Showing posts with label rant. Show all posts

During each dose of chemo, the small group of foods that I was willing to eat changed radically. For instance, during my last dose, I had (I just love that I can refer to chemo in the past tense now!) an overwhelming desire for Trix. When my minions provided me with the magical cereal, I was nearly moved to tears by the atrocities floating in milk - the individual fruit shapes were replaced with two-color orbs! They were basically painted, and more sugary, Kix! With everything else going on, such disappointment was not welcome. But I ate something like two boxes anyway, out of spite. I showed them.

My dad left yesterday morning, so we went out to dinner on Sunday night to celebrate the end of chemo. I picked The Smokin Joint, a delicious barbecue restaurant at the corner of Beverly Hills and West Hollywood. Upon arrival, we faced a small sign that read "On Vacation! Back soon!" The papered-over windows and giant application for change in ownership notice slightly contradicted the "back soon" claim. How dare they be closed when I was finally out of the house to celebrate! The nerve! Well, at the very least, it explained how we found an empty meter directly in front of the restaurant.

Matt requested that I not explode, as it would be a waste of all the chemo that I just went through. I think he was just worried about it's affect on the leather upholstery. So he started suggesting nearby restaurants that were significantly more likely to be accepting customers. I settled for The Stinking Rose, a restaurant that I love, even when I have my heart set of barbecue. Woe was me, but I managed to eat an entire bowl of garlic soup.

Finally, I have some choice words for delivery companies. Various gifts have been arriving since we sent out the invitations. The boxes without any external warnings always arrive in perfect condition. The boxes marked "FRAGILE" all over always arrive sans the rhinoceros that sat upon it.

On that note, I leave you some xkcd yumminess: http://xkcd.com/931/

The LA Times just had to throw it in my face with ANOTHER cover story about the giant pile of stupidity surrounding Roman Polanski. Yes, there are many irregularities in how the case was handled. The prosecutor and judge were obviously biased, and Monsieur Polaski didn't help things by fleeing the country. Now all sorts of celebrities are crying foul: it's the past; he's an artistic genius so he's allowed to be eccentric; it was "making love" (that's how Polaski himself described it). However, none of that changes the fact that HE RAPED A 13 YEAR OLD GIRL. There isn't a caps lock button big enough to adequately express my outrage at the people who publicly support him for entirely inadequate reasons.

Hollywood is bursting at the seams with rich crazy people of questionable morals. All too often these creative souls' actions are dismissed without consequence. I have to ask, though, what kind of person is willing to ignore the intoxication and rape of young girl by a man more than three times her age? Let's suppose, just for a minute, that she not only consented, but was voluntarily participating. While still statutory rape for blindingly obvious reasons*, consensual sex with someone physically and mentally mature enough to make reasonable decisions about her own body is significantly less heinous than ignoring the same girl's wishes and forcing himself upon her. In this Hypothetical Land, the one Polanski seems to be inhabiting, his actions could reasonably be overlooked by some. While I would not, I can understand why others would.

Moving back to reality, she did not consent. Just because he didn't beat her up and tie her to a radiator in the process does not excuse his ignoring of her "No." Though less violent than other cases, IT WAS STILL RAPE. I cannot fathom why anyone would be so willing to allow the perpetrator, who readily admits his guilt, to go free of punishment. To be clear, living a life of luxury and cinematic awards on a different continent is not punishment. Jail time is punishment.

On a whole different level, what does it say about people like Whoopi Goldberg and Woody Allen when they publicly support a child rapist? Do they also think it is acceptable to set puppies on fire and kick them off cliffs? To my knowledge, Kevin Smith is the only celebrity to point out the ridiculousness of defending Polanski. At least he isn't a puppy killer.

*I'll give you a hint - as the adult, he should have ceased and desisted.

Driving home from UCLA today, I almost killed both a bicyclist and a pedestrian. Later on, it occured to me that if I had hit either, or both, I could have just told the cops it was natural selection, and that no one could possibly want those morons in the gene pool. The bicyclist was weaving in an out of 30mph traffic turning onto Wilshire Blvd at a major intersection. The pedestrian was crossing Sepulveda where the road curves rather sharply, about 25m from a traffic light. I had to stop short to avoid hitting the imbecile. Next time, I might just not bother.