said, I do not want Joseph Kony brought to justice. You read that right, I do NOT want Joseph Kony brought to justice. Do I want his crimes to come to an end? Yes. But do I want him brought to justice? No. Before you get out your pitchforks and torches, let me explain why.
I'll first define what bringing him to justice means. I'm thinking it; you're thinking it; we're all thinking it, and even if someone weren't, I'll prove, to the best of my ability, that to bring justice upon him is to kill him. He deserves it right? I mean, he's killed and raped large numbers people, abducted tens of thousands of children and forced them to act as soldiers, and he has displaced millions from their homes. The only thing worth doing to him is ending his life, correct? The wages of sin is death therefore he deserves to die. The problem is that we all deserve to die. We have all chosen a path that leads to death: me, you, Joseph Kony, and yes, even Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. We have all chosen to sin and deserve death for that. We are all sinners to be stoned, and none of us is worthy to throw the first stone.
Take a look at your Bible. It's written by a bunch of murderers. Moses, who wrote the entire Torah, killed an Egyptian. David, a man after God's own heart, had an affair with a woman and had her husband killed to hide the resultant pregnancy (you could probably categorize his sexual intercourse with her as rape, as well). Paul, writer of much of the New Testament, was the leader of a group that hunted down and slaughtered Christians. Would you have brought these people to justice for their crimes? I'm pretty sure I would have, but it's not the mentality I should have.
No man is beyond redemption. This is why we should love the sinner (hate the sin? yes, but more importantly, love the sinner). This is why we are not worthy to cast the first stone. This is why an eye for an eye leads to the whole world going blind. This is why Atomic Opera, in their song "Justice", sung "I pray that I will never ask for justice". Yes, this does mean that Joseph Kony, Osama Bin Laden, Muammar Gaddafi, Joseph Stalin, and Adolph Hitler do not deserve justice served to them from fellow humans. Just because each treated others without regard to their humanity does not give us the excuse to act that way towards him. Justice comes from the King on High and He has already sent someone that redeemed all of us from our crimes.
So don't get me wrong, the video is fantastic. The plans it lays out are good, but let us focus on stopping these crimes for the sake of saving those being terrorized and not on bringing Joseph Kony to justice.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)