I suppose I should mention that Christmas wasn't nearly as horrific as I was braced for it to be.
All in all, it was pretty good: only one present in that class we all know, where you stare at the present and say to yourself "What made you think that was appropriate for ME?" while politely thanking the person for the lovely present......and lots of lovely desirable stuff.
No uneasiness or stuff that can be best defined as insufficiently lubricated human interaction. On the other hand, I did apply a certain amount of Captain Morgan Lubricant when I started to stress out, and it worked admirably.
Anyway, the pictures are here:
http://www.faloshi-studios.com/xmas1.html
Oh, and to my vast astonishment, and probably everyone else's, I actually got all my genealogical webpages updated! (last update date was "31 december 2001" before this)
http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~piglet/
31 December 2007
Death and Destruction....feeling like Robert Oppenheimer....
Arose Saturday to find a handful of very small ants wandering about in the bathroom.
Made a mental note to get something chemical to treat the situation, when next I sallied forth to the store, stomped a couple of them, and went about my business.
Noticed that by Sunday morning there were several dozen, and still only in the bathroom; as best I could ascertain, they were coming up alongside the heat vent.
Felt the need to tackle it with chemicals, and explored what I had available. Nothing logical for the purpose, but what the hey, try what's at hand.
Zotted the buggers (cringe, sorry) with Windex Multi-Task and waited. They had some difficulty wading, but otherwise continued. Tried Niagara Spray Starch in desperation.
By Sunday evening, there were probably a hundred ants, many of them Very Clean and/or with Rigid Posture, but otherwise quite healthy-appearing. They were starting to explore the world outside the bathroom. It...er....bugged me (re-cringe) too much to let it ride until Monday morning.
So after a complete waste-of-time Colts game, at nearly midnight, I braved the cold to tackle the 24-hour Kroger on a quest for Insect Toxicity. Found a selection of sprays; chose the least expensive, least obnoxious sounding scented one (yes, bug spray now comes Perfumed To Be Mistaken For Air Freshener) and headed for home.
Applied the spray most thoroughly to the floor and lower four inches or so of the walls of my small bathroom, turned the fan on, and closed the door, lest I take myself or either of the cats out with the ants. Tiptoed in one last time, about an hour later, for the pre-bed rituals, saw a few ants still moving, zotted them again.
Closed door, went off to sleep.
Arose on Monday morning and betook myself to the bathroom.
Wow.
A floor dotted with corpses of small ants. Nothing moving at all.
Wait: three ants, in the small area between the heat vent and the wall. Had the poison not worked? No, these were explorers from the home colony, looking to see what had happened to the battalion they'd sent forth the evening before, who had not returned home.
And all I could see was their horror at the devastation: the death and toxicity they saw around them; the shudders I surely imagined---for they were too small for me to see such movement, even in the unlikely case that ants can shudder.
And then they betook themselves back down the heat vent, quite possibly fatally poisoned themselves, to report back to the home colony and die.
A necessary victory over nature inside the house, but one I find I'm not terribly proud of......
Made a mental note to get something chemical to treat the situation, when next I sallied forth to the store, stomped a couple of them, and went about my business.
Noticed that by Sunday morning there were several dozen, and still only in the bathroom; as best I could ascertain, they were coming up alongside the heat vent.
Felt the need to tackle it with chemicals, and explored what I had available. Nothing logical for the purpose, but what the hey, try what's at hand.
Zotted the buggers (cringe, sorry) with Windex Multi-Task and waited. They had some difficulty wading, but otherwise continued. Tried Niagara Spray Starch in desperation.
By Sunday evening, there were probably a hundred ants, many of them Very Clean and/or with Rigid Posture, but otherwise quite healthy-appearing. They were starting to explore the world outside the bathroom. It...er....bugged me (re-cringe) too much to let it ride until Monday morning.
So after a complete waste-of-time Colts game, at nearly midnight, I braved the cold to tackle the 24-hour Kroger on a quest for Insect Toxicity. Found a selection of sprays; chose the least expensive, least obnoxious sounding scented one (yes, bug spray now comes Perfumed To Be Mistaken For Air Freshener) and headed for home.
Applied the spray most thoroughly to the floor and lower four inches or so of the walls of my small bathroom, turned the fan on, and closed the door, lest I take myself or either of the cats out with the ants. Tiptoed in one last time, about an hour later, for the pre-bed rituals, saw a few ants still moving, zotted them again.
Closed door, went off to sleep.
Arose on Monday morning and betook myself to the bathroom.
Wow.
A floor dotted with corpses of small ants. Nothing moving at all.
Wait: three ants, in the small area between the heat vent and the wall. Had the poison not worked? No, these were explorers from the home colony, looking to see what had happened to the battalion they'd sent forth the evening before, who had not returned home.
And all I could see was their horror at the devastation: the death and toxicity they saw around them; the shudders I surely imagined---for they were too small for me to see such movement, even in the unlikely case that ants can shudder.
And then they betook themselves back down the heat vent, quite possibly fatally poisoned themselves, to report back to the home colony and die.
A necessary victory over nature inside the house, but one I find I'm not terribly proud of......
23 December 2007
Linguistic Oddity: Intermission
[I'm fascinated by language. I think I'm going to start interjecting the odd bit of wordplay in this blog; they'll all be labelled "language."]
Two words. Cognate equivalents. But they aren't even the same part of speech. What does that tell us about gender equality?
effeminate
emasculate
One's an adjective: effeminate is how something or someone *is*. No matter what you do---remove her ovaries and breasts, change her behavior to super-macho, you cannot "effeminate" a woman.
But the other is only a verb: see a rather butch female walking down the road, you don't say "Ooh, doesn't she strike you as a bit emasculate?"
Something to ponder.........
Two words. Cognate equivalents. But they aren't even the same part of speech. What does that tell us about gender equality?
effeminate
emasculate
One's an adjective: effeminate is how something or someone *is*. No matter what you do---remove her ovaries and breasts, change her behavior to super-macho, you cannot "effeminate" a woman.
But the other is only a verb: see a rather butch female walking down the road, you don't say "Ooh, doesn't she strike you as a bit emasculate?"
Something to ponder.........
22 December 2007
Irreconcilable Similarities.....
The divorce process was a bit weird....first we sat through a couple of other cases, one of which was truly bizarre. Echoes of Monty Python.
Wife. Husband. Lawyer. Interpreter.
Judge explained to the husband that he was in default, so it was all right if he wanted to be there, as long as he understood he Wasn't Actually There. He decided that since he Wasn't Actually There, perhaps he should be Not Actually There, and departed...
Wife spoke no English; lawyer spoke no Spanish. Ergo, interpreter.
Interpreter had problems grasping that he had to a) always tell the court what she said and b) not tell her what the "correct" answer was that she should be giving. Judge explained repeatedly, but we kept going through the same steps, same dance...
Lawyer asked her all the pro forma questions in full bore legalese. Whenever her response was that she didn't understand the question, he would ask it again, word for word the same, but slower and more loudly. When the judge suggested he use simple English, he didn't seem to know what that was---or would simplify entirely the wrong part of the sentence.
For example, he would take the sentence "It is your belief that there is no chance that future attempts at reconciliation will be successful, is that correct?" and would "simplify" it to "You think that there is no chance that future attempts at reconciliation will be successful, is that correct?"
Finally the judge stepped in and told the translator to translate "You don't think you'll be getting back together ever?" The lawyer couldn't grasp that.
Also, since the husband was in default, pretty much anything the wife asked for, she'd have gotten. Instead, her lawyer asked that her divorce be made final with *nothing* settled: no maintenance, no child support, no visitation, no custody worked out.
Judge ripped him a new one, not even lowering her voice, in front of everyone: made it very clear that she didn't believe the lawyer had made much effort for the client to understand what was going on, and that the client likely didn't understand what the lawyer was doing, and refused to settle.
Then it was our nickel.
Got asked the standard question about "irreconcilable differences", and "....future attempts at reconciliation." Okay, I understand courts are fairly solemn, and I did resist the temptation to do the Carol Merrill "voila" presentation aimed at my now-female ex and respond with "ya think?"
But I couldn't help it; I still answered with something along the lines of "Gee, I really don't think so" on the reconciliation.
Wasn't until after we left that I realized that the correct label wasn't irreconcilable differences. It was irreconcilable similarities: I wanted a marriage with one from column A and one from column B, and had found myself in a marriage with two from column A and nobody in column B at all.
Anyroad, we capped off the day with a dinner in Greektown and then getting reasonably tiddly. Other than that, not much significance........
Wife. Husband. Lawyer. Interpreter.
Judge explained to the husband that he was in default, so it was all right if he wanted to be there, as long as he understood he Wasn't Actually There. He decided that since he Wasn't Actually There, perhaps he should be Not Actually There, and departed...
Wife spoke no English; lawyer spoke no Spanish. Ergo, interpreter.
Interpreter had problems grasping that he had to a) always tell the court what she said and b) not tell her what the "correct" answer was that she should be giving. Judge explained repeatedly, but we kept going through the same steps, same dance...
Lawyer asked her all the pro forma questions in full bore legalese. Whenever her response was that she didn't understand the question, he would ask it again, word for word the same, but slower and more loudly. When the judge suggested he use simple English, he didn't seem to know what that was---or would simplify entirely the wrong part of the sentence.
For example, he would take the sentence "It is your belief that there is no chance that future attempts at reconciliation will be successful, is that correct?" and would "simplify" it to "You think that there is no chance that future attempts at reconciliation will be successful, is that correct?"
Finally the judge stepped in and told the translator to translate "You don't think you'll be getting back together ever?" The lawyer couldn't grasp that.
Also, since the husband was in default, pretty much anything the wife asked for, she'd have gotten. Instead, her lawyer asked that her divorce be made final with *nothing* settled: no maintenance, no child support, no visitation, no custody worked out.
Judge ripped him a new one, not even lowering her voice, in front of everyone: made it very clear that she didn't believe the lawyer had made much effort for the client to understand what was going on, and that the client likely didn't understand what the lawyer was doing, and refused to settle.
Then it was our nickel.
Got asked the standard question about "irreconcilable differences", and "....future attempts at reconciliation." Okay, I understand courts are fairly solemn, and I did resist the temptation to do the Carol Merrill "voila" presentation aimed at my now-female ex and respond with "ya think?"
But I couldn't help it; I still answered with something along the lines of "Gee, I really don't think so" on the reconciliation.
Wasn't until after we left that I realized that the correct label wasn't irreconcilable differences. It was irreconcilable similarities: I wanted a marriage with one from column A and one from column B, and had found myself in a marriage with two from column A and nobody in column B at all.
Anyroad, we capped off the day with a dinner in Greektown and then getting reasonably tiddly. Other than that, not much significance........
20 December 2007
Single again.....
Well, the divorce is final, for whatever that's worth.....
it's totally anticlimactic, just an accounting detail. Can't see where it makes any difference in my life in any practical sense except for the IRS part of the deal.....
Now to survive the whole Fambly Crispness Holly Day in one (emotional) piece and we'll be fine....
did some serious grandbaby time after finals were over (1 A, 2 Bs, 1 C, I've seen worse semesters...)
Just in time for snow......
Babies rock :)
it's totally anticlimactic, just an accounting detail. Can't see where it makes any difference in my life in any practical sense except for the IRS part of the deal.....
Now to survive the whole Fambly Crispness Holly Day in one (emotional) piece and we'll be fine....
did some serious grandbaby time after finals were over (1 A, 2 Bs, 1 C, I've seen worse semesters...)
Just in time for snow......
Babies rock :)
05 December 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
