Birth Control

Neutering is a much cheaper, much more effective method. Anyone?

So, this is a thing now. And I'm going to put in my two cents on why politicians should leave it the hell alone.


Birth control, and whether or not insurance companies should offer it without a copay and even whether or not women should have access to it, stands to be a real issue in the upcoming election. And when I use the word real, I do not mean legitimate, because it is not a legitimate issue for a presidential contender to discuss. There has been a lot of misinformed crap floating around about what birth control is or what it means to us as a society, almost exclusively spouted by old men, but the most egregious of all comments recently came from Rush Limbaugh, who believes birth control turns women into sluts.


His actual words:

"What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps."

We shouldn't be taking his comments seriously and do our best to just ignore him because he clearly has absolutely no understanding of how birth control works or even what this bill would mean, but there are people who listen to him and take his hateful remarks seriously, and those people scare me. Plus, this is an issue that's not only important for us as a society but something that will directly affect me. So I'm going to point out the glaringly obvious flaws in these comments.


1. Limbaugh doesn't have sex. This one seems the most clear and obvious. If he is having sex without the intention of creating a child (which is against Republican values anyway) he needs to be using some form of birth control so as not to have a child every year, and if he thinks so poorly of birth control he wouldn't use any or support his... wife? girlfriend? one night stand? from using it. So, Limbaugh must not have sex. At least, not with women.


2. Condoms and other barrier methods fail. Oral contraception makes for a lovely back up, and emergency contraception (which is not the same thing as abortion) is pretty darn crucial at preventing abortions, which both conservatives and liberals want, and helps responsible couples do the right thing.


3. Allowing women to have sex with men without getting pregnant does not turn them into sluts or prostitutes. It allows both women and men to have the kinds of relationships they want (most of which are loving and committed) without turning into rabbits and bankrupting our country. I have yet to figure out how this is bad. In fact, if a woman is going to be slutty it's better that she's using birth control so she doesn't either have abortions or bring several unwanted children into the world, which us taxpayers actually would be paying for. Whether that's condoms, barriers or oral contraception, preventing unwanted pregnancies when women and men have sex is something we must do.


4. People will always have sex. Any high school health teacher can tell you that people will want to have sex, and not having birth control available isn't going to stop them, which is why abstinence only education isn't effective and unwanted pregnancies do happen and the foster care system exists. Taking away the ability to prevent pregnancy will not ever in a million years turn people into chaste, abstaining, uber responsible citizens. And when married couples can't prevent themselves from having child after child, we'll change our minds about birth control.


5. Requiring health insurance companies to offer oral contraception without copays is not the same thing as paying women for sex. More accurately, it's giving men a way to have sex with women without being financially responsible for children. Think about it: a man can have the same amount of sex as any woman, but a woman can only get pregnant once a year at best while a man can get 365 women pregnant every year, which he would then have to pay. Who should be a bigger advocate of birth control?


6. Oral contraception treats many health issues unrelated to pregnancy or sex. I know a few women who have such horrible menstrual cycles that they are incapable of doing a whole lot of anything without major pain relievers and birth control helps lessen the intensity of the pain and allows them to have normal lives. Without hormonal birth control many women would be incapable of holding down a job, caring for others or completing tasks because of debilitating pain a few days every single month.


And finally...


7. Women need birth control because we have sex with men. Men get women pregnant because men have sex with women, and birth control prevents men from having children they have no interest in. Men benefit from birth control just as much as, if not more than, women but it seems like some of them are just too dumb to see the connection.

Quadrennium

The official leap year day mascot.

Leap Year!


For some reason the randomness (ok, I know it's not really random and that we need this day every 4 years to balance that fraction of leftover sun time that doesn't quite fit in to our set schedule) of February 29th completely amuses me. Today possibly more so because the morning commute seemed to indicate a lot of people looked at today as a bonus and took a holiday. Disneyland had an extra day of fun, which I'm sure drew tons more crowds than a typical February Tuesday, and honestly I really wish I didn't spend it working.


But there was nachos, so I win a little bit.


Leap Year is traditionally the one day a woman is allowed (encouraged?) to propose marriage to a man. There's at least one restaurant in Britain that is capitalizing on this tradition, letting ladies order the Leap Year Special, a steak with "will you marry me?" seared into it. If I were to propose marriage that is nowhere near the way I'd do it, but it is a fantastic idea and I wonder how many women took advantage of the opportunity. And it does follow the notion that the way to a man's heart is through his stomach, a notion I take to heart. Plus, what meat eater could say no to a woman proposing with steak? You'd at least get a chuckle and a great story if it didn't work out, plus apparently 12 pairs of gloves the man would give his spurrned woman to cover her ringless shame.


I've always pitied people who happened to be born on February 29th (and wondered if it was a coincidence that I have 3 relatives with February 28th birthdays) because they are essentially birthdayless for the majority of their lives, and most places officially recognizing their birthdays on March 1, making them technically wait a day. Fortunately, "leapers" turn 16 on a leap year, which means they can get their driver's licenses on their actual birthday, but unfortunately they don't turn 21 on a leap year, so legal drinking gets to wait a day.


Leap Year does another thing: the days of February and March are exactly the same, except March has a few extras. But during Leap Year there's an extra day of February so that scheme is thrown off, which, however, is something you'd only notice if you manually create a calendar every month.


Unfortunately for me this year, Leap Year mostly sucked, but it did end nicely and I did earn an extra day of pay, so it wasn't all bad. The next Leap Year will be in 2016... wonder what life will be like then?

Race At The Oscars

Those are happy tears!

Leading up to the Oscars over the weekend there seemed to be a lot of talk about Octavia Spencer, who played a maid in The Help, being nominated. Some people were angry not that she was nominated, but that she was nominated for what they considered to be a demeaning role. Their point was that black actors should have more varied roles, not just play maids and servants. But this movie was based on a book, which was written partially about the author's real life experiences in a certain time and place in history when wealthy white households employed poor black maids and servants.

This whole controversy made me wonder what would have made these naysayers happy. They were angry that a black woman was nominated for (and won!) a stereotypical role in a movie. But what about the alternatives?

Should she not have been nominated? Octavia played her character very well. I'm sure it wasn't an easy role but she shone. Her mother worked as a maid, and I think winning an Oscar for this role is a great way to pay tribute and acknowledge the history of her home state and region. Her skills deserved nomination and she deserved the award she won.

Should she not have played the role? Octavia chose the role. If she believed, as a black female actress, that a role as a maid to a wealthy white woman in the American South was demeaning she could have not auditioned, turned it down or made it clear she didn't want any part in it. But clearly she did, and that choice was hers alone.

Should the movie not have been made? OK, well the book was great and the movie made a wonderful story that many more people got to enjoy, so I'm all for this movie. I don't think there's anything wrong with making movies about recent time periods. Plus, it's not like everything's all fine and dandy today; we still have loads of discrimination in all sorts of forms, not the least of which is still race in this day and age.

Should the book not have been written? A good number of the naysayers never even read the book, for various reasons. I can see choosing to not read the book, but it does kind of take away from your ability to be vocal against the validity of it (yeah yeah yeah, I'm vocal against Twilight and I've never read them, but I've seen the movies, sort of, and I'm willing to acknowlede my hypocrisy), and especially your ability to knock the actress who played a character in the ensuing movie. The author grew up in the same place she wrote about, and part of her goal was to more effectively represent what life was like in that time and place, Jackson, Mississippi. While it may seem stereotypical to say that wealthy white families employed their poor black quasi-neighbors as diminished servants, it happened in real life, so why try to ignore it? Again, it's not like we're all that advanced as a society now. Plus, I'd be willing to bet the South has quite a bit more left over discrimination because of their history.

Should producers be focusing on providing black actors with more substantial roles? Sure. Of course. But have you seen the types of "black oriented" movies that are out there, or worse, the TV shows? They're incredibly stereotypical. Black thugs, fat funny guys eating fried chicken, being loud and shouting at each other at all times... how are these characters any better than a black maid? The bargain bin at Blockbuster has these movies, which should be an indication of their quality. The Help isn't reinforcing stereotypes, but plenty of other movies and TV shows are.

When it all comes down to it, Octavia was so happy and excited and beyond composure that she clutched her Oscar and cried onstage. The bottom line is she played a difficult role very, very well (and she held her character true to the book, but that's beside the point) and she deserved the recognition she got. I'd even say she stole a good portion of the movie and was a very significant supporting character. I'm sure she's still very happy she received the most prestigious award in her industry and is glad she chose the role. And I hope those who were knocking her role earlier will shut up about it.

In Which I Am A Gym Member

Now I have to figure out locker room etiquette...

So I joined a gym.


Didn't really think I was the type of person to pay to exercise, but you know what? Having a machine that forces you to run at a consistent pace is pretty great, and being in a room full of other sweaty people trying to improve their bodies is a good motivator. And I think I'm going to like the consistent climate within a gym.


After spending a few weeks researching my options and trying out a couple of places, I picked the least expensive gym, Chuze Fitness, for a few reasons. 


It's near my home and on my way to and from work. I stop in after work about every other day, and when I want to go on the weekends it's a 5 minute drive from my place or a short trip down the freeway from my boyfriends'. A pretty convenient location and I'm more than happy to make the drive and save $20 a month over every other gym around.


It's enormous. You can see the TVs from the freeway. There are 4 rows of various equipment evenly spaced and in front of the various channels so you can watch the show you choose while working out on the machine you choose. There's a whole dedicated weight area and a class space, and so far I haven't had a problem finding a free locker to use.


It's new. And clean. The cleanliness was a big issue for me and my moderate germophobia. There are signs everywhere reminding people to wipe down equipment after sweating all over it, there are paper towels and sanitizing spray conveniently located everywhere and nothing has felt wet or sticky yet. The walls still look freshly painted, the bathroom is clean, and staff members are constantly walking around with hand vacuums. 


It has variety. There are treadmills, two different kinds of elliptical machines, and stationary bikes and all of the machines have a little thing where you can plug in your headphones to listen to whatever show is on that lets you change channels (there are 10 and the variety is pretty solid. I watched Chicken Run last Saturday.). The weight machines seem to cover every muscle and are designed in a way that women can use them without feeling like we're exposing ourselves. All the weight machines face one direction so you're just staring at people's backs. I've found a machine to train every muscle I want, plus there are enough free weights for the standard stuff.


It has free classes. All classes are included in the membership, which is just $10 a month. I took one and it kicked my butt, but in a way that made me feel stronger. It was good to have a leader yelling at me/the class to not stop; I don't do that to myself. There's also a variety of classes to suit a range of fitness styles at different times so you should be able to go to any class you want at least once a week. Plus, signing up for a membership gives you a 30 minute session with a trainer where you can ask questions about fitness and nutrition and focus them towards a specific goal. 


It has a no grunting policy. Seriously. I had to sign saying I would not grunt. The point (I had to ask) is that grunting is intimidating and Chuze wants to be unintimidating, so if you're working out so hard you're grunting you should step it down a notch or take it to a gym that's better suited for that. Plus, people who are body building and serious weight lifters are probably not going to be at this gym because it's designed for the average person, and it goes to great lengths to make the average person feel comfortable. The other gym I tested out did not make me feel this way, and I did feel rather awkward and even weak compared to the other members. And Chuze has a much higher percentage of female members than the other gym I tried, which is more important than I realized. So there's none of this.


It does, however, also have the former-neighbor-turned-one-night-stand as a member, which I discovered, but that's much better than the person I might run into at the gym near my house.


Since my time for a half marathon has only gotten worse, I'm hoping the gym membership will get my butt back into gear and in May I'll beat my best time. But after this race is over I think I'm going to keep the membership so I don't have an excuse to not run when it gets hot over the summer and can get back the tone I used to have in my arms. For $10 a month there's really no reason not to.

Thinking About Money

Cat in a pile of money!

Today one coworker bought another coworker a Coke. The one buying the Coke doesn't make as much as the one receiving the Coke, and she also has 2 kids and can be heard on the phone talking with her fiance about money issues. The coworker receiving the Coke asked how much he owed her and you know what she said?

Don't worry about it.

As in, I just bought you a Coke and do not need you to pay me the $1.25 back. And do you know why? Because the cost of the Coke was so small it wasn't going to make a difference. Her exact words were:

I mean, it's not going to make me go broke.

Hearing her say those words made me feel pretty shitty about myself because I realized I'm selfish enough to know when I've spent $1.25 on someone else. I don't worry about things like that with close friends, my sisters, my roommate or my boyfriend because there's a regular give and take with those people, and something like five bucks, or even a meal or utility bill, aren't worth worrying about with those relationships. But I would remember buying a Coke for an acquaintance or coworker.

I really need to let go of my money worries. I'm constantly recalculating my finances trying to make sure I'll have enough for taxes and car insurance and have been living on a very strict budget since the beginning of the year in order to do so and worrying about money (which is way more fun now that gas prices have jumped 35 cents a gallon in 4 days) is exhausting. And depressing. I know I'm OK and I'm sure I'm going to make it, but I would have asked for that $1.25. Kinda makes me feel like a crappy person. 

I really want to not worry about money. I want to be the person who buys people Cokes, or even lunch, and says don't worry about it. To be the person who tips generously. To take friends out for celebrations on me. To give random presents. And I really, really want to look at the left side of the menu page before the right side, not let price dictate everything I do and be the first question I ask. 

The other want I have, however, is to do something with my life that I feel passionate about, something that's important to others and that might matter in a few years, or even decades. But I'm worried that I'll never be able to have both of those things... to feel like what I'm doing means something and to also not always be so worried about every dollar I spend. I know when I graduated with a writing degree that I said I would be OK with being poor, but if I'm already sick of it at 26 what am I going to do in ten years? My hope is that once large expenses stop I'll be able to save for accidents and unexpected expenses in the future. And then I'll have a buffer so I can stop worrying, and stop feeling bad for saving for fun things, like vacations and computers and bigger beds. 

I feel like I've been saying the word "someday" a lot.