Every summer up until the summer after grade 9, I wore running shoes and
socks during the summer and got a hideous sock tan. I couldn't do anything
about the sock tan, however, because it was too hideous for me to brave
exposing my feet to the general public.

The summer after grade 10, I finally got brave enough to wear sandals in
public, and I've been wearing sandals all summer every summer ever since.
The last time I wore socks outside in the summer was in 1995. So why do I
still have the damn sock tan????

On an unrelated note, every couple of weeks I am accosted on the street by
someone trying to sell me a discount spa package. Do I look like I need a
spa or something? I'd go if it was free, but it isn't something I'd pay
for.

Note to the spa guy at Yonge & Sheppard today: to make your pitch more
effective, you need to:
1) say "Excuse me, ma'am," instead of just "Excuse me" (just excuse me makes
you sound like a lost tourist);
2) have a brochure or some literature in hand, or at least a nametag that
clearly identifies you as a spa employee. Having some random civilian guy
walk up to me and start talking about spa treatments is kind of creepy;
3) be (or at least act) gayer. If I must have a discussion about spa
treatments with a strange man (discussion with a strange man, not spa
treatments with a strange man), it's much more comfortable if he's
reasonably gay. But then that just might be my (politically incorrect,
borderline-objectifying) preference for gay men as customer service
representatives.

Why does the smell of popcorn stick around in the microwave for longer than
the smell of anything else?

Heard back from the Green candidate. Asked me to call him to discuss the issues I wrote about. Fair enough, but not quite what I was looking for - it seems to me that good public relations would include communicating with the public in the medium of their choice.

However, he loses points for spelling my name with a single letter where there should be a double letter. I hate it when people do that!

I read all the party platforms, and found that none of them answered all my
specific questions. Yes, they did have general information about how much
money they're going to throw at which programs, but I'm concerned about
issues within issues. For example, rather than how many jobs you're going
to create, I want to know what specific measures you'll take to encourage
businesses to create secure full-time permanent jobs with reasonable pay and
benefits instead of insecure contract positions. None of the party platforms
entirely addressed the specific aspects of the issues I care about the most.

So what I did was I sent an email to each of the four candidates running in
my riding. In this email I made it clear that I had read the platforms and
they didn't provide me the answers I was looking for. Then I asked five
specific questions that I couldn't find the answers to in the platforms. I
sent the same five questions to all the candidates, mentioned that all the
candidates were getting the same questions, and politely asked them to take
a moment out of their campaign to answer my questions.

It did occur to me that I might not get answers from all the candidates,
that I might not get answers from the candidates themselves but rather a
campaign worker, and that this might be irritating the candidates because
some of my questions were off-message. But I thought it important to define
my issues myself rather than letting the parties and the media do it for me,
and also I wanted to see what would happen.

I just got my first response back, from the NDP candidate. He gets points
for being the first to reply, for replying on a Sunday, and for under
24-hour turnaround time. However, all those points are swiftly taken away
because his response consisted of politely suggesting that I read the
platform. GAH! I did read the platform! I told him that! That is not so
very cool.

A lot of people find my blog by googling for "strumpet". Strange thing to google for. They're probably disappointed by what's here.

I hate how newspapers always publish polls indicating "X percent of
Canadians intend to vote for this party." That isn't what matters! What
matters is the number of ridings that are going to elect each party, so what
we need is riding by riding polls. I realize that the popular vote is often
a useful guideline, but it is of no importance whatsoever in situations like
ce que nous vivons, where there is a difference of only a couple of
percentage points between the two leading parties.

Ideally they should publish polls for each riding, if only to remind voters
that their vote only has an effect within their own riding. I'm concerned
that publishing TORIES ARE IN THE LEAD BY TWO PERCENTAGE POINTS! on the
front of every newspaper might encourage, for example, voters in Toronto to
vote Liberal so the Tories don't win, which would be a wasted vote if they
live in a riding that would never elect a Tory anyway.

Anyone know which current xian denomination Puritanism evolved into?

What Was She Thinking?: Notes on a Scandal by Zoe Heller. This book is a
fictional scandal where a high school teacher has an affair with a student,
as documented through the eyes of another teacher, who identifies herself as
the woman's best friend. What is fascinating about the book is that it has
the most unreliable narrator I've ever read, so it doesn't tell us as much
about the teacher who's having the affair as it does about the narrator.
It's all very psychological and handles the squicky subject matter with
excellent discretion. Worth reading even if just to appreciate the literary
devices.

Things they should invent: an F to M peeing device. It would be like a
strap-on dildo except the "penis" would be flaccid, and it would also
incorporate a non-invasive funnel-like thing that would cover the female
wearer's urethra. The female wearer would be able to stand up, unzip her
fly, take out the "penis", release her urine normally, and the urine would
come out the end of the "penis". It could also be made of just tubing, with
no attempt to make it physically resemble a penis, for women who want it to
be easier to pee outdoors but have no desire to walk around with male
genitals.

My computer starts to get sluggish and need rebooting about every 10 days. It doesn't freeze or crash until day 15, but on day 10 I start to notice that its performance is lagging.

Whenever this happens, I get grumpy. Oh, grumble grumble, stupid lazy 5-year-old computer, I should replace it, grumble grumble always needs rebooting grumble grumble.

After a bit of grumbling, I heave a world-weary sigh and start closing all the programs to reboot. When I get to the point where I'm disconnecting my DSL, I finally remember that it has been running for 10 days. Then I get all proud of my computer. Ten days, frequent multi-tasking, running games while Outlook is still checking email once per minute, resource-draining DSL connection software, constantly running a distributed computing program, and it doesn't show any signs of weariness until it's been running for 10 days straight. Not bad for a five-year-old computer!

Last Thursday, June 10, was the one year anniversary of same-sex marriage in
Ontario. While it is important that we continue to lobby for the
legalization of same-sex marriage in parts of the world where it has not yet
been legalized, and while it is important that, when voting in the upcoming
election, we keep in mind the need to get it legalized federally, under the
name marriage, for once and for all, the time has come to stop calling
same-sex marriages "same-sex marriages" and start calling them "marriages".
This is the final step in full equality, to indicate through our use of
language, that a same-sex marriage is just as much of a marriage as an
opposite-sex marriage. It's the same line of thinking that has eliminated
"lady doctor" and "male nurse" from the language.

We should take our cue from the Toronto Star's treatment, several months
back, of the first same-sex marriage involving a member of the Canadian
military. Several other newspapers ran small blurbish articles indicating
that John Doe [I forget his real name], a cadet at RMC, has made history by
marrying Pierre Untel. The Star instead wrote a small article to accompany
a larger article about some concert. They showed a picture of the happy
couple with a caption something like "Newlyweds John Doe, a cadet at RMC,
and Pierre Untel, a whatever his job is, attended whatever this concert is
while on their honeymoon." It looked exactly like one of those "here's
pictures of random people being moderately interesting" pictures. Brilliant
treatment!

I tried two new wines recently, and, surprisingly, I have teh same thing to say about both of them. The wines are Peter Lehmann Barossa Shiraz and Sumac Ridge Cabernet Merlot. Both of them taste mostly typical for their respective varieties, and they both start with a little "tangy zip" of something that I don't like very much. Unfortunately I don't know the word for the aspect I don't like, but you do become accustomed to that aspect after a few sips and then they are both perfectly serviceable reds. The unpleasant aspect may be cancelled out with appropriate food pairings, but I don't know how to do that.

I would just like to remind everyone involved in public discourse: there is
a world of difference between using referenda and free votes to make
decisions that either could give people further rights and freedoms or would
have no effect on rights and freedoms, and using free votes and referenda to
make decisions that could take away existing rights and freedoms.

If your address book contains my home email address and the email address of
someone named Cindy who works for the Toronto District School Board, you
have a virus on your computer. This has been a public service announcement.

Note to self: next time you think you've lost the foil things for the stove
burners, try looking in the cupboard above the stove.

I suppose you know the world really considers you a grownup when your alma
mater starts sending you fundraising solicitations.

An unfortunately-named right-wing organization recently came out in support of the idea of legalizing, regulating and taxing marijuana, which is surprising considering this organization's usual stance on things.

Now I have no problem with the idea, it seems like the kind of thing that could make everyone happy. However, they're going to have quite a challenge creating a regulation and taxation system that is easy and convenient enough both for suppliers and for users that they decide to come out from underground. We already have a very effective system for underground distribution of marijuana, but if there's too much red tape or regulated prices are too high, people might just continue to use the black market. I'm sure some people would use legal channels just because they are legal, but one might reasonably assume that most current users and suppliers consider the questionable legality of their activities to be an acceptable risk. Any new regulation system would have to be worth their while.

Proof that politics has taken a sharp swing to the right?

I did the 2004 Vote Selector, and it gave me, among other things, 38% for the Liberal party. Then I did the 2000 Vote Selector, using the knowledge and opinions that I have today, and it gave me, among other things, 50% for the TORIES! This would imply that the 2000 Tories are further left than today's Liberals! GAH!

I'd be interested in knowing if it does the same thing for anyone else, if you take both quizzes today using the knowledge and opinions that you have today.

I'm in a petty, bitchy mood, so here's a list of random things piss me off:

1. The weather. It does not need to be above 30 degrees, at all, ever.

2. Sporadic floaters in my eyes. I keep thinking I see something small moving out of the corner of my eye. Not a good thing when you have insect phobia.

3. Blog/LJ entries where the writer namedrops every person they know, usually all written in one big long paragraph. You don't need to name every person who was there last night, it just comes across as "OMG, look at me, I know so many people!" There's really no excuse for using more than five names to tell a story.

4. Unfocused writing in general. Especially when it crosses my desk for translation.

5. Grownups who get pissed off at their kids because they (the kids) demonstrate intelligence. Like their kid is an activist and cares passionately about their cause of choice, and the parents say disapprovingly "Well, when I was your age, the most important thing I worried about was whether I'd have a date for Saturday night."

6. Adults who claim that they would rather be a teenager than an adult. The first sign of aging is that you look back on your highschool self and don't shudder.

7. The fact that subway stations were designed without consideration for people who might be walking up the stairs wearing a skirt.

8. Radio commercials

9. People who incorporate religion into HP fanfic for no good reason. Particularly when they have religion in every single aspect of every single scene! To me, that shows a serious lack of imagination, if you can't write even one scene of a secular fictional universe without viewing it through a xian filter!

10. Did I mention the weather?