Creating my flow

From Justice League cartoon Season 3

Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:56:21 GMT

Wonder Woman: "Nope, no dating for the Batman.. it might cut into your brooding time."

Batman: "One: Dating within the team always leads to disaster. Two: You're a princess from a society of immortal warriors, I'm a rich kid with issues -- LOTS of issues. And three: If my enemies knew i had someone special
they wouldn't rest until they'd gotten to me, through her."

Wonder Woman (crushing stone with her bare hands): "...Next?"

Scary Home News

Wed, 22 Aug 2007 06:59:46 GMT

So apparently today a bunch of police showed up at my parents' house searching for a fugitive. Dad found him hiding in the rabbit poop under Bun's cage. Somehow both the cop and the dog missed him. SCARY!

This is even worse than the phantom pooper who crapped in our shed and stole our machete. I think. Maybe I should teach my little sister some MCMAP

Our Gateway Drug Study

Thu, 02 Aug 2007 07:41:25 GMT

Since I forgot to post the results of the_armadillo and I's study from earlier this year, here you go. Enjoy!

I apologize if the tables are difficult to read.. LJ can be difficult when it comes to that sort of thing. The spaces don't want to stay, and if I try "rich text" mode, I'm told the paper is too large to post. The graphs worked because I was able to save them as jpegs.
-----

Gateway Drug Precedence:
Investigating Sequences of Use

Introduction
Marijuana, the most widely used of illicit drugs in America (SAMHSA 2005; Marijuana 1988; Labouvie 2002), is commonly presented as “the gateway drug.” The concept of a “gateway drug” is the assumption that individuals will progress from using a lower-stage drug to upper-stage drugs in sequence; that a person is unlikely to proceed to an upper-stage drug without having first tried a lower-stage drug (Labouvie 2002). Our survey-based study operates under the assumption that gateway theory itself is valid (as indicated in our literature review), but with the theory that it may not be presented accurately. Our research question asks if there are correlations between the precedence and sequence of individual illegal drug use, and if there are any trends regarding the sequence in which respondents in our sample used illegal drugs.

For this study, we considered the three drug categories that are most prominent in America (SAMHSA 2005) as lower-stage drugs, with all other drug categories listed below as upper-stage drugs. Our lower-stage drugs are tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana. The upper-stage drug categories include: amphetamines, cocaine, hallucinogens, heroin, inhalants, and non-prescribed medical drugs (SAMHSA 2005). The focus of this descriptive analysis was on the relationships between the drugs. It is important to note that this study is not making any determinations of causality, but instead illuminating trends within gateway theory indicating that marijuana may not be the sole – or even the primary – initiator of upper-stage drug use. If alcohol or tobacco is identified as the primary catalyst, and gateway theory is valid, America’s defenses against upper-stage drug use may be spending a lot of money and effort on an errant cause.

Literature Review
Previous academic research indicates that marijuana is not usually the initial drug used by those who have used upper-stage drugs, observing instead that the sequence is usually initiated with alcohol (Hawkins 2002; Kandel 2002; Labouvie 2002; Rebellon 2006). This was the strongest common theme in our research review, but three articles ignored tobacco use in their studies (Hawkins 2002; Labouvie 2002; Rebellon 2006). This is something we aimed to bring into our own study: being sure not to exclude any drug category. Two of the articles used adolescents exclusively as their sampling frame; interesting, but likely producing data that does not directly relate to our own study (Hawkins 2002; Labouvie 2002). Adolescents may not have had the time or the money to be exposed to or purchase many upper-stage drugs, depending on the ages that are under observation.

There was plenty of mass media to be found referring to marijuana as “The Gateway Drug,” but our research team could not find any academic studies supporting this. The only item from a reputable source that we did locate claiming this was a brochure distributed by the U.S. Customs Service, which stated, “Marijuana is the gateway into further illegal-drug usage” (Marijuana 1988). The brochure did not offer any related data, nor did it provide citations that would have allowed us to further pursue evidence supporting the statement.

While marijuana is not the initial drug of precedence in these studies, it is certainly not disregarded as a factor. Three of the pieces directly remind us that marijuana is still prevalently used prior to the use of upper-stage drugs. That is to say, it was used prior to using upper-stage drugs, but not necessarily used prior to using tobacco or alcohol (Golub 2005; Kandel 2002; Labouvie 2002). One article suggests that both prior tobacco use and prior alcohol use were predictors of marijuana initiation more than marijuana use predicting the use of tobacco and alcohol (Hawkins 2002).

None of the articles in our literature review claimed to identify causality in their reports, and neither do we. It is important to keep in mind that there are factors beyond the use of lower-stage drugs that go into an individual’s choice to abuse any substance. Some of these are pointed out in an appendix to this report. Indeed, one research article showed evidence that the elimination of perceived gateway substances may not necessarily reduce subsequent upper-stage drug use at all (Golub 2002).

Data and Methodology
Based on information synthesized from our literature review, we expected to find a strong correlation between the initial use of marijuana preceding the use of upper-stage drugs, but also that there is an equal or greater correlation between initial use of tobacco or alcohol preceding the use of upper-stage drugs. The way we decided to investigate this was to issue a survey to individuals who currently use or had ever used an upper-stage drug. This population was chosen because, due to the nature of this project as a class assignment, there were restrictions on time and money, which prevented us from surveying a larger, random sample. The result was a more refined and focused study that looked only at the order of use of drugs amongst those who had used upper-stage drugs, with no data regarding those who only used one or more of the lower-stage drugs, and no data that could be used to evaluate the validity of gateway theory itself.

As many of the upper-stage drugs are illegal, a sample of individuals who had engaged in their use was a challenge to find. We ended up using a blend of convenience and snowball sampling by making the survey available to be taken anonymously online. We advertised the survey in a number of drug-related communities on a popular blogging site, and asked individuals whom we knew personally to take the survey and encourage people they knew to participate. Additionally, we contacted a dozen rehabilitation clinics that included drug use as a focus, asking them if we could arrange to administer the survey to their clients. One of the organizations ended up participating and distributed physical copies of the survey to a number of their clients. Overall we had a sample set of 224 usable respondents. The primary questions guiding our research were:

· Are there any correlations between precedence and sequence of individual illegal drug usage?

· Are there any sequential trends in which respondents in our sample used illegal drugs?

Our primary independent variables included upper-stage drug use as a collective and also usage of each individual upper-stage drug category, each of which were compared against our primary dependent variables. The dependent variables we used include the use of each of tobacco, alcohol and marijuana as the drug of precedence. While it is normal to use the independent variables as the variable that comes chronologically first, we intentionally switched this around to establish for each upper-stage drug what was most likely to have been used first. To help clarify, we can sum this up in a statement: Those who have used an upper-stage drug are more likely to have first used one of the following: alcohol, tobacco or marijuana. It would not have worked to analyze the other way -- saying that usage of each of the lower-stage drugs made it more likely for respondents to use an upper-stage drug -- because we had no respondents who did not use upper-stage drugs; there would be no variance. Based on our review of literature, we hypothesized that an individual who had used one or more upper-stage drugs was more likely to have initially used alcohol, specifically.

To determine the order in which our respondents used drugs, we included a question in which we asked the age of first use for each drug or drug category. The intent behind this was so that the respondent was not turned on to the fact that we were specifically investigating drug precedence, because we thought that some might be inclined to be less honest when faced with a controversial topic such as gateway theory. This could have been a mistake, as we found out quickly that many people had tried more than one drug in their first year of drug use, making it impossible to determine exactly which drug came first for a number of respondents. Out of 224 respondents 73 had marked down more than one drug of precedence. To deal with this, we filtered the multiple initial-drug respondents out of the data, leaving us with 151 people who had used only one drug of precedence. In every step of data processing, we compared the group of 224 against the group of 151 to see if it made a difference. While the numbers were different, the ratios remained very similar, and the most important part – the sequences – remained exactly the same. Most of our data presented in the finding section of this report reflects the larger set of 224 respondents; we will note if a table or chart is drawn from the group of 151.

In addition to the variables that related to our primary research questions, we also included questions in the survey intended to help gauge the availability of each drug category and the self-identified reasons each respondent had given for why they used the drug. To evaluate the accessibility of a drug category, we asked the respondents to rate the difficulty they had in acquiring that drug as easy to get, troublesome to get, very difficult to get, or nearly impossible to get. To determine the reasons our respondents gave for using the drugs, we asked them to choose all that apply of five of the most common reasons for drug use in America and also a space for them to write in case they felt a separate reason was applicable (see Appendix A: Self-Identified Reasons for Use).

Some other, less useful variables we looked at included the respondents’ sex and current ages. While we had originally intended to examine the relationship between sex and precedence of drug use to look for correlations, there were no distinguishable differences between male and female responses. The current age of the respondents was not useful either, for two reasons. First and foremost, because we were looking at what age the respondents first used drugs, their current age was irrelevant. In addition to this, our internet-based respondents ended up being almost exclusively between the ages of 20 and 35; similar to the age distribution of registered users on the blogging site we advertised with.5

Research Findings
Out of our pool of 224 respondents, the breakdown of percentages of respondents who had used each drug category is shown in Table 1: Drug Use Percentages. In this, all three lower-stage drugs hold true to their status as the most commonly used drugs, with 98% of respondents having used alcohol, 97% having used marijuana, and 88% having used tobacco.

Table 1:
Drug Use Percentages

Drug Percentage of Total Respondents
Alcohol 98%
Marijuana 97%
Tobacco 88%
Hallucinogens 81%
Non-Prescription 72%
Cocaine 60%
Amphetamines 53%
Inhalants 28%
Heroin 19%
Total Respondents: 224

Table 2: Age of First Use shows the average, median, and mode ages of respondents when they first tried each category of drug. Once more, alcohol, tobacco and marijuana are the leaders, all of which being first used at younger ages than the first use for any of the upper-stage drugs. Note at this point that all of the drugs, when first used, were used unlawfully (being as marijuana is illegal in America, and legal smoking and drinking ages are 21 and 18, respectively.) This may have had an effect on the availability of the lower-stage drugs, which we will look at shortly when we examine drug accessibility.

Table 2:
Age of First Use
Mean Years of Age Median Years of Age Mode Years of Age
Alcohol 14.3 15 14
Tobacco 15.2 15 13
Marijuana 16.2 16 16
Inhalants 16.5 16 18
Hallucinogens 17.9 17 16
Non-Rx 18.1 18 18
Amphetamines 19.3 18 18
Cocaine 19.2 19 18
Heroin 20.8 20 18

Figure 1: Overall Drugs of Precedence illustrates the first look at actual precedence, identifying the overall breakdown of drugs of precedence. In this chart, we can see that over half (52%) of all respondents used alcohol before they used any of the other drugs in the study. After alcohol comes tobacco, representing 28% of the respondents, with marijuana in third place, initiating only 9% of the respondents. In fact, more respondents used an upper-stage drug first of all than used marijuana first (12% vs. 9%).

Figure 1:
Overall Drugs of Precedence

While this provided a strong case for alcohol as the primary drug of precedence, we examined how the data was distributed for each individual drug category as well. This is shown in Table 3: Categorical Lower-Stage Drug Precedence. You can see here that for every category of upper-stage drug, alcohol was the primary drug of precedence. Each row represents one of the upper-stage drug categories and the percentages within that category of the precedence of each of the lower-stage drugs. For example, under the heading “Inhalants,” 68% of respondents who had used an inhalant used alcohol first, 45% of respondents who had used an inhalant used tobacco first, and 19% of respondents who had used an inhalant used marijuana first. In each category, alcohol is more precedent than tobacco by at least 10%, and tobacco is more precedent than marijuana by at least 15% (ergo, in all cases, alcohol shows at least 25% more precedence than marijuana). The column on the right (P =) shows the statistical significance of each figure according to a chi-square analysis using the SPSS data analysis program.

Table 3:
Categorical Lower-Stage Drug Precedence

Ever Used Precedence Drug First Used Percentage of Drug Total

Inhalants Tobacco 28 45%
Total: 62 Alcohol 42 68%
Marijuana 12 19%

Amphetamines Tobacco 51 43%
Total: 118 Alcohol 62 52%
Marijuana 38 32%

Cocaine Tobacco 65 48%
Total: 135 Alcohol 79 58%
Marijuana 40 30%

Heroin Tobacco 17 40%
Total: 42 Alcohol 21 50%
Marijuana 12 29%

Hallucinogens Tobacco 78 43%
Total: 182 Alcohol 109 60%
Marijuana 48 26%

Non-Rx Tobacco 73 45%
Total: 161 Alcohol 92 57%
Marijuana 43 27%

Total Respondents: 224

Even though the data here shows a strong case for alcohol as the primary drug of precedence, the statistical significance does not support it in most cases. We suspect that because of the way we processed the data, the analysis was skewed; the variables were processed in reverse from the standard method (as mentioned earlier), and our sample was drawn without any respondents who did not use upper-stage drugs.

To take an even closer look at marijuana in particular, we used the notion suggested in one article that indicated tobacco and alcohol as precedent to marijuana use (Hawkins 2002). Figure 2: Drugs First Used by Respondents Who Used Marijuana shows how precedence is broken down within lower-stage drugs alone. 50.3% of marijuana-users first used alcohol,

29.4% of marijuana-users first used tobacco, 11.2% of marijuana-users first used an upper-stage drug, and 9.8% of marijuana users started out with marijuana. Do note that this is still only representative of a population that has also used upper-stage drugs. It is possible that individuals who have only used lower-stage drugs (not found in our study) may show a different trend.

One might assume that because alcohol and tobacco are not outlawed that they are easier to acquire, which may be suggested as a reason for their strong presence. With this idea in mind, our final chart, Figure 3: Level of Difficulty in Obtaining Drugs, shows that respondents had very nearly equal levels of difficulty acquiring alcohol as marijuana. Likely, as reflected in the starting ages, this could be because alcohol was also illegal at its common starting age.

Conclusions
Our findings show that the first drug used by individuals who have ever used an upper-stage drug was predominantly alcohol, followed by tobacco, followed by marijuana. This holds true for every individual upper-stage drug category as well. Within these three drugs of highest precedence, marijuana was used 80% of the time after having first used alcohol or tobacco. These results establish a strong case for alcohol to be defined as “the gateway drug” more so than the commonly accepted marijuana. While legality of each of the lower-stage drugs may have played a role in their precedence, respondents found alcohol and marijuana to be equally difficult to acquire. At the time of first use for most respondents, both were unlawful to possess. The analysis is not shown to be statistically significant (possibly due to experimenter error), so should not be applied to the greater drug-using population. Even so, our figures are concurrent with our literature review, which indicated similar trends. According to the data we processed, the concept of marijuana as the sole initiator of upper-stage drug use does not stand up against alcohol or tobacco.

References:
Golub, Andrew and Bruce D. Johnson. 2002. “Substance Use Progression and Hard Drug Use in Inner-City New York.” Pp. 90-114 in Stages and Pathways of Drug Involvement: Examining the Gateway Hypothesis. Denise B. Kandel. Cambridge University Press.

Golub, Andrew; Johnson, Bruce D.; Dunlap, Eloise. 2005. “Subcultural Evolution and Illicit Drug Use.” Addiction Research & Theory Vol. 13, Issue 3:217-229.

Hawkins, J. David; Hill, Karl J.; Guo, Jie; Battin-Pearson, Sarah R. 2002. “Substance Use Norms and Transitions in Substance Use: Implications for the Gateway Hypothesis.” Pp. 42-64 in Stages and Pathways of Drug Involvement: Examining the Gateway Hypothesis. Denise B. Kandel. Cambridge University Press.

Kandel, Denise B. and Kazuo Yamaguchi. 2002. “Stages of Drug Involvement in the U.S. Population.” Pp. 65-89 in Stages and Pathways of Drug Involvement: Examining the Gateway Hypothesis. Denise B. Kandel. Cambridge University Press.

Labouvie, Erich and Helen R. White. 2002. “Drug Sequences, Age of Onset, and Use Trajectories as Predictors of Drug Abuse/Dependence in Young Adulthood.” Pp. 19-41 in Stages and Pathways of Drug Involvement: Examining the Gateway Hypothesis. Denise B. Kandel. Cambridge University Press.

Marijuana – The Gateway Drug. 1988. U.S. Customs Service Drug Awareness Program.

Rebellon, Cesar J. and Karen Van Gundy. 2006. “Can Social Psychological Delinquency Theory Explain the Link Between Marijuana and Other Illicit Drug Use? A Longitudinal Analysis of the Gateway Hypothesis. Journal of Drug Issues Vol. 36, Issue 3:515-539.

SAMHSA: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2006). Results from the 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings (Office of Applied Studies, NSDUH Series H-30, DHHS Publication

End Notes

Labouvie’s definition used the term “higher-stage” instead of “upper-stage.” For the sake of consistency in this report, we decided to use “upper-stage” throughout.

Our own data showed that most people who have used upper-stage drugs first used each drug between the ages of 14 and 20. Depending on how one defines “adolescent,” it may not matter very much that (Hawkins 2002) and (Labouvie 2002) focused on adolescents instead of a broader age range.

Media exposed primarily through television and the Internet.

Data regarding the self-identified reasons for drug use were qualitative and not scientifically approached, so had no direct relevance to our research questions. We included some of these results in Appendix A: Self-Identified Reasons For Use.

The site we used to host our survey was www.freeonlinesurveys.com.

We are not identifying the website for the sake of confidentiality.

We are not identifying the organization for the sake of confidentiality.

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:59:11 GMT

Quite possibly the best feedback I've received on a college assignment.

From my writing teacher:

"Yes. Write poetry."

A moment

Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:05:11 GMT

A moment is composed of feelings. Were time to stop, there would be no sound, no light, and no gravity. A moment is dark and void and without motion. The existence of a moment is wholly dependent on the next moment... and the prior. It is not a frame of time, but a perpetual movement, a symphony that won't stop. Just as with a symphony, any one note or chord does not carry the power of its siblings. The only moments that exist alone in the universe are manifest in memory, cherished chunks of life; products of countless other contributing moments, giving value long after their time has passed.

Fri, 18 May 2007 02:18:01 GMT

The Crying Girl’s Lemonade
by, existence_ltd

Prison is often seen as the antithesis of freedom. While most people acknowledge that being imprisoned is likely to change a person, the nature of that change either goes unaddressed, or is disregarded altogether. To have been convicted in America presages a social and legal stigma that follows an individual all his or her life, a stain that will not fade with time. Quite often, people have their own idea of what an ex-convict is. Humor me for a moment: Which of the following do you think best describes an ex-convict?

a) A crusty dirty old man, with no teeth and ratty clothes.
b) A dangerous person who should be watched.
c) A bigger, scary-looking guy with tattoos. Bald. Scary face.
d) A ray of sunshine in anyone’s life.

Wanting to get a feel for the general attitude towards ex-convicts, I polled a college chemistry class, asking them to write down their first impressions upon hearing the term, “ex-convict.” The first three selections above are quotes from the responses I received. The fourth is how my ex-convict described herself.

Telling people that you interviewed an ex-convict often triggers for them the image of a large, tattooed, dangerous man on a motorcycle (such as the ex-con described collectively by the chemistry class). I asked around in an Internet community for an ex-convict to participate in an interview, and a member knew someone who fit the bill and passed on my email address. The ex-convict contacted me and we arranged to meet, one-on-one at a coffee shop. When I explain this, people are still rather shocked. “How daring!” they say, and, “Isn’t that dangerous?” I smile and shrug at them, amused by the instant respect I receive, and think of the woman I spoke to: Renée. Renée, who describes herself as short and round, neglecting to mention her kind brown eyes and easy smile; Renée, who is the go-to gal in her friends group when there is a need for hugs or tears; Renée, who likes gardening and bird watching… The only apparent trait Renée has in common with that grizzly man is the motorcycle; she rode to our interview on it, a lightweight Suzuki Savage that she uses to get around town. Otherwise, the differences between that constructed ex-con and she are as stark as those between being imprisoned and living free.

Renée has her own ideas about freedom, and her experience in prison did, indeed, influence them. She did not leave prison hardened and ready to commit crimes again, like people may assume (even though she did get a few lessons in criminal methods). She did not leave prison with gang or mob ties, or with a hatred for the society that put her there. Renée left prison with a newfound appreciation for freedom and a new set of values; aspects of her personality that would continue to develop throughout her life.

Born in 1959, and raised in Portland, Oregon, by authoritarian, alcoholic parents, Renée grew up somewhat rebellious, reaching her teenage years in the latter part of America’s civil rights era. Her perspectives and attitude were different than her conservative parents’. She would argue with them about race and equality, often getting upset when her parents would call African Americans offensive names. Her parents would respond by asserting that she was abnormal. “What’s the matter with you?” they would say, and, “You’re weird because you don’t agree with us.” It was a challenging situation for a young woman, with no way to win, and no outlets for her frustration.

At home, she was not even allowed to cry in front of her parents, and Renée felt stymied. Her attempts towards freedom, at the time, came in the form of disobedience, a habit that would continue into her adult life. Her parents would tell her, “No, you can’t go to that movie with your friends,” or, “No, you can’t go to the A&W drive-in,” and she would assert her personal freedom by lying about where she was going and participating in these activities anyway. “Even though they tried to cap my freedom,” she said, “I still took it back.” Renée jokingly diagnoses herself as having “obstinance disorder,” characterized by her distrust and flippant attitude towards authority. She declared to me with a smile, “Whenever anyone tells me what to do, I have to do the opposite!” She would later discover – the hard way – that being able to resist this teenage oppression was much more freedom than she would have in her twenty-first year, where “taking it back” was simply not an option.

The late teens and early twenties are a crucial stage in the development of a man or woman. For Renée, it was her first taste of liberty away from the grip and scrutiny of her parents, and, as she puts it herself, she “went a little crazy.” Exercising her freedom intruded on class and study time, and Renée got D’s and F’s during her first (and only) year of college at Oregon State University. Her parents decided then to cut off her finances, a move to which she responded, “Okay, I’m outta here!” She ended up working as a bank teller, standing at a boring job where she spent her idle time dreaming up ways to swindle the company. One day, she said to herself, “Why not?” and actually began to steal little bits of money from the bank. A hundred dollars here, five hundred dollars there – the funds for a partying lifestyle. Eventually, she withdrew money at a location where she was recognized, and that was the end of it. Figuring that she was going to be caught anyway, Renée jokingly told me that if she could, she would go back in time and tell herself, “You should have done five million dollars!”

The idea of consequences for this activity was unimportant to young Renée. She thought that, since hers was a white-collar crime, she would get a slap on the wrist and reprimand. She described her sentencing as somewhat of an anomaly, suggesting that the judge must have really wanted to “get her” for some reason. According to Renée, most people who commit similar crimes to hers get punished in the form of restitution and probation – or only one of the two. She was sentenced with both of those, plus prison time: one year in federal prison in California.

Both women and men were inmates of this particular prison. Although the security systems and safeguards were the same for both sexes, it was defined as maximum security for women, and minimum security for men. The women Renée associated with there were convicted for crimes like drug possession, helping Mexicans sneak across the border, conspiracy, and various forms of fraud. Renée said that she rubbed elbows with Lynnette “Squeaky” Fromme, the woman who attempted to assassinate then-president Gerald Ford five years prior in 1975. Renée maintained a positive attitude. She told me what she said to herself back then: “If I’m going to have this experience, I am going to make it as positive as possible. It’s nobody’s fault but my own that I was there; I wasn’t blaming my parents or society or anything like that. I took full responsibility and I really did use the experience.” Her time was spent working in the prison warehouse, and then managing it, exercising her body and mind when she could. She was released on parole, and came back to the free world no longer a young student – now she was a young felon. Intent on doing good and never again being put in a situation where she was denied her freedom, Renée committed to building a life.

After a number of leadership jobs, voluntary community services, activism, and nearly three decades of keeping her nose clean, Renée still needs to report on every application that she has been a convicted felon. “I’m an ex-felon, not a recidivist,” said Renée, “It’s not like I’m a career criminal.” Ever since she was jailed nearly thirty years ago, she is obligated to check that conspicuous box. This leads to paperwork, questions, and quite often distrust, all of which become a persistent hassle for everyone who has been convicted. Renée has an opinion on that:

Come on! When is enough enough? It’s never, and I think that’s wrong. There has been
reform in how prisoners are treated while they’re in prison, but there hasn’t been any
reform in how you treat prisoners afterwards. They’re let out, and if you’re met with
that much obstacle – having that stuff shoved in your face every time you try to better
yourself – where is your incentive to better yourself? There’s way more incentive to go
back and do it wrong again. ‘Cause that’s what you know, and that’s what’s easy, and
that’s what you learned in prison.

To avoid this situation and the prejudices that spark from it, Renée has, over the decades, found ways to be her own boss. She started a newspaper in Portland, owned a hotel on the Oregon coast, as well as other small businesses here and there. These endeavors went untainted by the fact that she was an ex-convict, except for the newspaper. She started this paper in the early nineties, a competitor with Portland’s popular Willamette Week. When it became known to her staff that she had been convicted for stealing money from that bank so long ago, they accused her of doing the same from the paper and forced her to leave. She is still bewildered as to how she could steal money from the company she owned. True to her philosophy of making a good experience out of a rough situation, though, she made the best of it and moved on to her next project.

Now, Renée is settling down, tired of the hassles concomitant with being the boss. She is going to school to become a construction manager and has applied for a job with the City of Portland. The inevitable questions that rise from having had to check the “I am a felon” box on the city’s application is not something she looks forward to, but hopes to get through successfully. She does not have to face this alone, however; having left her biological family behind, she has built her own, established through bonds of love and friendship. She has crafted and holds around her this close weave of new family, tied by a common thread that she feels connects all humans, superseding racism, social status, and enmity. This common thread is the binding and driving force that sustains the close-knit group.

In all situations, Renée does her best to find that thread, particularly when someone is having a rough time. Those who know Renée come to her when they need to cry, and she will cry with them. When she was telling me this, she wanly smiled through moist eyes and called herself a “portable wailing wall.” A ray of sunshine is what she strives to be. I asked her how she accomplishes this, and her little smile widened: “I make lemonade out of the lemons.”

Renée cries for herself as well, and with good reason. Her parents are distant and cold. The last time she had a conversation with her mother, she was told, “You just pretend that I’m dead, and I’ll just pretend that you’re dead.” Despite the shroud of estrangement that obscures their relationship, she wishes she could reestablish her connection to her parents, but it seems impossible. Renée likened the situation to a Grand Canyon of time and distance between them, feeling helpless. “I have this little fantasy of Oprah bringing us all together,” she said. “It would have to be something like that. I’ve even run into them at funerals. [I] went up and said hi, but after that, still nothing. When my grandmother died, they didn’t even contact me to tell me.” Renée’s eyes misted, and she sniffed, and I, who rarely can cry alone, felt my throat tighten and tears threaten as I watched her unearth difficult memories. There is a sort of therapy that comes from a good cry, and Renee agrees with that; the release is healthy. She pointed out that laughter is much the same, seeing no contradiction in being both quick to laugh, and quick to cry.

“I have my chosen family now, people I’m close with,” she said. She lives for these people, the family she has built around her, and through her experiences has learned to not look too far in the future. Her motto is to just make life the best it can be in the here and now.

I’m pushing fifty – I’ll be forty-eight this year and my partner is sixty-three and she
just retired and she’s looking at some health issues that definitely will shorten her
life. She’s looking at maybe another good ten to fifteen years. I look at that and I
think gosh, we’ve been together eleven years, and that just flew by. So if you think
you’ve only got another good ten or fifteen, what am I lookin’ at? Don’t want to look too
far ahead. I’ve always lived my life for just now. I never look ahead. I never set
five-year goals. Everyone says you gotta have those five-year goals, ten-year goals – I
just want to be alive in five years… Even at this stage you think you’re gonna live
forever… I had a partner who died of cancer, I had a business partner who died of AIDS.
I’ve had death in my life – People who were my age, that I was close to. That’s where I
got my live for today attitude. It’s all you got. You know you’ve got this, right now.
Five minutes from now, I don’t know I’ve got that. A year from now, I don’t know if I’ll
have that.

This is Renée: She lives for the freedom of the moment and the bonds that twine us all together. She has had difficult times and met them with tears and tenacity. True to her ethos, she has taken the lemons that life has thrown at her and squeezed, with all the vivacity of a girl who enjoys the taste of freedom – and drinks deep from the juice.

Tue, 08 May 2007 16:25:16 GMT

So for some reason Rent skipped Oregon altogether. They're in Seattle right now and then Spokane -- SPOKANE -- but they skip Portland.

*sigh*

I was hoping to take my sister.

WTFonecall

Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:34:11 GMT

receptionist: "Hello, Student Center for Health and Counseling, how may I help you?"

me: "Hi! I was wondering if the SHAC had a physical therapist on staff?"

receptionist: "We cannot."

me: "Uhh... Okay?"

*click*

Embrace your weight

Wed, 21 Mar 2007 16:30:58 GMT

Overweightness and obesity are aspects of one of the least-talked about American cultural discriminations. Not only are overweight and obese people considered less attractive, but they are also assumed to be less intelligent, less responsible, and even less moral than others.

Yet another of our double standards. You're not allowed to be fat, but you'd better eat that American fast food and drink those lattes! To be "technically" overweight or obese does not necessarily mean you are unhealthy, either. You can be fit and fat at the same time; fit obese persons have half the death rate of individuals who are normal weight but unfit.

Anyway, I thought this was a good video.

When you know they shouldn't say that, but don't know how to tell them

Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:44:47 GMT

What a great resource this website is.

Responding to Everyday Bigotry

Your brother routinely makes anti-Semitic comments. Your neighbor uses the N-word in casual conversation. Your co-worker ribs you about your Italian surname, asking if you're in the mafia. Your classmate insults something by saying, "That's so gay."

And you stand there, in silence, thinking, "What can I say in response to that?" Or you laugh along, uncomfortably. Or, frustrated or angry, you walk away without saying anything, thinking later, "I should have said something."

In the spring of 2004, the Southern Poverty Law Center gathered hundreds of stories of everyday bigotry like these from people across the United States. They told their stories through e-mail, personal interviews and at roundtable discussions in four cities: Baltimore, Md.; Columbia, S.C.; Phoenix, Ariz.; and Vancouver, Wash.

People spoke about encounters in stores and restaurants, on streets and in schools. They spoke about family, friends, classmates and co-workers. They told us what they did or didn't say — and what they wished they did or didn't say.

And no matter the location or relationship, the stories echo each other.

When a Native American man at one roundtable discussion spoke of feeling ostracized at work, a Jewish woman nodded in support. When an African American woman told of daily indignities of racism at school, a white man leaned forward and asked what he could do to help. When an elderly lesbian spoke of finally feeling brave enough to wear a rainbow pin in public, those around the table applauded her courage.

Speak Up! echoes that applause, encouraging everyone to take a stand against everyday bigotry.

Click here for the whole shebang.
http://www.tolerance.org/speakup/index.html

Muskoxenstein 3D

Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:34:42 GMT

My chemistry teacher was explaining how paradodecylbenzenesulfonate works in water (you see, the main carbon chain is hydrophobic while the so3- substituent is not) by describing how a musk oxen herd will form a ring, horns pointed out, with their young in the center. Except it would be a sphere. A floating sphere of musk oxen. Can anyone please render a sphere of defensive musk oxen for me? Maybe floating in space?

That would fill me with mirth.

If you or someone you know has ever done the good (bad) drugs, please help me earn my degree!

Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:39:05 GMT

Hey, I'm doing a survey for a graduate-requirement research course regarding drug use. Please, your help would be greatly appreciated, as I need 150 respondents by February 9th.

Our sampling frame consists of individuals who have ever used or currently use an illegal drug besides marijuana. Whether or not you have used marijuana is included in the questions, but is not the focus of this project, so if the only illicit drug you've ever used is marijuana, don't worry about it.

If you or anyone you know has ever used an illegal drug, please click here to participate in our survey, or send them this link:

http://FreeOnlineSurveys.com/rendersurvey.asp?sid=ngo5phfm26588z6256578

It's short and your responses are completely anonymous, and data will not be shared with anyone except for our team members and instructor.

Thank you!

How to read the Metric System

Sat, 27 Jan 2007 05:16:37 GMT

Annnnd, my Uncyclopedia article!

I made a facebook community to educate the world about giant squid...

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:24:14 GMT

Giant squid, once believed to be mythical creatures, are squid of the Architeuthidae family, represented by as many as eight species of the genus Architeuthis. There is also a species called the Colossal Squid, but that's just French for "Oh Shit! A Giant Squid!" For our purposes, they are one and the same.

Giant squid are deep-ocean dwelling animals that can grow up to 20 meters long! - For those of you who don't know the metric system, that's like 10 football fields! Wow! And amazingly enough, except for one detail, they reproduce just like people do: "the male of the species has a prehensile spermatophore-depositing tube, or penis, of over 3 ft in length, which extends from inside the animal's mantle and apparently is used to constantly inject sperm-containing packets into the female squid's arms." PREHENSILE! WAY COOL!

Sperm whales, however, take this waving about of the genitalia as a snide comment about their name (they're very touchy about that) and will attack giant squid on sight. Some think that the sperm whales are just compensating for a cruel irony, which would explain also why they buy huge trucks that never go off-road. But that's a species of a different color.

Being as big and randy as giant squids are all the time requires plenty of sustenance. Their diet consists mostly of wood and ninjas. This is why they attack ships all the time, and is retroactively the reason we ever began mining mineral ore: to make metal ships so we woulnd't get ett (I bet you didn't know how important they were historically! Be sure to check out the picture captions here for more history). They have evolved to be extremely sensitive to the sound waves produced by electric guitars. This explains why you never see ninjas rocking out in a pirate ship after flipping out and beheading the crew. The whole scenario is a giant squid's wet dream (a horrifying spectacle best left unmentioned). A meal like that could feed them for a month.

Giant squids tend to worship Cthulhu, but definitely can't speak Japanese very well.

Rank, Change, & Hispanoamérica

Fri, 12 Jan 2007 20:20:13 GMT

I had a pleasant surpise last weekend at drill. I got promoted! I was just on the verge of being sure that it would never happen, but I walk in at 0531 Saturday morning for 0530 formation, apparently right after they'd called my name to fall in behind formation for promotion. (This says something about their organization; I wasn't even supposed to be there that day and they were looking for me.) I've been a lance corporal since May 1, 2003, and I'm a corporal now. That is, a Level 4 Human Marine.

This means more responsibility and $50 worth of uniform items. I think I'll get them tailored when I have the new insignia and stripes attached; I've gained about 50 lbs since boot camp. I think 20 of it is body hair. As a non-commissioned officer, I'm now authorized to get a NCO Sword. It's mostly used for ceremonial purposes, but I'm pretty sure that technically it's still authorized for use as a sidearm. Think about that for a minute. Tempting if I ever find myself in a combat situation, but I'll be sticking with the Beretta.

The two corporals I went to Pennsylvania with were promoted to sergeants at the same time. For the next few months, I'll be drilling at Fort Lewis instead of in Portland with one of them and one of our newer Marines. They're both good guys, but the sergeant is expected to do sergeant administration duties which he doesn't know yet, and the corporal (me) is expected to do corporal administration dutes which I don't know yet, and the lance corporal will be expected to say, "Hey, I'm just a lance corporal." It should be a learning experience full of acting like we know exactly what we're doing, getting back to people with their questions, and clandestine calls back to Portland for guidance. This duty does, however, put me very close to the greater Tacoma area, so I'll have to explore some possibilities...

There is one lance corporal who has been in longer than me in our platoon. She's one of my favorite Marines because we see eye-to-eye on a lot of things - particularly the exact amount of excited we are to be at drill at any given time (typically "not very at all"). A knowing look can relay so much. She hasn't been able to get promoted because she's in the "body control program (BCP)," a highly flawed fitness qualification group. Basically if you are above a certain weight for your height, you can't get promoted until you make and maintain that weight. She is a Latina around 5'4" tall and is probably in just as good of shape as I am in. Buuut, because she is solidly built and has large breasts, she's stuck in BCP. This happens to male Marines too, if they are particularly muscular (if you're male and have large breasts you probably deserve to be in BCP). The criteria is based only on height and weight, so people get stuck in a rut because of how they're built. Does that seem right to you?

I mentioned that she was Latina, right? For some reason I get along really well with people frm Spanish-speaking origins, when I'm in a situation where we interact. It's easier for me to connect with them than with whiteys for some reason I can't quite gauge. Like my wrestling practice partner in high school was just as motivated as I was about practice ("not very at all") so we could slack off together while making it look like we were working hard. I connected better than most other recruits with the recruit who was our platoon chaplain's aide in boot camp who left behind a huge family. The gangster from LA who joined the Marines to get out of that rut and support his little brother and sister. Recruit Morales, whose name-tape frequently read names like Wannabe or Shitbag because he had the same last name as one of our drill instructors. Little Lopez, signed up for infantry, who was about 110 lbs and had a horrible bruise on his shoulder just from carrying a rifle (He's probably been to Iraq 2 or 3 times now; I hope he's doing alright). And also like mom's friend who grew up in Spain, whose family suffered under Franco - I gave him Musashi, and he gave me a secret martial art and a cobra in a bottle. Good people, all, who I instinctively got along with. Does that make me racist?

Goals, school & anomic future.

Sun, 24 Dec 2006 19:14:26 GMT

It's taken me sixteen-and-a-half years of school to become an academic student. What changed?

I guess I have goals now. For the longest time, school existed for me as an institution based upon grades, to the neglect of education. Yes, you would get your education, but as a side effect to the oh-so-important Grades. Since I was very young, this seemed a fallacy to me, and I was jaded early against the system, instead doing what I felt was more benefit to my own practical education. I didn't fully realize that actuality of how any given concept can be made real in its consequences. Even then, it's not so much that I actively resisted good grades, I just never saw the need to change my ways to enable myself to earn them.

While I still maintain today that social activities, extracurricular books and even some media exposure is valuable to the education of today's youth, I've accepted the importance of grades. This is symptomatic of a greater paradigm of mine which desperately believes that the world can exist as I think it should, without the inefficiencies, inconsistencies, dichotomies and redundancies that are so glaringly apparent to me. I see my sister slipping down a similar path, and now find myself in the role of the adult trying to explain to the teenager how life really is. I'm thankful that she actually listens to me (anything Dad says becomes "oppression"), but it's difficult to change. She, like I at that age, doesn't have any goals because there is no clear path and real life seems so far away.

Do you remember when high school was an eternity? Promptly, it becomes a twinkle, light years away, and we are faced with ourselves.

I've got goals now, and I am forced to wonder if they are to be pursued at the rescindment of my greater ambitions. Do you shoot high or do you shoot realistically? I am gradually beginning to accept the idea of living for myself; I have that option as a privilege. The problem is that a big part of me wants to enable those who don't have that privilege to live for themselves. I've got it in me to be a leader, I know that, and I want to put it to use to fight social injustice, but how can I apply it? Do I let go of that drive until I'm independent and financially secure? By then will it be too late to make a difference?

A medical profession will be fine; I think I'll really enjoy being a physical therapist (or doctor, if I can swing it). Improving lives one at a time has its own sense of satisfaction, but every time I look at an insurance payment, I'll think of those who don't have that privilege and wonder what I could have done to fix it. I've got this distinct feeling that there is a greater purpose for me, and if it doesn't come to fruition I hope that I can be satisfied with all the little things I will have done. Otherwise I'll become a rather sad old man.

It has come to a point where most of my friends are graduating or have graduated from college:

What drives you? Do you have goals besides survival and self-sufficiency? What do you think you'll be doing with your life? Do you have a sense of purpose?

Recovery

Sat, 25 Nov 2006 07:57:26 GMT

The nurse joked about how many hours it would take to shave my legs, then my doctor initialed each one, a reminder that both legs needed doing. They wheeled me into the operating room with old-style Mississippi blues in the background, said I was going to go to sleep now, and I was out. At some point I guess I stopped breathing (Mom snooped in the folder while I was recovering) and they had to clear my airway. Probably my tongue. No big deal.

Since then, I've been taking a Percocet pill about every six hours, and I'm quite coherent and lucid, provided I'm awake. My routine the last couple days seems to be awake for two hours, asleep for three, with slight variations. My legs don't really hurt, but their soreness and stiffness increase each day. I'm using the crutches to get around more often and it helps, but I'm a little concerned about humping my schoolbooks and computer around. Lucky for me I have a spectacularly supportive girlfriend.

So I spend this weekend in turns sleeping, studying and watching television in equal parts, living on Thanksgibbin' leftovers. Not too bad.

Surgery tomorrow

Wed, 22 Nov 2006 06:57:42 GMT

Tomorrow morning, Doc is going to slice open the lining of my afflicted muscles. I'll be under a general anesthetic, so if I don't wake up you're all invited to the funeral. Joy!

Either way, I may be too assed out on anesthesia and narcotics to do this later, so HAPPY THANKSGIVING!

On a side note: I'm getting out of class one whole day earlier than all you [lovable] twonchkins!

I'm SO done with fall term already. Ugh!

Tue, 14 Nov 2006 00:32:40 GMT

This is the point in the term where there are 3 weeks left and all of the professors are redoubling their efforts to make our heads pop off. It's kind of like that game at the carnival where you fill the balloon coming out of the clown's head until it bursts by shooting water in it's mouth from across the counter. Except you're the clown, and you have three or four people, all aiming at you, who just upgraded to firehoses.

I'm not going to rant about all the nonsense that's going on, but I will say one thing:

A student should not be marked down simply because the professor disagrees with their opinion. If they answer all of the questions with evidence, quotes & citations, it should be graded fairly. Infuriating!

Joining the horde of students getting stressed in November

Wed, 01 Nov 2006 17:40:53 GMT

I sit in chemistry and the numbers and symbols mean nothing. I can only read my textbook on the weekends. Tuesday and Thursday evenings are for the other three books and various readings. Monday I have referee meetings immediately after work, and Wednesday I have class til 9:20pm. Friday is for relaxing. The daylight hours are for classes. I have to write my papers in class. I'm never doing 18 credits and working again. Now that I'm somewhat serious about school, the anecdote about time applies:

In college you can have three of these things, but not all four: Good Grades, Sleep, A Job, Social Life.

With the few friends I still have close enough to hang out with, we play blind-bazooka-monkey with our schedules. So far I think I've gone 'out' once - perhaps twice - socially since school started. At least it's going by fast. I am starting to slip though - I'm just on the precipice right now of falling into my freshman-year trend of giving up on class. Only 5.5 weeks left until winter break.. at least it's going by swiftly. Three of my classes I think I'll do just fine in, probably get As or Bs.

I am worried about chemistry. I got a 66% on the midterm and class means nothing without having read the textbook, which I just don't have time to do before the first class of the week. It's poorly written and everything in it uses everything we're supposed to have learned prior so I grind through the text and try to teach myself at a rate of about a half-hour per page. I think I'd learn much faster if I could just sit down with someone who can functionally explain instead of just say how it is.

If I weren't working I'd have enough time, but I need the money. I went from summer to overwhelmed in about 3 days.

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:34:10 GMT

I reposted the pics from this morning because some had trouble seeing them.

There's a new Southpark episode about World of Warcraft. Good stuff. Check it out, courtesy of youtube:

It is broken up into three ~8 minute sections.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Do you remember when you could scarcely imagine downloading - forget about streaming - video onto your computer?

If it looks like a horse... (the diagnostic appointment)

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:03:15 GMT

I came in and he felt my legs and anesthetized about a 2-square-inch area around the spot where he wanted to gauge the pressure inside the fasciae then stuck me with the gauge. It really didn't hurt much, although there was always a sudden jolt whenever the needle pierced the fascia (we couldn't anesthetize anything but the skin). I didn't squirt, but I did leak blood when the needle came out.

I don't know for sure the actual unit of pressure, but the number was 43 in one and 45 in the other which raised his eyebrows as quite high. After this, I walked fast on the treadmill with my backpack to aggravate the syndrome and get all swolled up. I limped back with 2 rock-hard anterior tibialii (sp?).

Now, after the pressure was pretty much as high as it usually gets, Doc stuck me again, getting results of 15 and 17: far lower than the initial measurements. This did not make sense. We figured that the initial reading must have been wrong somehow. Doc cleaned the apparatus and several more attempts were made at different angles with not much variance. 18, 20... 20, 22.

We decided to try a different spot. Doc Murphy anesthetized me a little higher up than the initial areas. While the anesthetic took effect, I headed back to the treadmill for another 5 minutes of speed-walking. After this, my legs were really hurting because it was the third time I'd pushed myself to the point of high pain in a half hour, with no stretching or relief. This time it was 24, 25.

For a proper diagnosis of Compartment Syndrome, the pressure inside the fascia is supposed to be at 30 or higher. I did not meet this by measurement data, so I will have to come back again next week to do it all over again; this time with very careful initial measurements. Besides from getting a score of 30, if the difference is high enough between my typical pressure and the max pressure of 25 or whatever, a diagnosis can be made as well. My issue with this is that my legs are constantly under a little bit of pressure from this, so a comparison between 50% above normal and 100% above normal might not reflect a big enough difference. I will adjust for this hopefully by taking it easy this week, walking as little as possible, stretching much and hopefully getting some massages from a benevolent girlfriend. I hope that this will make for the most accurate measurement possible next Thursday.

Without this diagnosis, I cannot be treated (minor surgery). My main concern is that if this incapacitates me when I play basketball or ultimate frisbee, what happens if I have to be depended on in a combat situation should I (hopefully never) be activated? Without this diagnosis, I officially have no problem, and the military docs are not very flexible when it comes to complaining service-members: see malingering. One of my physical therapists was there, and he said, "If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse and sounds like a horse, well, it's probably a horse." While I wholly agree, the military bureacracy likes to see numbers.

If it keeps getting worse, I kill cells. Once it starts tingling or feeling numb, it's too late for little bits of my body.

Big big needles

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 05:46:17 GMT

I'm seeing the doctor tomorrow to get a proper diagnosis for my Compartment Syndrome.

This has been bothering ever since the end of boot camp in 2003, and finally something is being done about it.

Basically, whenever I engage in activity such as fast walking, basketball, ultimate frisbee, military humps or sometimes jogging, my anterior tibialis muscles swell a little too much for their compartments (imagine the skin on a sausage). It really really hurts when it gets like this, and it pretty much increases with every step, although it's never been enough to physically make me stop. This means when I am on a 10-mile hump in the field with 70 lbs of gear I can't let myself fall out - because I can still go on. Ow.

There's a little blurb & pic for you. Tomorrow morning, the doctor will be sticking my legs with a pressure gauge before and after I engage in physical activity to see just how bad it is.

It'll be something like this:

The only real treatment is to have surgery, which will likely be something like this:

Kind of scary, yeah, but at least I won't look like

Can you tell I'm studying right now?

Sun, 15 Oct 2006 18:44:36 GMT

Play Prodigy's song Breathe and watch Gir dance to it. Wheeeeee.

On scientific nomenclature.

Sun, 15 Oct 2006 17:51:21 GMT

Long ago, scientists discovered a part of the brain that helps to control voluntary movement, produce dopamine and regulate mood. Of course, they didn't know this at the time. What they did know was what they could observe physically. It was black stuff.

"What should we call it?" asked one.

"Well, based on our observations, let's call it Black Stuff," replied the other.

"No way! We can't just call it black stuff. It sounds so.. unscientific!"

"Okay, how about, well, um, Substantia Nigra!"

"OooOOOOoooh, that sounds nice and scientific. What's it mean?"

"Oh, it's Latin for 'black stuff.'"

"Huh. Fine by me."

This happens all the time.