heybebe

launch

2010-03-23T12:11:00.000-07:00

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for visiting. heybebe has moved to www.stephaniebe.com. Thanks to Henry Plant for layout and design.. essentially all of the backend work! See you at the new site!

heybebe

Will you survive?

2010-03-19T08:05:00.000-07:00

Survival of the fittest. The inherent, animalistic drive to preserve your own life and those of your progeny. The urge to reproduce for no reason other than your genetic obligation to the future.

I've been watching a lot of movies lately that, while not particularly mentally stimulating, were certainly suspenseful and entertaining. Each and every one depended critically on the understanding that it is human - and animal - nature to want to survive. In every movie, there was a predator of some sort and a good looking protagonist attempting to escape with his/her/their (whatever) life intact. The situations that people endure in order just to live, regardless of how that life might turn out, are astonishing. Granted, these are purely fictional situations, but without the universal acceptance that the only options in stressful situations are fight and flight, they would have no impact on mass audiences.

I wonder, then, how representative art is of life. There certainly exist people who do not express the urge to live (though, in the evolutionary scheme of things, these types of people would not be propagated to a great extent). In Titanic, there's the old couple that lies on the bed as the boat is sinking, knowing they lived full lives and not having the energy or desire to fight on. But what of the young people that simply have accepted their own mortality, that are at peace with their lives and find no desire to strive to live? Nobody wants to know about the boring person that gives up - that wouldn't make for very interesting film or literature. But I wonder how many of these people exist in real life, despite the fact that they are rarely portrayed in modern media?

We see this urge to fight every day in situations such as those in Haiti and New Orleans. People don't want to die. We see stories of incredible resilience and strength, of perseverance and hope. And yet, we never hear the stories of those that gave up. Perhaps there are not that many of them, based on Darwin's theory of evolution. Perhaps it is because they do not live to tell their tales; only the stories of those that survived are ever heard.

Fight or flight - the uncontrollable sympathetic nervous system response to stressful external stimuli. Why is there no third option? Are these our only choices? I suppose that it isn't truly a choice - you are unable to choose your hormonal and chemical responses to fear (although some may argue that fear itself IS the emotional response to stimuli..but we shall leave that for another day). Certainly there must exist people who experience different emotions under stressful situations. There are people who "deal with" stress better than others, who remain calm while others panic. Why, then, are there not other classes of people? I find that every time I have an exam or experience another stressor in my life, I become extremely somnolent. People frequently have trouble sleeping when they are stressed about upcoming deadlines; I tend to sleep even more than usual when I'm stressed. I've never pulled an all nighter the night before an exam because I physically become more drowsy in stressful or emotional situations.

It could be argued that humans are separated from animals by the ability to reason. People have the ability to make choices about the best course of action: to run or hide, turn left or right. But in the split second we have to make these choices, few would take the time or possess the mental wherewithal to weigh the pros and cons of the simplest decision of all - whether to live or to die. Once this determination has been made, we choose the best path to accomplish that goal. But the paramount issue, the difference between life and death, is a resolution we make far too rapidly to be conscious of.

I myself have never come face to face with a situation in which I must decide (consciously or subconsciously) whether I want to fight or give up. I sometimes think I might be the kind of person that has accepted my own mortality, that if Los Angeles were to fall into the ocean I wouldn't be one of the people fighting to live. It'd be much easier just to die. The dead do not care that they are dead; death is purely the business of the living. I am unafraid of death.

I hope I never have to encounter this situation. I have a feeling, however, that if I do, I'm not the one that's going to get to choose anyway.

Thank you to http://www.xarj.net/2009/end-of-the-world-animation/g for the image above

On "Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent"

2010-03-10T23:07:00.000-08:00

Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), recently published a study in the Social Psychology Quarterly on why liberals and atheists are more intelligent and perhaps more highly evolved. The original article can be found by following this link. The article is well-written and fairly interesting, if long and I certainly recommend reading it.

However, I don't necessarily recommend agreeing with everything Dr. K. attempts to argue. His study, though extensive, suffers from some significant problems.

Some background: "general intelligence" is defined as "the ability to...synthesize information and apply it to new domains." That is, "general intelligence" in this context is used to describe the genetic, inherent ability of certain individuals to respond to new stimuli and situations better than others. These more "intelligent" individuals are more likely to adopt values and behaviors that are relatively new to humans, specifically, liberalism, atheism and (for males) monogamy. However, there is no effect of "intelligence" on familiar values, such as children, marriage, family, and friends.

In order to test his theory, Kanazawa estimated the IQs of thousands of adolescents using a picture-based vocabulary test. He then questioned these individuals about their religious and political beliefs seven years later. He discovered that those who described themselves as "not at all religious" and "very political" had an IQ 11 points higher than those that were "very religious" and "very conservative." I will assume that Kanazawa is not a native English speaker and forgive him the semantic confusion of "atheists" and "agnostics."

Firstly, Kanazawa defines "general intelligence" as the ability to recognize and analyze new situations and to respond appropriately. However, there currently exists no qualitative method for testing this "general intelligence" that Kanazawa describes. In fact, his definition and explanation of this intelligence deviate from that of his peers, making it impossible to compare his descriptions to others'. However, he tests this problem-solving ability using a vocabulary test, which does not address problem-solving capabilities at all. This one-dimensional IQ test did control for sex, age, education, earnings, and religion; however, these controls had several flaws. The main flawed factor was "education," which was based on years of formal schooling. It is easy to see that formal education is not necessarily related to intelligence or problem-solving capabilities; a soldier who enlists in the military at age 17 may be significantly better at solving real-life, immediate problems than his college educated counterpart. Again, we return to the complication of what Kanazawa defines as intelligence and how he tests said intelligence.

Secondly, he defines "liberalism" as caring about others to whom you are not related, which is evolutionarily new. However, here he confuses "liberalism" with "caring about others." I do believe it is possible to be altruistic without being a political liberal - and in what category do libertarians fall? I myself identify myself as "no party" and am very moderate (as are most people), and yet I have spent hundreds of hours volunteering to help those I am not related to. Here, perhaps, a discussion of altruism, not liberalism, would be more appropriate.

Finally, Kanazawa says that "monogamy" in males is evolutionarily novel, yet the concept of "marriage" is evolutionarily familiar. You can understand my confusion.

In all, I believe that Kanazawa makes interesting arguments and may be able to predict our future trend if we are in fact evolving the way he says we are. However, his testing methods are flawed and his data somewhat unreliable. With time and further research, he might be on to something, but for now, I remain skeptical.

Congratulations on making it to the bottom of this very long post! Feel free to comment/debate!

Thank you to Henry Plant for the National Geographic article that led me to find the original article and www.liberalvaluesblog.com for the graphic.

I do....not understand the point of getting married

2010-03-09T12:25:00.000-08:00

Don't get me wrong. I understand completely the financial reasons to wed - tax benefits, higher pay if you are a government employee, etc. But fiscal incentives aside, I'm not sure I understand the purpose of getting legally married.

An inordinate number of people I know are getting engaged - and I'm not even at "that age" where it's about time all the girls start marrying. At 21, 22, many of my friends - most of which are male - are popping the big question.

And so, it brings me to wonder - if you intend to spend the rest of your life together, what is the benefit of getting married at such a young age? Again, as I mentioned, fiscal incentives aside. I'm not against the idea of marriage at all. I understand the importance of explicitly making the lifelong commitment. But I don't understand it at 21.

Marriage was conceived in order to permit men and women to have sexual relations and produce progeny without the fear of being struck down by the awful hand of God. In some cultures, this is still the case. I understand the motivation for marriage in extremely religious or old-fashioned families and leave that argument to another day.

However, in a day where lifelong monogamy is no longer the norm, marriage seems to have lost its meaning. I'm not arguing that monogamy is extinct in our culture. Certainly, however, it is possible to be monogamous without an elaborate ceremony and without a slip of paper. Penguins are monogamous. They manage to do it without any legal proceedings or pomp and circumstance. Gay and lesbian couples that are forbidden the right to legally marry manage to remain together for decades without that legal slip of paper.

Further, "back in the day," so-called "illegitimate" children were not prohibited the use of their father's name. But in today's society, parents can choose to name their children whatever they choose - they can use the father's name of an "illegitimate" child if they so choose. They could give the child a name that is different from both the parents if they want. So the passing of the name and the blood line is no longer a reason for marriage.

Finally, studies show that marriages are more likely to last 10+ years (i.e., not end in divorce before the 10 year mark is reached) if both parties are over the age of 26 when they marry. Don't ask me about the details, I heard it on NPR. Feel free to look it up. Even if the couple has been together for years prior to marrying, something about maturity and stability makes later marriages last longer.

I realize I sound like a jealous spinster (at the ripe old age of 21), but if you have any reasons to get married.. please, do share. I'm genuinely curious what it is that possesses people to get married at such a young age. Remember - religion and money aside. But what would this world be without religion and money? Probably a better place.

The Right to Vote

2010-03-08T09:49:00.000-08:00

According to the BBC, voter turnout in the Iraq parliamentary election (2010) was 62%, down from 75% in 2005.

38 people were killed by suicide bombers and other attacks on polling places in Iraq, the most deadly of which was on an apartment block that subsequently collapsed, killing 25 people.

Despite the violence, the election has been hailed as a milestone in Iraqi history and a sign that Iraq is, in fact, prepared for the U.S. and other countries to withdraw their troops.

What strikes me the most about this election is its comparison to turnouts in American elections. Voter turnout in the U.S. Presidential election in 2008 was 56.8%. In the 2009 California state special election, voter turnout was 28.4%.

Do we not remember our revolutionary origins? We (collectively, as Americans) fought the British for our right to representation, for our right to have a voice in the government that allegedly acts in our best interest. Today our soldiers / troops give their lives and leave their families and loved ones behind to fight for the freedom of Iraqis, and yet we are unable to appreciate and take advantage of our own.

It seems lately as though people have been bitten by the protest bug. There exist a plethora of injustices that must be exposed, wrongs that must be righted. I wonder, though, how many of the people at these protests failed to vote in previous elections. Should those who were eligible to vote but chose not to have the right to protest? Those who believed in the right to vote are the ones who fought for our right to free speech; should those who choose to forgo the right to vote be forbidden associated rights? To extrapolate, should those who forgo the right to vote be forbidden all rights associated with freedom? Should those who chose not to vote for the senate and congressional leaders, for president and on propositions, not be afforded the right to whatever benefits the government decides to bestow upon us (e.g. healthcare)?

People are willing to die in order to cast their ballots in what they know might be a rigged election. And yet, we take our ability to vote safely, securely, and honestly for granted. We willingly give up the rights that we fought for and that our troops fight for daily, and yet we are outraged at the injustices our government commits against us. How can those who did not vote be angry at our government?

True, you could argue that your single vote doesn't matter, especially in presidential elections with the electoral college and all. But that is the beauty of democracy, the beauty of one voice becoming a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand. When I see other countries that have fought so hard for their freedom, as we did two hundred years ago, I feel ashamed of what has become American apathy and hypocrisy.

For reference:

Voter turnout in the UK General Election in 2005 was 61%.
Voter turnout in the Afghan parliamentary elections in 2005 was 70% (50% in 2009).

Review: Yamashiro

2010-02-27T12:51:00.000-08:00

(Photo from the Yamashiro website)

Yamashiro:
1999 N. Sycamore Avenue
Hollywood, CA 90068

From its lofty aerie, Yamashiro (executive chef Jason Park) likely possesses one of the most spectacular views in all of Los Angeles. The restaurant, which perches in the hills above Hollywood, is a trek to get to. An easily missed turn leads you up into the narrow-streeted neighborhoods surrounding the restaurant, and nonlinear streets make it difficult to find your way back. The journey, though is worth it. The view is simply breathtaking, especially on a clear night. I can only imagine how stunning the view must be at sunset. If you make reservations, though, be sure to mention that you would like a table by the window - otherwise, they will place you in the back of the restaurant with no way to see out. Also note that if you make this request via OpenTable, they will ignore it. And trust me, you want to sit by the window, because the food alone is not enough reason to go to this restaurant.

The food, unfortunately, is not up to par with the view. Instead of ordering a main course, my date and I ordered several appetizers and a roll, opting to create a tapas-style dinner so we could try more foods. First we had the Seared Rare Filet Mignon Carpaccio ($16). The meat was fresh and the fried shallots gave it a nice texture, but the slices were rather thick for a carpaccio. Next came the Truffle Hamachi ($16). This dish was probably the best one we had all night. The Hamachi was fresh, but the seasoning was unmemorable. I remember the food being good, but I can't even describe it less than 24 hours later. Third we ordered the Tropical Albacore Ceviche ($16). The chips it came with were not freshly made and there was certainly more mango than anything else in the dish. Is albacore not in season? Finally we ordered the Comfort Me, Amore roll ($14). Goat cheese, melon, prosciutto, arugula, basil, and soy paper. I knew when I ordered that it sounded like it could potentially be not-so-good, but it sounded so bizarre that I had to try it. Bad choice. The only reason we even finished the roll was because we were so hungry from the tiny portions we'd had earlier. Granted, we ordered appetizers so we expected very little food, but after three appetizers and a roll, we were barely satiated.

The hostesses and waiter were friendly if slightly inattentive.

In summary: amazing view. mediocre, overpriced food.

Spring Break Staycation

2010-02-24T09:11:00.000-08:00

Los Angeles is one of the premier tourist destinations in the world - people cross the globe to see Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Bel Air... I've lived in Southern California my entire life and in Los Angeles for the last three and a half years, and yet there are so many things to see and do that I've missed out on.

I've decided to change that this spring break. I'm buying a nice camera and planning a Los Angeles staycation - and I'd love company. Below are some things that I intend to explore. If you want to join me or have any ideas for other places to go/see/do, I'm open to suggestions. I have Tuesday - Friday and Saturday day free of Spring Break (3/22-27/10).

Norton Simon Museum
411 West Colorado Boulevard
Pasadena, CA 91105
Free to Students with I.D.
Open every day except Tuesday, 12pm - 6pm

Natural History Museum
900 Exposition Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90007
$6.50 to Students with I.D.
Open every day, 9.30am - 5pm

Grauman's Chinese Theater
6925 Hollywood Boulevard
Hollywood, CA 90028
$10.75 for a regular movie (not for 3D movies, etc.)
showtimes at Movietickets.com

Bergamot Station
2525 Michigan Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90404
$5 suggested donation
Galleries open T-F 10am - 6pm, Sat 11am - 5.30pm

Griffith Observatory
2800 East Observatory Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90027
Free
Open T-F 12pm - 10pm, S/S 10am - 10pm
include the Hollywood Sign Hike

Huntington Library & Gardens
1151 Oxford Road
San Marino, CA 91108
$10 to Students with I.D.
Open M,W-F 12pm - 4.30pm, S/S 10.30am - 4.30pm
(I've technically been here, but I love it so I'm counting it.)

MOCA
250 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90012

152 North Central Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90013

$5 to Students with I.D. includes admission to both Grand Ave. and Geffen
Open M 11am - 5pm, R 11am - 8pm (free after 5), F 11am - 5pm, S/S 11am - 6pm

Getty Villa
17985 Pacific Coast Highway
Pacific Palisades, CA 90272
Free, but requires advance reservations
Open W-M, 10am - 5pm

La Brea Tar Pits
5801 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA, 90036
$4.50 to Students with I.D.
Open every day 9.30am - 5pm

I'd also like to do Disneyland one of the days (any day but Saturday). Hitting the beach and going shopping are also absolute necessities. Looking forward to an action-packed spring break!

And, of course, eating out every meal and partying at night.

quit your bellyaching

2009-12-09T06:35:00.000-08:00

It's 6.30, I've been up for hours, I have an exam this afternoon, and I'm tired. FML.

I've been seeing these posts on facebook far too frequently: "ugh, I'm so stressed out." "dying from finals week!" "final today, final tomorrow, final final" whine whine whine. Yeah, people, I get it. It's finals week. It happens every 10 weeks, three to four times a year. You've been doing this for at least three years now. Get over it! You knew what you were getting yourself into when you paid your tuition at the end of last quarter. I'm sorry your life is so hard. You have to go to one of the best academic institutions in the world to learn from some of the most intelligent people in the world. Sorry. It must really suck to be you.

Life is beautiful, people! Wake up and look around! If I have learned anything over the last three years, it's that life is short an unexpected. Who are we to take life for granted when we could die tomorrow? or today? Every moment could be your last. That's true, as cliche as it sounds. You could get hit by a car, get a deadly infection, be the victim of a violent crime during Chem 30CL.

If you died tomorrow, would you want your last day to be filled with unhappiness? No, don't say that "it isn't my fault - finals make me unhappy!" Happiness is a choice. Choose to love every moment, even the stressed out crazy ones. When you're upset, complaining about life, and just being an overall negative nancy, stop and think for a moment: what am I really complaining about? Do I sound ridiculous? I think that most of the time, you'll find that you do.

If you still feel like complaining, help someone who is less fortunate than you. Count your blessings.

Heifer International

Kiva International

Wounded Warrior
American Red Cross

Charity Navigator

Underground Undie Run

2009-12-08T16:48:00.000-08:00

Administrators and local law enforcement are attempting to "cancel" an epic, unaffiliated, student-run quarterly tradition. The reasons are apparent: property damage, physical injuries, lawsuits. Students, in youthful defiance, intend to hold the event anyway. How can administrators cancel an event that isn't sanctioned by the school anyway? "Let's take it to Westwood!" "Let's take it to the apartments!" "They can't do anything to us if we aren't on campus!" "We aren't doing anything illegal!" I intend to participate this year, as I've had Thursday finals for the last three years in a row. It is my senior year, after all. But a few words to those intending to participate:

First, if students enter campus, though it is public property, school administrators have the right to punish students who participate as they so choose.

UCPD and LAPD will likely be blocking off Strathmore tunnel and other main routes to the heart of campus. UCPD does have jurisdiction off campus, contrary to popular belief. Even if you are in Westwood, UCPD can still arrest you. Especially if you are drunk in public. You don't even have to be belligerent to be written up for being drunk in public - I once got stopped by a cop and questioned for half an hour because I was sitting on a curb waiting for a ride (and no, it wasn't a "work" night.)

We are doing something illegal if enough people participate. If more than three people congregate in any area for any reason, it can be considered unlawful assembly. If they intend to do something illegal (e.g., gain access to IM field if it is locked - trespassing), it becomes rioting. It also becomes rioting if something illegal happens whether or not it was planned and/or intended (property damage a la Spring 2009 - thanks for the picture, Alex Sun).

You ARE doing something illegal, but isn't that what college is for?

So, my advice is, go out, have fun, stay safe, be smart, and RUN FAST.

wear flats to that interview

2009-03-06T11:35:00.001-08:00

I was watching "House" the other day (guilty pleasure), the episode about the meningitis outbreak and the 12-year-old pregnant chick. In any case, House is interviewing doctors for the fellowship position left by Cameron (the chick). One girl comes in--she's pretty, she's witty, she's tough, her credentials are good, and she's wearing these green heels. House doesn't hire her (partially because he just wants Cameron back), but he makes the argument that her fashionable shoes look uncomfortable. A woman who wears painful shoes in favor of fashion must not be a very reasonable person. A smart, comfortable shoe reflects the wearer in a more favorable light. As convoluted as this argument may be, I actually have to say I agree. It makes sense. If you can't make an intelligent decision about your footwear, you probably can't make intelligent decisions about other things as well. If you're interviewing to be a model or fashionista of some sort, go ahead and wear those heels. But if you're applying for a position in which you'll be running around and on your feet for several hours, don a cute pair of flats.

Besides, you never know if the person interviewing you will be a really short man who might just like you a little bit more if you're shorter than he is. Trust me, I would know.

Facebook TOS

2009-02-24T07:03:00.000-08:00

Background:

(From CNN.com): The company deleted a sentence from the old Terms of Use. That sentence said Facebook could not claim any rights to original content that a user uploaded once the user closed his or her account.

It replaced it with: "You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. ... (H)owever, you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content."
...
On Monday, Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg tried to quell the controversy by saying the company's philosophy is that "people own their information and control who they share it with."

Schnitt said the company is in the process of rewording its Terms of Use in "simple language that defines Facebook's rights much more specifically."

Facebook's TOS:

By posting User Content to any part of the Site, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to the Company an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, publicly perform, publicly display, reformat, translate, excerpt (in whole or in part) and distribute such User Content for any purpose, commercial, advertising, or otherwise, on or in connection with the Site or the promotion thereof, to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, such User Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses of the foregoing. You may remove your User Content from the Site at any time. If you choose to remove your User Content, the license granted above will automatically expire, however you acknowledge that the Company may retain archived copies of your User Content. Facebook does not assert any ownership over your User Content; rather, as between us and you, subject to the rights granted to us in these Terms, you retain full ownership of all of your User Content and any intellectual property rights or other proprietary rights associated with your User Content.

My thoughts:

Anything you post to the internet, in general, never goes away. How many of us have ever used an image we pulled off Google in a book report (which is actually illegal)? Look at the case of Jon Favreau, whose political future is debatable after a picture of him partying with a Clinton cut-out was posted to Facebook (cnn)? Although the picture was barely up for a couple of hours, there was no turning back--once a picture, or any content for that matter, is posted to the internet, it's there forever. Every single person who views that image has it stored in their computer, not to mention how easy it is to take a screenshot or "save image as" (bad english).

As far as Facebook goes, the TOS change has not been that drastic. The change only states that they can continue to use our images and posts if we delete our account - and how many people are going to delete their accounts? As long as we post content to Facebook, they can use it however they like. They argue that it is our intellectual property, but that by posting it, we automatically allow them to use it "for any purpose." After we remove the content from the site, they can no longer use it as they wish, but they can retain archives of the material. This is more of a security issue than a property rights issue. If you take a picture of yourself killing someone, post it to Facebook, and then delete it, they have the full right to retain that photo in the archives and to turn it into the police.

Long story short: The change indicates that they can retain archives of whatever we post to Facebook, even if we remove it from the site and/or deactivate our accounts. Anything we post to Facebook can be used in any manner they so desire.

Moral of the story: Don't be an idiot about what gets posted to Facebook. It's not really all that difficult to comprehend.

hero

2009-02-20T20:00:00.000-08:00

Tonight I'll go to visit, say hello
to you, an old good friend whom I've not seen
in so long. Two long years it's almost been.
I'll hurry anxiously, I miss you so.
Angelic vibrant lilies hearty grow.
I'll wander in and out and in between
the aisles, wonder at your lawn so green,
such peaceful beauty, statues made of stone.
I stopped, saw flags wave, I laid upon your
grave, wilting, two white roses, heard TAPS play,
my mind careening chaos from the grief.
And for your life, for bravery in war,
a bronze star, purple heart, three cheers, hooray!
These shiny things, and "not to be"

Curvy

2009-02-14T07:35:00.000-08:00

"Shape" magazine last month included a 4-page spread on "real" women and how much they love their "curves." Granted, there were some healthy women as well, but several of the women were clearly overweight.

I know there is a reason for "Shape" to have published this spread, trying to instill confidence in all women, regardless of their shape and size. But therein lies the conflict. Yes, women should have confidence, and yes, they should love who they are inside. But overweight women don't belong in "Shape" magazine. The purpose of "Shape" is to help women stay in SHAPE and get healthy. Being overweight is not healthy. Being overly skinny isn't healthy either. I'm not saying that women should be stick-thin or should all starve themselves in order to lose weight; that isn't healthy either. But there is no such thing as being overweight and healthy, or overweight and fit. Fit people are not overweight. Studies of healthy- and overweight sedentary individuals (both groups were sedentary) showed that the healthy-weight group was much less likely to contract a series of disorders and diseases, including heart disease, atherosclerosis, diabetes, etc.

Being called "fat" is hurtful. It should also be a reality check. Regardless of whether or not you love your "curves," they aren't healthy. Losing weight is hard. But it's absolutely necessary to not just have a longer life, but to improve the quality of life.

Taking care of yourself aside, if you absolutely refuse to lose weight, please buy pants that fit. I'm so sick of seeing fat girls muffin-top out of their too-small jeans. Either deal with the fact that you're a size (or 2? or 3?) bigger than you used to be, and buy pants that fit, or lose some weight so you can fit into your old pants. When your button is trying to escape from your pants, take it as a sign that you're so fat even your button doesn't want to be near you.

This post has been terribly written, but it had to be said.

villification of wall street executives

2009-02-04T10:26:00.001-08:00

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Pledging to take "the air out of golden parachutes," President Obama announced Wednesday that executives of companies receiving federal bailout money will have their pay capped at $500,000 under a revised financial compensation plan."

Let's take a deep breath and think about this one for a minute. Yes, bankers and executives in the financial industry make lots of money. Yes, the economy sucks. No, it's not their fault. In hard times, people always look for a scapegoat--who can we blame for what has happened to us? The most apparent answer is the people who are in charge of pushing around money. It seems to make sense to cap the executive's salaries in order to assure tax payers that their money is not being wasted on Joe Millionaire's Rolls-Royce.

However, this may not be the best course of action. It's like painting a very small figurine with a very large brush. First off, not everyone in the business of money was taking huge risks and overvaluing weak assets. Secondly, not everyone in the business is even responsible for analyzing assets; an investment banker, for example, has no idea what goes on in the trading department of his company, and he shouldn't. I think it may be borderline illegal for him to know, in fact. Furthermore, hindsight is 20/20. Yes, risks were taken. Yes, a good deal of them resulted in catastrophic failure. Was it done on purpose, or was it due to the massive ineptitude of Wall Street CEOs? I highly doubt that every single CEO or high-ranking officer of every company that is floundering is an idiot. It just doesn't make sense that dumb people would get rich. No, rather, they came into their money through hard work and by taking risks. How angry would shareholders have been three or four years ago, if their investors said "no, actually, I'm going to hang onto your money and not take risks. I'm going to make you less money than everybody else is making for their clients." I don't think that would have worked. People would have lost their jobs, they would have been replaced by people who were more willing to take risks, and we would still be where we are today. Speaking of working hard, when people work 90-100 hours a week and travel 50 weeks a year, don't you think they should be compensated accordingly? I know $500,000 is a lot of money, but.. I don't know if it's really all that much.

Secondly, what is Obama's plan for the installation of this cap? If you take an executive who makes $2 million a year, and cap his salary at $500,000, he's taken a75% wage cut. That shouldn't be okay in any industry. These people, more importantly than make money, also spend lavish amounts of money. A 75% pay cut, at any wage level, is ridiculous. People will lose their homes, be unable to pay the leases on their cars, and yank their money out of the stock market just to pay their bills. The economy will collapse further. There are a lot of economically active people who will suddenly cease to be active, and their inactivity will show in the markets.

I know we want someone to blame for the economic crisis, but a sweeping executive pay cap is not the solution to this problem. In fact, I think it will actually perpetuate the problem. Rather than singling out the individuals who made mistakes, it blankets all executives working for companies receiving the TARP and affects those both innocent and guilty.

beginnings and endings

2009-01-28T08:47:00.000-08:00

Exam tonight, so it'll be brief.

I don't understand why people have given endings such a bad rap. A good movie ends, the lights come on, and you have to stop making out with that random guy in the back row of the movie theater. The year ends, and we look back with a feeling of nostalgia for auld lang syne, with a feeling of expectation and hope for the new year. We make new year's resolutions. Bush's term comes to an end and Barack Obama's begins.

Flip side: a war ends, a friendship begins, last year might have actually been better than this year is going to be. We already failed at our new year's resolutions.

The lesson I want to take from this is that life is just life. Whether a good thing just ended or just began is irrelevant; if we live as if each day is our last then hoping for a better tomorrow is a moo point. (yes, a moo point. as joey from "friends" said, it's like a point a cow makes. it's moo.) I understand the need for hope, I understand the need to look forward to a better future. I understand better the need to live for today, to believe that today is the last and best day there ever will be.

I want also to make a point about the thrill we all feel about the "change" President-(not-elect) Obama has promised to bring us. It's the beginning of something new, and so we're excited. Bush's last.. several . years didn't work out quite the way we hoped, so we're looking forward to a better and brighter future. Who knows what may happen. I'm sure that eight years ago, everyone was excited that Bush had taken office. Everyone was looking for an upright, God-fearing man after Clinton's infidelities tainted his personality (still a great leader, though, but that's another point). People expected Bush to bring morality to the office. 9/11 happened within his first year of office, and everything, everyone's worlds, changed. Maybe he wasn't able to do what he was hoping to, but as he keeps reminding us, there hasn't been a terrorist attack since then. That was his promise in office, to keep us safe. Other things didn't go so well.

I'm not trying to support Bush or to knock on Obama, I'm just saying that we never know what the future will bring, whether it's 4 years down the line or tomorrow. We don't know how Obama's presidency will turn out... who knows, maybe he'll turn out to be an evil zombie and his grand plan is to turn the US into a nation of zombies. Maybe he'll be the best president the US has ever experienced. We don't know

Don't live expectantly with hopes and wishes of a brighter future, because today is all we have. Today is all we know about. Scratch that, I don't know what's going to happen 5 minutes from now. RIGHT NOW is all we have.

Christmas

2008-12-25T01:04:00.000-08:00

It's late and I'm tired, but I know I won't have time to write tomorrow / later today, so this will be brief and poorly written. I haven't been into the "Christmas Spirit" lately, for no apparent reason, and I'm hoping that writing this will remind me of why I love Christmas so much. My brother also made almost 50 cupcakes without any sugar in them (unrelated, but funny).

I'm only moderately religious: I occasionally go to church, I pray when I'm scared or worried, and I have faith in a higher power. While I may not agree with everything the Church has to say about certain topics, and I may not take what the Bible has to say at face value, I do believe in God and I do think that a lot of the messages from the Church have good underlying intentions and meanings; the reminders of kindness and love are what I try to glean from my pastor's sermon every week.

Christmas to me is not about the birth of Christ--even the Church admits that Jesus was most likely not born even in December, but the date of observation was arranged to coordinate with the Winter Solstice. What's the point of even celebrating Christmas, then? Why don't we celebrate the Winter Solstice instead? I celebrate Christmas because it is important for me to have occasional reminders to be good and kind to others. Ideally, a "good" person doesn't need semi-annual reminders to spread love and cheer, but I am not that "good" of a person, whatever that means. At Christmas we spend time with our families, whether we like them or not, and we tell ourselves that this is a season of giving and we must bear what we can because at least we have families to spend time with.

I think Christmas lately has lost a lot of its meaning; I don't mean the religious awe of the Miraculous Conception (if you believe in it) or the birth of Christ (if you believe in it). When we are all stressed and panicked about finding the perfect gift for someone and yell at the pedestrians crossing the street in the mall parking lot, we tell ourselves that we have to deal with the crowds because this is the season of giving and we need to find gifts to give. That's not what the season of giving is supposed to be about. We don't need to give material gifts to show that we care, simply spending time with each other is the best way to spend the holidays. I refuse to exchange gifts with my friends because I think that I'd rather just spend time with them and exchange the gift of love (sappy, I know, but it's the truth).

I love Christmas because I have so much love to share and it gives me an opportunity to give that love to others; I want to strive to love as many people as I can, even if I can't stand or understand them. I want to love strangers, friends, and enemies, trying to keep the enemies to a minimum. I am blessed to have so much love in my life, to have been given such loving friends and famiily, and to have such a beautiful, full life. I'll try to remember this whenever I encounter other people. I need to remind myself to love everyone, and this holiday season, to spread that love and cheer.

Bowling for Soup - Shut Up and Smile
Its not the end of the world
In fact its not even the end of the summer
But thank god the tv is on
Cuz theres no way we could know
Anything that’s goin down
Or how were supposed to be feeling about it
I cant tell you how much I wish we could shut up and smile, yeah

Sail around the world and tell them all to keep singing it
la la la la la la
all we needs a harmony and we’ll convince the world to sing
la la la la la la
throw your arms around someone (throw your arms around someone)
maybe spread a little love
I know it sounds a little dumb (or maybe I’m a little drunk)
But all we need is some ice cream and a hug

Take a good look around
Does life really suck
Are we just complaining
I hope that this mic is on (testing 1, 2)
Cuz im on a roll here
I hope this is making some sense
I hope that you’ll throw up your hands and sing it
And tell all the haters that they should just shut up and smile, yeah

Sail around the world and tell them all to keep singing it
la la la la la la
all we needs a harmony and we’ll convince the world to sing
la la la la la la
throw your arms around someone (throw your arms around someone)
maybe spread a little love
I know it sounds a little dumb (or maybe I’m a little drunk)
But all we need is some ice cream

All we need is love and beer
And old school metal and holiday cheer
To be happy
(All you need is someone near)
like ben and jerry
(to hold you close and pretend that they care)

can we all just, get along now
we found something that we all have in common now
we can hold hands, do keg stands
water skiing sounds great to me now

Sail around the world and tell them all to keep singing it
la la la la la la
all we needs a harmony and we’ll convince the world to sing
la la la la la la
throw your arms around someone (throw your arms around someone)
maybe spread a little love
I know it sounds a little dumb (or maybe we’re a little drunk)
But all we need is some ice cream and a hug

all we need is some ice cream and a hug...

What I'm Thankful For

2008-11-27T00:17:00.001-08:00

Remember when we had to write these essays in elementary school?

My family: So many people have such tough home lives--and of course, whether we consider something "tough" or not is a matter of opinion and perspective. Needless to say, I'm so glad to have such a great family that I'm so close with. I'm so thankful for this strong foundation upon which the rest of my life has been built and continues to build. I love my family and am so blessed to have people with whom I can talk about anything. My small, perfect, nuclear family is amazing--and so is my crazy, big, family. We have so much fun together and I'm so thankful for this rock in my life.

My friends: my extended family. My shelters, my shoulders. I'm so glad to have you all in my life; I love knowing that I have people to turn to if I'm ever in need, and I hope you know you can turn to me, too. I'm thankful for the people in my life that keep me sane and drive me insane; for the network of people I trust, admire, and adore.

The Red Cross: saving lives, kicking butt, and always being there. I give my time to this organization because I know that someone somewhere needs our help--and someday, when we need theirs, they will be there

UCLA: I'm so thankful to have the opportunity to attend this great institution--athletics, academics, art.. and all in the best city in the world. What more could anyone ask for? (Don't tell me small class sizes--a good number of my classes are in the 40s... and I've never not been able to get into a class I needed -- thank you, alumni scholarship!).

Southern California: beautiful weather, beautiful people, diverse ethnicities (= diverse ethnic foods!), the beach, the desert, the mountains..there's something here for everyone.

The United States: we bitch and moan about it, but as my Tech Management professor says, "the only thing worse than democracy is anything else." As many problems as we have, and as much as I say that I'd love to move to Paris, I think that we have a pretty darn-good set-up here. I wouldn't trade it for anything else. In this, I'd like to thank the men/women of the military (mmm i <3 military boys). You're so brave and I'm so thankful to have the few of you I know in my life. I'm also thankful for all the men and women who work tirelessly day and night, without holidays, doing what they believe is right.

My health: not everyone is so lucky. Give blood this season.

The last few days and weeks I've been thinking about how wonderfully lucky my life has been (and I hope God sees fit to keep it that way). I'm so thankful for the charmed life I lead and for the beautiful, wonderful people I've been lucky enough to encounter. I have so much to be thankful for--and in this holiday season, I will do my best to remember there are others less fortunate than I, and I'll do my very best to help those in need.

miscellaneous

2008-11-01T18:02:00.001-07:00

why can't courseweb, voh, and blackboard all consolidate themselves into one useful website?

Stephanie's guide to voting this November

2008-09-22T15:12:00.000-07:00

Prop 1: California High Speed Rail -- no
I spent a lot of time thinking about this one. I initially thought I would support this measure; California needs to get cars off the road to alleviate traffic and to clean up our smog-ridden air. However, i don't think California is ready to PAY for the high speed rail. We are in the middle of an economic crisis and the government does not even have a budget prepared for the next YEAR--how could the government possibly handle 10 billion dollars in bonds over the next thirty years? I understand there is a difference between the state government and CalTrans, but I think, this year, investment in the California High Speed Rail is fiscally irresponsible. I'm not saying that the measure should never pass. When the economy is stable--I'm not even asking for it to be strong--then California will be ready to pass the High Speed Rail.
Prop 2: Farm Animal Confinement -- not sure
The fiscal impact is only several million dollars annually, which will most likely show up in our food costs. Let the little animals stretch their limbs/wings, etc.
However, this will eliminate egg production in California. How are we supposed to buy local when our produce will HAVE to come from other states and MEXICO? There will be an increased risk of Salmonella if our produce comes from outside of California.
Prop 3: Children's Hospital Grants -- no opinion.
There's a difference between not sure and no opinion. 2 billion dollars over 30 years? I'll come back and think about it later.
Prop 4: Parental Notification for abortion -- NO. NEVER. EVER. NO
Supporters of this proposition argue that notification laws will protect young, sexually abused girls from being victimized. They argue that this will "encourage" a relationship of trust and communication between young teens who become impregnated and their parents. The proposition requires the girls, if they have been abused, to physically pen an accusation against their abuser before they can receive an abortion. If there is no abuse, the non-emancipated minor must inform and receive permission from her parents before receiving an abortion.
There are so many problems with this proposition.

1. Let's talk about the situation when there is no abuse. If a girl, regardless of her age, decides she is old enough to have sex, regardless of what the law states about statutory rape and age of consent, then she is old enough to decide whether or not to carry through with the ramifications of that sex. I know that, technically, girls under 16 "can't" decide whether or not to have sex, but if she has unprotected sex, then she has to decide for HERSELF whether or not to carry the baby to full term. The issue here is not about the right or permission to have SEX, but the decision which follows.

2. Many of the supporters of this measure are parents trying to protect their daughtes. I don't care what they have to say. They have forgotten what it is like to be a young girl, to be a teenager who is scared and lost and unsure. If a 16 year old girl gets pregnant and she MUST notify her parents before she receives an abortion, she is likely to run away from the situation rather than to notify her parents. It would be easier for her to run to Mexico to receive an illegal, black-market abortion than to confront her parents who, despite her wishes, may force her to carry the child to term. The supporters of this measure are PARENTS who want to CONTROL their children with the notion that they are protecting them. Parents need to have open lines of communication with their children in order to protect them, and yes, pregnant teens SHOULD tell their parents so that they have a strong support base. It is not, however, the government's responsibility to force this communication to occur, it is the parents'.

3. This is a subtle attack at a woman's right to choose. a WOMAN's right to choose, not her mother's, not her father's, not the government's. If a WOMAN decides she wants to abort the pregnancy but her PARENTS' religious beliefs mandate that she carry the child and then give it up for adoption, the woman has lost her rights and women everywhere have lost theirs as well.

Prop 5: Rehab programs for drug offenders -- no
Local governments should be allowed to decide for themselves what to do with their drug offenders.

Prop 6: Funding for criminal penalties -- no
see above

Prop 7: Renewable energy generation -- yes
Save the environment!

Prop 8: Gay marriage ban -- NO NO NO NO NO

Still 4 more and I'm tired of reading.

let's get our drink on.

2008-09-08T11:16:00.000-07:00

daily bruin

read that (9/8/08).

and then, read this (8/20/08)

npr

I have found that 21 year old students who have to worry about stumbling back to their apartments after a long night at the local bar tend to drink less and less often than younger students drinking illegally at a friend's apartment where they can get sick and pass out. Lowering the drinking age would force more people to worry about walking and driving after their festivities and would make more people drink only in moderation. Furthermore. The embarrassment of being unable to hold their liquor in a public place would prevent people from drinking to the point of physical illness. I have no statistics to support my hypotheses, but I have a more recent point of view than the people talking about protecting "kids" from the world. When my 19 and 18 year old friends return from Iraq and Afghanistan, I think we should be allowed to share a drink at the bar. If 18 is old enough to die for this country, 18 should be old enough to raise a glass to those who've died

Plus, there's always the "there's no thrill so it's not as exciting" factor

and the age-old "well in europe..." argument.

..you should also scroll down on the NPR page and read some of the comments people leave.. they make some good points.

dichotomy

2008-09-08T10:34:00.000-07:00

I love LA. I love LA for so many reasons, but this morning I came upon a perfect example of one of those many.

As I was driving back from downtown around 8:00 (AM), I stopped at La Brea & 3rd Street, at a red light. Two bootylicious (yes, bootylicious) blonde women were crossing the street. Whether they were coming home from a long night out or simply very much in tune to their sexuality, this blonde bombshells were walking down the street in rather (very) short, black cocktail/clubbing dresses and heels. Man, girls in LA, right?

Two blocks down, on La Brea & 1st street, several young women were heading to the Menlo Family Center, wearing dress shirts, sweaters/vests, long skirts (i.e. mid-calf), stockings, and sensible shoes.

I love that in this city, you can have both "types" of people coexisting (relatively) peacefully. Where else in the world can you experience the true diversity that you get in LA?

i don't hate the new facebook

2008-09-07T23:01:00.000-07:00

i know we all fear change and the changes the "new" facebook layout have brought have caused widespread panic. We liked the old facebook--and so, we think it is impossible to learn to like the new one.

I've received 4 invites to groups against the new facebook in the last two days. And, while I am also having trouble adjusting to the new layout, figuring out where things are and learning my way around the site, I have refused to join these new groups.. or, as facebook still says, "ignore[d]" them.

Why?

Firstly, I only join groups that really, truly interest me or that serve me some purpose. Groups send messages. I don't like receiving messages from groups.

Secondly, I think that there is no point in joining the facebook groups. Regardless of how many people sign silly "official" petitions against facebook, they will stick to their changes. Do you really think they implemented the new layout without hours of research and hard work? I doubt it. They are unlikely to revert to the old layout and to throw away all of their man-hours, simply because a few (and I mean a few--1,000,000 against the new facebook doesn't mean anything when there are 100 times that many people using the site) people signed a petition. Remember how many "official" petitions and anti-whatever groups there were when Facebook opened its availability to high school students? Nothing. And when it became available to anyone 13 and over? Nothing.

Unless massive numbers (I mean MASSIVE) of people deactivate their accounts after the integration of the new layout, facebook has ZERO reason to revert to the old one. Just because you're angry and signed some petition, they don't care--you're still using the site.

the wedding night nasty.

2008-09-07T00:26:00.000-07:00

i don't understand how people can possibly have sex on their wedding night. I understand the tradition and the meaning behind it, but I simply cannot fathom how it would physically be possible.

Think about it:

After a long night of tossing and turning/pre-wedding jitters, you'll wake up early -- get hair, makeup, and nails done, worry about everything being set up for the ceremony, double-checking flowers, seats, and everything else, you go through a minimum hour-long ceremony (full of emotional stresses). You walk down the aisle, praying to God that you don't trip, and after finally saying "I do" you can rest a little. Then you can worry about your next wardrobe change, confirm flowers, food, decorations, linens, and GUESTS for the reception. At the reception you have to entertain your guests, make speeches, dance (again praying you don't trip), and more emotional stress. After this long, stressful (happy, but stressful) day, you have to be the last person to leave your wedding (probably rather tipsy by this point) and stumble up to your bedroom (or get on a long plane flight). I don't know how other people do it, but I have a feeling after a day like that, all I would want to do would be to sleep. And no matter how much I loved my husband and wanted to share my wedding night with him, the minute my head hit the pillow I'd probably pass out. You have your honeymoon and the rest of your lives to "make love," and after a long wedding day and night, wouldn't you rather just sleep?

being a GUEST at a wedding exhausts me. I can't imagine that compounded with all the stress of planning and hoping everything goes according to plan.

elite

2008-09-05T10:52:00.000-07:00

e·lit·ism or é·lit·ism (ĭ-lē'tĭz'əm, ā-lē'-)
n.

1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.

2.
1. The sense of entitlement enjoyed by such a group or class.
2. Control, rule, or domination by such a group or class.

I am frustrated by the people who have been calling our presidential candidates "elitists." McCain has been accused of being a social elitist (financially), while Obama has been accused of being an intellectual elitist. Whether I agree with either of these characterizations or not, I think the word "elitist" has been thrown around so much that it has lost all meaning. I'd like to dispute people's use of the word and the support they have for using it.

McCain: Being wealthy does not necessarily make you an elitist. People have argued that McCain is an elitist because his wife wears expensive clothes and he has a lot of houses. So what? The sheer fact that he has money does not make him an elitist. Spending that money does not make him an elitist. Did we think our presidential candidate was going to be middle class? I don't think that's possible, considering how much money it costs to run a campaign. He may be an elitist, but the fact that he spends a lot of money does not make him one.

Obama: The argument here is that Obama is an intellectual elitist, surrounding himself with only intellectual people, and not "average Joes." I don't blame him. People tend to surround themselves with people who are like them, as the saying goes--birds of a feather. I don't like hanging out with people who are not on the same level, intellectually, as I am (whether they are far superior or far inferior), and I don't expect others to.

Another argument is that we don't have candidates who can relate to the "average American." Some will argue that neither McCain nor Obama can empathize with the average, working person, because they are so wealthy and well-educated, and I'll have to agree. If the average, working person had the money and intelligence to run a campaign, there would be a lot more people running for president. The average American is also not college-educated. I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to have a president with a college education, preferably a law degree from some major ivy league school. The candidates may not be able to empathize with the aver American, but that does not mean they cannot serve them. That's like expecting all the volunteers in a soup kitchen to have a background in homelessness and hunger.

macbook photobooth

2008-08-30T13:35:00.000-07:00

rant of the day.

Okay, we know that photobooth is really exciting and that it has all these amazing features that distort images. But we really don't need to see 80,000 pictures of yourself and your BFF all over facebook. One, two, three, MAYBE four. But when you put an entire album of yourself on facebook, no matter how distorted the image is, don't you think that's a LITTLE bit narcissistic?

i guarantee that nobody other than you and your friend (singular) look at those pictures. If you're having fun seeing what the program does to the images, enjoy them ... but please. do they really need to go on facebook? really?

cyclists in portland

2008-08-26T23:42:00.000-07:00

I'm almost too tired to blog tonight, but I apparently have too many opinions for my own good. In fact, I have so many opinions that I bother to record them in this silly journal, even though I'm the only person who will ever read them. Also, if I don't get my thoughts out now, I'll just forget them--this morning, as I hunkered down at Border's for some good morning coffee & studying, I came upon a fabulous thought that I should blog about. Then I promptly forgot it and my opportunity for immortality forever lost.

It's interesting how "blog" has become a verb. I guess if you do something enough, it becomes a verb.. blog, facebook..screw...

Anywho,

I love NPR because it always gives me something interesting to think about..and of course, incites more opinions and more unread blogs.

Tonight's "Talk of the Nation" discussed the rift between green cyclists and commuting drivers. Yes, we all already know about the road rage and the everything, but my point of contention is this:

The show took callers from Portland, Oregon and Boulder, Colorado. Apparently these are very "bike-friendly" cities, where the infrastructure has accommodated bikers via the addition of a curb and separate lights for bikers. However, I highly doubt that either of these cities has the density of traffic which LA has. The addition of larger bike lanes would either a) eliminate valuable parking spaces or b) remove the few lanes and increase the amount of traffic. As one expert pointed out, increasing traffic would increase the amount of idling time; the ecosystematic effects are questionable. In a city such as LA where there are far more cars than bikes, and more bikes than pedestrians, the solution is not to fight over valuable street space; the solution is to move cyclists to the sidewalk (where it is currently illegal to ride your bike, except in West Hollywood). I understand the concern of the elderly walking the streets, but I am also concerned about bikers in the street. Moving bikes to the sidewalks would be less inconvenient for the thousands of drivers, and be safer for the bikers, as well.

night.

Juicy.

2008-08-25T22:29:00.000-07:00

There was a discussion tonight on "Talk of the Nation" about Juicy Campus, ACB, and BoredAt. People called in to express their feelings about how vile the posts are, and how "middle school" the conversations are. I'd like to point out a couple of things about the people who called in and the points they mad about Juicy Campus.

1. The people who listen to NPR at 10:00 at night are not the same people who care who the biggest slut on campus is.

2. I understand that nobody likes being called the biggest slut on campus. However, it's not like people make things up out of thin air. Although it may not be true that so-and-so (let's call her "Mary") has had sex with X number of guys (or should i say Y), it's not as though Mary is.. well.. so innocent. The way she acts around men, the way she dresses and treats other women, must clearly create some sort of impression. The women who are called sluts on sites such as Juicy Campus claim that their reputations are damaged; their reputations are already damaged by their own actions and behavior. If these Marys didn't already have reputations, they wouldn't be discussed on Juicy Campus. Juicy Campus is simply a forum for discussing pre-existing reputations.

3. People were complaining that sites such as The Dirty permit people to post pictures, in addition to salacious gossip. If people put themselves in situations where others can take incriminating photos of them, then they deserve to have those pictures posted on the internet. Public actions are public information.

4. To the people who are hurt by the mean things people say: do not be indignant, but really consider what people are saying and why they are saying it. People are really not imaginative enough to come up with lies from thin air. If there are multiple posts/replies about you, then REALLY take into consideration what people are saying.
a) To the sluts: really think about the way you act around men. Think about the way you dress. Think about the things you say and the way you treat other people.
b) To the bitches: think about the way you treat other people, especially other women. Women are cruel and hell hath no fury...

that's all for now.

plumbing

2008-08-21T09:43:00.000-07:00

there is a plumber who has been at my new house since 7:00.. he went to buy a new hose for the dishwasher and came back, but he's been in my kitchen for 2 hours now. I wonder what he's doing back there. I kind of need to go to work and it would be nice if he would finish soon so I can do that, but it's also kind of nice that I have to stay here.. to.. "study"

I want a basket for the front of my bike, but the giant spring which serves no apparent purpose is preventing me from being able to get a front basket. Looks like I'll have to get a rack for the back and a basket to go on top of the rack. This is silly. Also, apparently it's hard to buy bike racks for Mini Coopers, so my bike is stuck in LA for the rest of its life. I also just registered my bike (the same way you register a car, but cheaper). Make: Schwinn. Model: Roxie. Color: Other. Apparently "pink" is not a normal color option for bicycles.

caffeine

2008-08-19T10:40:00.000-07:00

My name is Stephanie, and I'm a caffeine-oholic. As I was making the hour-long commute back home from work yesterday, I was hit with a mild migraine headache. I got home and decided, maybe, I should exercise a little. Get the blood flowing, you know? No help. I then went to three painful hours of class (trust me, it was really painful..and not because of the headache), came home, and promptly fell asleep (still with the same migraine). I woke up this morning with the same headache. What's going on!? Usually sleep will cure anything for me, but this was not the case. I rolled out of bed, headed over to the coffee shop and...voila. cured.

new roommate

2008-08-17T17:06:00.001-07:00

... kind of a new roommate. I did, after all, spend sixteen years of my life living with this "new roommate" of mine, but this time we're older and busier. For those of you who haven't figured it out yet, I've moved out of the 50-year-old, traffic-jammed Westwood. I now live with my brother on the corner of Beverly & Fairfax, in what is apparently a Jewish neighborhood. Across the street is the Shalom Retirement Home, and there's a Hebrew school on the corner. The only Modern Orthodox school in LA, the Shalhevet School, is just a few blocks away.

The new place is ridiculous. The location is amazing.. I walked to the farmer's market/The Grove in fewer than 20 minutes the other day.. I know I'm a long way from my friends in Westwood, but the Thursday & Friday night quietness, the space, and the newness/niceness of my new place are SO worth it.

Today's rave (besides my new apartment): Buzz Coffee, on The Grove Dr. & Beverly Dr. Always fast and friendly service, free Wi-Fi (for customers only), great people watching, and delicious Mochas (and Iced Mochas). I have yet to try anything else on their menu because I just happen to love Mochas, but I'm sure everything else is fabulous also. The downside: no parking. Good thing it's a quick 5-minute bike ride from my new place