Introspection, Work

Getting geeky

Leave a comment

I think I spent five minutes laughing today. It was laugh or cry, really. I had one of those work-related moments where life itself becomes entirely absurd and you realize that there’s nothing worth taking serious anymore. All because of an email I received.

You see, we’re working on a new product at work. And the powers that be have decided that they’re not comfortable with the risk involved in writing the firmware for the product for Linux. They’ve decided that they’d be much more comfortable modifying the code we currently use on other products that runs under VxWorks. So this means a complete change in firmware development. New compiler, new development environment, different baseline code.

That’s all fine for the firmware guys because, quite frankly, they haven’t really been working on the code for this anyway. So regardless of which operating system they go with, they’re still at ground zero. Unfortunately, as I’ve already began working on the bringup code to verify that the hardware is functional (and it only makes sense to write the bringup code and operational firmware for the same operating system for the sake of code reusability), it means setting aside about a month worth of work that I’ve done and starting over from scratch. There’s nothing like saying, “wow, look at all that work I’ve done. It’s great. Now it can sit there and possibly never see the light of day again.” As I said, I laughed because it was easier than crying.

The only thing that really bothers me about this is that I feel like I only found out about this change of direction on “accident.” The program manager for this project just sent out an “oh, there’s been this official decision, just so everyone knows.” No one explicitly came out and said, “you know, this means Jarred needs to change gears too.” So if Mark hadn’t just offhandedly pointed it out, I wonder how much farther they would’ve let me toil away in the wrong direction before I found out. Now that would’ve irked me. It’s one thing to tell me that I need to start over again. It’s another thing to let me keep working in the wrong direction when a change of plans has been made.

In the long run, this really doesn’t bother me that much. Sure, I have to let go of my work from the last month and acknowledge that it doesn’t account for anything now (other than the fact that I’m a hard and dedicated worker). But that’ll be a good exercise in ego dissolution. And my ego could probably use a bit of dissolution, anyhow. But on the true positive, it means that I can write the bringup for VxWorks. And in a lot of ways, writing bringup code in VxWorks is a lot simpler than doing it in Linux. Especially when you consider that I’m still really learning the ins and outs of the Linux kernel.

Of course, that does also mean that this project will be less of a challenge for me. I mean, hacking the Linux kernel, figuring out how to do device drivers, and everything else was new territory for me, so it required learning and a shift in thoughts. And I rather enjoy that. I was looking forward to it. Oh well, hopefully I’ll get another project to do that with.

Paganism, Rants

“The Gardnerian BOS”?

Leave a comment

You know, it’s really quite ironic. After Artharaja and I talk about the Sacred Texts website and the supposed “Gardnerian BOS” they have on there, I find someone posting about that very thing on a message board. I think I managed to express amusement about the whole thing rather than annoyance. Though to tell you the truth, I’m both amused and annoyed.

Of course, whenever someone says “Look, I got the Gardnerian BOS,” I first have the urge (and gave into it this time) to ask, “Really? Which one?” I mean, really, the idea of the Gardnerian BOS makes about as much sense as the idea of the paper towel. There’s a bunch of them. It’s my understanding that Gardner rewrote his BOS a few times himself — or at least had each High Priestess he trained copy a slightly different version of it. And it’s also my understanding that each High Priestess added to it as they passed it on to their own initiates. And that’s the way it’s been going ever since, though it’s my understanding that some lines are more likely to add than others. So at best, any Gardnerian BOS would be one version of the Gardnerian BOS as received and possibly appended by a particular initiate. In this case, the culprit would be Aidan Kelly. And to be perfectly blunt, considering the smear job he attempts to do on his tradition’s founder (and what I understand to be his shoddy research), I’d be dubious of any claims he makes.

Of course, the other thing that always gets me is that I don’t see why people get all excited over finding a copy of “the Gardnerian BOS” anyway? Hello? This is (supposedly) the BOS of the tradition that most eclectics think is just a bunch of “arrogant elitist bastards,” anyway? Remember that? Do they remember how they spend all this time justifying themselves by saying “well, Wicca has evolved beyond that, now.” Well, if it’s evolved beyond that, then why give a fuck about the BOS you’ve evolved beyond? Or is this just a case where deep in their hearts, they still believe that those “elitist bastards” might actually have something they want?

Honestly, people turn their nose up at Gardnerians and covet whatever they think they might have at the same time. It’s sad, amusing, and annoying all in one.

Introspection

I want to be petty and snide

Leave a comment

Apparently, part of me wants to be nasty, caustic, and snide. Anything I see that I think is stupid, I just want to mock the person in some way. Two prime examples of this happened on a message board in a topic discussing witchcraft and magic.

First of all, a 14 year old Christian came in and made a pronouncement: “I rebuke the spirit of witchcraft and all other demonic things.” I rolled my eyes. Part of me wanted to make some smartass comment like, “Well, I rebuke the Spirit of Saint Louis. That wicked plane!” I figured I’d have to mention that the Spirit of Saint Louis was a plane because quite frankly, I get the impression that this kid wouldn’t have gotten the reference. And let’s face it, if you have to explain a smartass comment, it takes all the fun out of it. I suppose if I was more caustic, I could’ve taken more pleasure in the fact that the person I was mocking didn’t get my statements, but I guess I’m just not that advanced of an elitist bastard/intellectual snob.

The next person came in on the same thread. Her pronouncement? “I don’t believe witchcraft and magic is real.” To her, I simply wanted to do the online equivalent of giving her a patronizing pat on the head and saying, “That’s nice, now I trust you can find your way the to the exit on yourself.” I mean honestly, if you don’t believe in something, don’t enter into a conversation about it. Is this really that difficult of a concept to grasp? But then, I guess that such an action wouldn’t give them the opportunity to sound so smug.

But then, can I blame them for wanting to do that? I mean, aren’t I wanting to do the same thing with my own caustic rejoinders? So I surely don’t have the moral high ground from which to criticize. But screw the moral high ground, I say. At least here. This is my chance to express my annoyance.

I suppose that’s why I’m writing this here. It gives me a chance to give into a bit of base pettiness and give “silent voice” to my snide remarks in private while I maintain my poise in that conversation. Part of me finds this a bit two-faced, but another part of me finds this a right action. After all, I am only human. I’m bound to have my moments of weakness, where my less than stellar side rises to the need for expression. And is it not better to give it this more private voice where it at least somewhat contained?

I suppose some day, it would be nice to reach a point where such nonsense truly does not effect me. Then, even such a private expression of annoyance and invective would not be necessary. That would be ideal. But while I strive for that ideal, I think it best to give place to the less-than-ideal reality of my personality, and acknowledge it forthrightly. After all, this is better than repressing it until it builds and bursts out beyond my restraint.

Deep Thoughts

Someone should’ve checked the facts

Leave a comment

It amazes me how sloppy people can be with the facts sometime. Take a recent entry I read on one diary site claiming that people were denied the right to have a Christmas parade in the Midwest. This person went on to decry that this was a violation of Christians’ Constitutional rights. Had her information been correct, I would’ve actually been inclined to agree with her. However, in my naive sense of idealism, I had my doubts about the details. So, I asked the diarist to send me to her original source.

The diariest quite nicely pointed to another entry on the same diary site. I immediately noticed the first discrepancy. In this version of the story (briefly mentioned by this diarist), she mentioned that it wasn’t a case of a request to have a Christmas parade being denied. Instead, this one stated that some religious groups were denied the opportunity to join an established Christmas parade based on the grounds that their entries would’ve been “religious in nature.” Immediately, I found myself curious to find out more, so I asked this diarist for her source. She happily pointed me to a FoxNews article by Bill O’Reilly. While Mr. O’Reilly’s mention of the parade incident was brief and a small point in a larger political commentary, I am grateful that he finally mentioned a source that gave the name of the town: Denver, Colorado.

Armed with this knowledge, I was able to do my own search and discovered a story by a local Denver News Station on the topic. From this entry, I was able to find out that the parade is being sponsored by the Downtown Denver Partnership. With this information, I was able to find the Downtown Denver Partnership’s site. And from there, I was able to find the following statement from their “About Us” pages:

Downtown Denver Partnership, Inc. (DDP) is a non-profit business organization that creatively plans, manages and develops Downtown Denver as the unique, diverse, vibrant and economically healthy urban core of the Rocky Mountain region.

In otherwords, the parade was being organized by a private organization. As such, as parade organizers, they are within their rights to set any standard they wish when evaluating whether to permit a given organization’s entry into their parade. In effect, contrary to the first diarist’s opinion, there is no Constitutional violation involved. (There may well be a question about whether most of us feel the parade organizers did the right thing, but that’s another matter.)

What truly concerns me here, though, is how this story has changed. In the first entry I read, it was presented as a case of a city denying religious groups the right to start a parade. In the second entry and the commentary by Mr. O’Reilly, the facts were more correct in that religious groups were being denied the opportunity to march in a parade already being planned. However, even in those cases, the identity of the parade organizers was kept vague enough so that people might infer that city officials themselves were organizing the parade and were denying these groups the opportunity to participate. (This is further exacerbated by the fact that Mr. O’Reilly mentions that the mayor of Denver had recommended changing a sign saying “Merry Christmas” to “Happy Holidays” without clarifying that this was actually a separate incident.) It’s not until I dug a bit further that I discovered that the parade organizer was a private organization. (And one must then wonder why Mr. O’Reilly — who supports the BSA’s right to exclude certain men and boys from their organization on the grounds that the BSA is a private organization — would turn around and cry foul when another private organization exercises the same right.)

In the end, I’m reminded of the old game of “telephone.” Someone whispers something to another person, who then whispers it to a third person. Unfortunately, due to poor enunciation and possible hearing problems, the message gets distorted, and what is passed along by whispers eventually bears little or no resemblance to the original statement. That’s exactly what’s happened here. By not carefully reading what they’ve read and taking care to repeat it as accurately as possible, the story eventually gets changed into something it’s not. And the sad part in this case is that a large number of people — who didn’t take the time to trace the story back like I did — will be crying “Constitutional violation” over the wrong situation.

Paganism

“A Year and a Day”

Leave a comment

Every now and then, I hear various eclectics throw around the phrase “a year and a day.” And to be honest, I somewhat cringe when I hear it. It’s one of those cases where they’ve taken a phrase that came out of Traditional Wicca, taken it somewhat (if not completely) out of its original context, and changed what it’s all about.

In the context most eclectics use it (and I suspect it can be traced back to some author somewhere, though I’m not sure which one), the idea is that one must study for a year and a day to become a Witch. It’s also often assumed that one must study at a certain degree for that amount of time when for a year and a day before you can move on to the degree. In either case, it’s not entirely correct.

First of all, “a year and a day” was not originally a hard and fast rule. In fact, I’m not sure it’s a hard and fast rule today, but more a “rule of thumb.” But before a certain time (sometime in the 1980’s, if I’ve pieced together my information correctly), it wasn’t even that. You see, back in the hay days of the 1950’s, 1960’s, and possibly even the 1970’s, it was not unheard of to initiate new Witches on the spot. It also wasn’t unheard of to Initiate new Witches into all three degrees in the same weekend. This was done for various reasons, all of which I doubt I’m even aware of. However, the basic reason boiled down to the fact that those who were doing these initiations felt it was the necessary, correct, and proper to do things at the time. (At the time, I believe it was primarily motivated by the feeling that it was necessary in order to ensure the survival of Wicca.)

At some point, the various High Priests, High Priestesses, and Elders slowly came to the conclusion — both individually and collectively — that this was not such a good idea anymore. They found that it didn’t give New Witches the chance to truly come to grips with the Mysteries they were being introduced to, nor were they getting well prepared to run their own covens before being thrust into the position of High Priest or High Priestess. In effect, they got “fly by the seat of your pants” style training. Also, as they felt that the survival and continued propagation of Wicca was now assured, they decided that it would be more appropriate to slow down the training process and give Initiates a chance to truly grow in the Mysteries before thrusting them to the third degree and all of the responsibilities it entails. So Witches, covens, lines, and traditions began to set up systems of training to guide their Initiates (and in some-cases, their candidates for Initiation) through what they needed to properly experience the Mysteries of Wicca and work its magics (both big and little).

In addition to this, some of those Witches, covens, lines, and traditions considered the Mysteries. Recognizing that (1) a Witch’s experience of the Mysteries gets deeper in each degree (or in some traditions, each degree involves slightly different Mysteries) and (2) to experience the full range and subtleties of the Mysteries requires the observance of the full Wheel of the Year, they decided that it would be wise for each Witch to experience the full spectrum of Mysteries at each degree by spending a minimum of one turn of the Wheel before moving on to the next degree. And hence, “a year and a day” was born.

It is important to note that, to the best of my knowledge, this is not a unilateral requirement among all lines and traditions of Wicca. This is just what some — and probably even many — have determined is a good thing. It is also important to note that this is often considered a minimum. It is not unusual at all for the teacher or student to decide that more time is needed, for whatever reason. One common example of this is in a case where a student does no live close enough to the covenstead to attend all of the rituals in the year. In such a case, the student may find it necessary to take a few turns on the Wheel in order to experience all of the rituals and their particular aspects of the Wiccan Mysteries. Or there may simply be a matter in the Witch’s personal life that makes a longer timespan necessary.

You see, I think that’s what bothers me. Eclectics seem to think that “studying a year and a day” guarantees one’s Witchiness in some sense. It doesn’t. No amount of studying — either a year and a day or a decade and a year — will ever accomplish that. The only thing that does that is the processes that makes one a Witch.

I also balk at the idea that “a year and a day” is always associated with studying. It’s as if studying was what it’s all about. It’s not. Don’t get me wrong here. I think studying is extremely important. But studying alone accomplishes nothing. It is the process of experiencing the Mysteries that make Wicca what it is that is important. And that’s what “a year and a day” was originally all about.

Health

Fabulous Day, Fabulous Progress

Leave a comment

Today, I had another visit to the endocrinology department. I didn’t see Dr. Lee, though. This was my chance to have follow-up meetings with Jen and Faith. And I have to admit that I had quite a pleasant time with them. Of course, the good news right at the beginning helped that a ton.

I got to the office at about 2:45, checked in, and paid $100 on my outstanding bill. That’s about half of what I owe from my last visit. I would’ve paid the other half too under other circumstances. However, with this being a non-payday week and already having spent a significant amount of money on other bills this past week, I decided I should wait another week or two to pay the full amount. At least I figured roughly 50% would be a “good faith token” that I am paying it and will continue to do so. So having checked in and taken care of the business portion of the visit, I sat down in the waiting room and patiently waited for my appointment. Faith was running a bit late and didn’t get to me until almost 3:15, for which she apologized. I didn’t mind, other than the fact that I was beginning to wonder if something had come up or something, but things turned out fine.

So before leading me into her office to pour over my food diary, Faith has me jump up on the scale to see what I weighed. And there was the pleasant surprise. It seems that since November 2, I have lost 18 pounds. I was a bit shocked. I had known I had lost some weight and I was hoping it was at least five or even ten pounds, but I’d never expected such high results. Needless to say, Faith was quite ecstatic, too. So we rushed into her office and I pulled out my food diary for her to look over. She went through it and was quite impressed with it. She commented that I was missing a few foods on the first page, which I explained was due to the fact that my mother and I had to spend the first few days doing some grocery shopping to help with my change in diet. (My family has never been very good about incorporating an adequate amount of fruits and vegetables in our diets, so it meant doing some serious restocking of foods for us.) She also commented on the few days where I seemed to “skip” meals and was fairly relieved when I explained that this was due to me forgetting to update my food diary in a timely manner and not being able to remember what I just ate. I did assure her that I ate, though, and she was satisfied. She said that I seemed to be doing quite well at making sure I hit all the major dietary needs as well as spreading my food intake throughout the day.

We even talked about my weight loss, and she reiterated her position on that. I actually like it. Her whole philosophy is that while she’s always happy to see her clients lose weight, it’s not her main aim. Her main aim is for them to do the work of eating a properly healthy diet of the proper proportions. In her mind, the weight will then take care of itself in turn. So I’m endeavoring to keep that in mind, because I think it’s a helpful philosophy. So my plan is to continue to keep track of what I’m eating in writing and monitoring my glucose levels. Then I can let the weight take care of itself.

After our conversation, Faith told me she’d like to see me again in a couple months and we determined that we could schedule my appointment on the same day that I go back to see Dr. Lee, which is March 3. After this, she handed me the paper and went to see if Jen was ready for my appointment with her. Jen was ready, so Jen popped in Faith’s office and had me come talk to her. Faith had already filled her in on the whole weight loss thing, and Jen was equally excited about it.

She went over my exercise calendar and saw that I’ve consistently met my goal of taking three twenty minute walks each week. She was quite pleased with this and inquired if I’d given any thought to any changes I might want to make to my physical activity. I told her that I had thought about it and decided that I did not want to increase the number of days I’m walking, due to the fact that it might prove difficult to make it someplace to walk more than three days a week when the snow starts falling. (Speaking of which, it was flurrying on the way home, but that’s probably best left for a different entry.) However, I did mention that I was considering the possibility of increasing the length of each walk to twenty five or even thirty minutes instead of the current twenty minutes. She felt this was an excellent idea.

I also discussed my plans to try and recall as many of the ballet exercises I did in my college dance class and make a twenty minute workout of that. She thought this was another excellent idea, especially as it would add a number of stretching exercises to my physical activity. Overall, that meeting was quite positive, and she commented that I wouldn’t have to come see her again as long as my therapy kept moving in a positive direction (i.e. going off medications rather than needing more). Since I’ve been walking so much, she also gave me a free pedometer from a bunch that she gets as gifts from one of the pharmaceutical companies. I checked it out when I got home and it’s kind of neat. It’s a talking pedometer, which I think is kind of cheesy, but it’s still a neat idea. Tomorrow sometime, I plan on measuring the length of my average step and entering it in. Then I can start seeing roughly how many steps and miles I walk during my exercise routine. Also, Jen suggested that I see how much walking I get in from a typical day when I’m not taking my walk.

Apparently, I also have Jen to thank for my reduced medication. According to her, Dr. Lee missed the numerous glucose readings in the fifties a couple weeks ago. He had sent her a copy of my readings with his recommendation of “no change.” She immediately sent them back to him with all the low values circled and a strong suggestion that he cut my glyburide. So it’s thanks to Jen that I haven’t been bottoming out this week. Well, other than Wednesday. But that was due to an insufficient supper, I think.

This was a highly positive visit for me. It seemed great to see the weight loss and know that I’ve made my goals. And it’s really encouraged me to keep going. I think I’ve about convinced myself to keep up with keeping track of my exercise and food diary, even after I don’t have to show them to anyone. And to celebrate, I ran to Vestal and ate at the Chinese buffet. It was absolutely tasty. I thought I’d had a bit too much, but I guess I didn’t do too badly. When I got home and tested my blood sugar two hours after eating, I was at a 78.

Religion

Circumstance as a litmus test?

Leave a comment

Ive been listening to Frank Perettis This Present Darkness on tape again. Its a highly enjoyable book for the most part. Some of the theological implications make me wonder at times, though. I suspect part of that is just because Im not a Christian. But a lot of it even makes me wonder how well it fits to a Christian perspective.

Take for example the one part I listened to on my way to work this morning. It takes place shortly after the church votes (but just barely) to keep Hank as their pastor. Hank and his wife, Mary, are sitting together in the kitchen of Grandma Edith Duster. Edith is one of Hanks biggest supporters, and she spends much of this particular conversation encouraging Hank. In it, she makes the comment that if Hank wasnt where God wanted him to be, he wouldnt be accomplishing as much as he can. The more that I think about this, the more it seems like divining the will of God from mere circumstance. And to be honest, that strikes me as an odd, fickle, and possibly dangerous thing to do.

Back in my college years, I remember learning about the concept of fleecing. Its a term used in certain Christian circles to describe a certain way of testing for the will of God. The idea is based on the Old Testament (from the book of Judges, if memory serves) story of Gideon and his fleece. In that story, God calls on Gideon to save the Israelites from the enemy (the Philistines, I think, but dont quote me on that). Well, Gideon is doubtful and God offers to prove His desire for Gideon. One of Gods proofs involves a fleece that Gideon put outdoors overnight. This happens twice. During one time, the fleece is left bone dry while the ground is wet with dew. The other time, God causes the fleece to be wet while the ground around it is completely dry. Such a miraculous event helps to demonstrate Gods power and will for Gideon. Gideon then agrees.

The idea of modern day fleecing works the same way. A Christian decides on some sign that will demonstrate that a given choice is Gods will. This concept is actually demonstrated in another Peretti boo The Visitation where young Travis Jordan decides that God will show him when he is supposed to head out to join Billy Grahams ministry by making it so that a banjo head he ordered arrives at the music store. In that story, Peretti demonstrates one of the great problems in fleecing; that is, the sign event is often something that is bound to happen anyway. So theres no real proof that the event is just happenstance or a legitimate sign from God. And I know other writers and theologians who have given much deeper explanations on the problem with fleecing.

But it seems to me that Edith Dusters comment is as much a sign of fleecing as any test involving a banjo head. It seems to me that its still a matter of relying on a matter of circumstance or circumstances that may well occur on their own without Gods miraculous intervention to determine whether one is following Gods will. It just strikes me as a shortcut to honest introspection and seeking the Will of God.

Now, I readily admit that part of my opinion on this is almost certainly influenced by my non-Christian views. In fact, Id say its further influence by the fact that Im a witch. After all, it seems to me that relying on circumstance to divine anything be it the Will of God or some impersonal force such as Fate flies in the face of underlying philosophy of my beliefs as a maker of magic. Thats why I have an equal problem with Neo-Wiccans who attribute their circumstances to fate and karma and then choose to passively live whatever life the world deems willing to give them. But it seems to me that the idea that something as fickle and highly susceptible to just about every influence as circumstance should be chosen as a litmus test for anything should bother anyone who remotely believes in free will and personal responsibility.

(Of course, the irony among some Christians is that many who will tell you that they must be in the Will of God because of all the good they’re doing will then turn around in times of trouble and tell you that their tribulations are signs that they’re in the Will of God because it’s obviously Satan trying to keep them down. But that’s probably a whole different entry.)

Memories

When I wore a rainbow colored wig

Leave a comment

Craig left me a comment about my experience as a clown. Particularly, he asked me if I told bad puns while I clown. The short answer to his question is no. But since he asked and stirred up the memories, I thought it might be fun to stroll down memory lane a bit.

I joined Acts 29 (my campus’s travelling ministry project that involved puppeteering, clowning, and similar activities) when I was in my sophomore year at Susquehanna. Though I didn’t really get all that involved with the group until my junior year. That’s when the project moved into a house on University Avenue. I shared the one downstairs bedroom with my roommate, Gerry. I immediately got involved in puppeteering and clowning. I enjoyed both, but in some ways, I enjoyed clowning the most.

I inherited one of the four or five clown costumes the project had. My friend Merion had actually used it the year before I became an active member, and it fit me quite well. I also went out and got a rainbow-colored wig to go with it and started working on a design for my facepaint. Unfortunately, I don’t remember everything I included, though I do remember I’d always draw a blue star on my one cheek. I always had such hard time with that, too. I was such a perfectionist, and I’d spend a few minutes trying to get the star “just right” before finally giving up and letting it go with however it looked. Don’t get me wrong, it always looked fine, really. At least no one ever complained or asked “what’s that blue splotch supposed to be?”

Acts 29 almost always did silent clowning. (The only time our clowns spoke was when they performed at the home for developmentally challenged individuals in Selinsgrove. We felt it was necessary to bend our rules of silence for the sake of being better able to get our message accross to our audience in those cases.) Our clowning mainly consisted of small skits with some sort of message. For example, we had this one skit called “Return to Sender.” For this skit, one of the clowns would take a big red heart and tape i to their chest, over where their own heart would be. Then the skit would begin. Through a series of events, each of the other clowns would be mean or thoughtless to her (I say “her” because more often than not, Amanda’s clown character, Rosy would play the part of the clown being hurt). For example, we might not let her join in a game we’re playing. Or we might get mad at her for a mistake she made and push her away. And each time one of these things would happen, she would tear another little piece off her heart. Near the end of the skit, her paper heart would be nothing more than small shreds. At this point, she would be very sad until she got an idea. She would then grab an envelope, put the torn heart into it, and seal it up. Then she would write on the front of the envelope “To God” in big black letters so everyone in the audience to see. Then she’d give it to someone (usually one of the non-clown facilitators that was accompanying the group) to send to God. A bit later, the same person would come back with another sealed envelope. The clown would open it up and find a new, untorn paper heart in it. Of course, all the other clowns would see this and get excited and everyone would hug and make up and play together.

I think that my favorite experience as Bobo (my clown name) was when we decided to write our own Christmas skit. It was a particularly interesting skit because we integrated a number of our ministry forms together. In this skit, we involved clowns, puppets, and at least one “normal person” part. (That part was the poor narrator who had to try to keep the whole thing together. In that skit, Bobo ended up playing the part of Joseph (we were re-enacting the nativity scene after all). And things just weren’t going well. The narrator would tell Rosy (playing the part of of Mary) and I to go to Bethlehem. Well, being two clowns, we immediately pulled out our map and started trying to find out how to get to Bethlehem. We would both sit there running our fingers over the map trying to find it (usually not looking in the same place). Usually, we’d end up turning the map as if we had it upside down for good measure. I loved that gag.

Needless to say, the whole experience didn’t get any better. Not only could Rosy and Bobo not find Bethlehem, but our Shepherd (another clown) couldn’t find her sheep (though she was able to find a cow and a duck, to the annoyance of the narrator), one of the wise men was sick and couldn’t make it, and above all else, we ended up forgetting the baby Jesus. This last put the narrator into absolute hysterics until our lovely Shepherd (played by Amy’s clown character, whose name escapes me at the moment) bring out one of her animals. Rosy immediately falls in love with it and decides it can stand in for the baby Jesus, and we ended the skit with a very sweet — if unusual — nativity scene.

I think the other thing I liked about clowning was the playtime. You see, before any service or event began, the clowns were given free reign. While people would be coming in, we had the honor of running around the place with our variou toys (after all, like any good clown troop, we had a suitcase full of them) playing and being silly. We’d be playing kazoos, blowing bubbles (which the children always loved to pop — and so did the clowns), and finding all kinds of make believe games to be playing with a simple length of rope.

Ah, the memories. I haven’t thought about my days as a clown in a long time. I enjoyed the stroll through the past.

Randomness

100 Things you probably didn’t know…

…and probably didn’t want to.

1. At one time, I was involved in an online “relationship.” At the time, I considered the other gentleman — who lived in the UK — my boyfriend. However, for various reasons (the fact that I never actually met him in person not being the least of them), I do not count it as a “real relationship,” nor do I count him as an ex.
2. I have never kissed a man.
3. I have, however, kissed a woman.
4. I actually worry about kissing. Even at thirty, I worry I won’t be “any good at it.”
5. My favorite drinks are pina coladas, strawberry daiquiris, mudslides, and long island iced teas.

6. My ex was also a diabetic. I actually attribute the fact that I took my own diagnosis so well to my experience with him.
7. At one time, that was the only positive thing I had to say about my ex.
8. The winter of my junior year at college, I went on a mission trip to Jamaica.
9. On that mission trip, we drove by the bar from the movie “Cool Runnings” several times. That’s not really a big deal, but we all thought it was kinda neat.
10. I have a brother (of sorts), but I rarely admit it.
11. The one time that I mentioned in public that he was my brother was because I wanted to make it perfectly clear to those around that he was not a friend. After all, I didn’t want them to think that I chose friends that were that big of assholes.
12. That was the one and only time I went anywhere with my brother during my adult life, and I have no intention of repeating the experience.
13. I met my current boyfriend, Mike, online.
14. Mike and I have been dating for three and a half years.
15. I don’t remember exactly when Mike and I first met in person, but I know it was the beginning of May 2001.
16. I used to have an online copy of every email Mike and I sent each other except for the first month. Then Webbox lost them all.
17. I fell in love with Mike the first evening we met, but not at first sight.
18. Mike is almost the complete opposite from what I’ve generally considered my “type.” This is why I don’t believe in “types.”
19. I used to do Christian clowning on a regular basis.
20. I was the coordinator of all InterVarsity-ran Bible studies on my campus my junior and senior year.
21. My lack of organization used to drive our IVCF staffworker bonkers.
22. I had a crush on my roommate my senior year in college.
23. My roommate also happened to be the president of our campus’s chapter of InterVarsity.
24. I made the mistake of confiding my situation to my roommate.
25. My roommate was actually pretty decent and understanding about it. We’re still friends, in fact.
26. The fact that he was pretty decent about the whole thing doesn’t negate the fact that he was a jerk a couple of times.
27. We had actually roomed together my junior year, too.
28. That year, we had told each other to go to hell.
29. I think that’s the only person I’ve told to go to hell.
30. If there WAS another person I’ve ever told to go to hell, it would’ve been my ex’s sister. (Also my ex-best friend.)
31. I cannot play sports well at all. I have next to no hand-eye coordination.
32. That’s due to the fact that I’ve had a lazy eye my whole life.
33. I’ve been through muscular surgery twice to correct it. I only know about the first time because my parents told me about it. I was extremely young (I don’t even know when exactly it was.)
34. My parents didn’t have insurance when I had that surgery.
35. It was clear immediately after the first surgery that they overcorrected. Unfortunately, my parents didn’t have the money for a second surgery. (In fact, they never had the money to pay the first one off. The debt just mysteriously disappeared.)
36. I didn’t have the second surgery until I was 27 because that’s the first time a doctor told me they could get my insurance company to pay for it. Before then, any doctor who mentioned it said that the surgery would be considered “cosmetic” and therefore the insurance wouldn’t cover it.
37. They got it right that time. My eyes aren’t perfectly aligned, but you’d really have to study my face to notice it.
38. This caused my depth perception to change drastically. I remember reaching for my glass at the dinner table and completely missing it. (I thought it was another four inches further away from me.)
39. I like to write erotica.
40. I like rollercoasters, but they scare me.
41. I’m dating a rollercoaster fanatic. Some days, that scares me.
42. At one time, I was working on a novel.
43. Originally, I was afraid to show anything I wrote to anyone.
44. Now, I practically shove my stuff in people’s faces.
45. I have a picture of my sister that my friends insisted was a picture of me in a blonde wig.
46. I actually passed that picture around the campfire one night during the “get to know your team members” session during our mission trip. Someone DEMANDED I explain the picture. Our team leader sat there laughing for several minutes.
47. I was raised in an American Baptist Church.
48. I have spoken from the pulpit before.
49. As youth leader, I was able to warp the fragile minds of the church’s youth for quite a few years before I left.
50. I call myself a fag all the time, despite the fact that it drives a few of my friends batty.
51. Actually, I partly do it BECAUSE it drives them batty.
52. I have a sadistic side.
53. I have a bigger masochistic side.
54. I’m a major cuddler.
55. I like to hug friends. Though there are some people I don’t like hugging at all.
56. I own a lot of computer games, but rarely play them.
57. There are only a few video games I’ve fully beaten. They are Super Mario Brothers, Metroid, and all the games in the Dragon Warrior series.
58. I own over twenty tarot decks, but only use two of them.
59. I have a hard time getting rid of books, despite the fact that I have many I have no use for.
60. I’m a packrat in general, too.
61. I love fantasy, but I was 28 before I ever read The Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit.
62. In reality, I got both of those on audio cassette. So technically, I still haven’t read them.
63. I was 21 before I watched Fiddler on the Roof.
64. My favorite musical is Sweeny Todd. I especially like the taped version where Angela Lansbury played Mrs. Luvitt. (There’s something about watching “Ms. Fletcher” sing a happy song about baking people into pies that inspires glee in the perverse part of me.)
65. I miss working with teens.
66. I love bad puns.
67. I used to love the green ping pong ball joke. (If you’re not familiar with it, don’t ask. You’ll regret it if you do.)
68. I jumped down off the table I was sitting on and strangled the person who told me the green ping pong ball joke.
69. I have only been drunk three times in my life. And both times, I was more tipsy and disoriented than all-out drunk.
70. The first time, I got drunk off jello shots.
71. The second time was at the local gay bar. I had one too many pina coladas.
72. The third time, I got drunk off two Long Island iced teas. It was shortly after being diagnosed with diabetes. It was the first time I drank after my diagnosis, and I didn’t understand how strongly my condition could effect my alcohol tolerance. (Plus having lost 50+ pounds didn’t help.)
73. I almost didn’t graduate from college. (Never come out to yourself your senior year, it’s not a pretty sight.)
74. I dream of being able to quit my job and devote my life to writing.
75. Part of me wants to publish something someday, but the thought of all the publicity involved with that scares the crap out of me.
76. I wouldn’t read anything by Ann Rice for the longest time because it struck me as too “trendy.”
77. Same with the Mists of Avalon, which I still haven’t read.
78. I’m actually very insecure, though most people online don’t believe it.
79. In 2001, I went from weighing 290 pounds down to around 230. By the first part of 2002, I started the climb back up. At my last doctor visit, I was up to 311. I’m hopefully bringing it back down again, though I hope to take it more slowly this time.
80. I consider myself an extremely boring person.
81. I have an insanely high number of online diaries/journals/blogs. In fact, I have to write their names down to count them.
82. I also have an insanely high number of email addresses. And I just added another one this weekend.
83. I didn’t keep track of my checking account for over four years. In that time, I only bounced one check, though.
84. I lost my license for three months due to my foolishness. (I let my car insurance lapse due to not paying.)
85. My first vehicle was an 82 Ford Ranger. My parents gave it to me my last semester in college.
86. I put two different engines in that truck. The first engine we put in had a crack in it. Less than two weeks after we put the second engine in it, a band broke in the transmission and it wouldn’t back up.
87. I also put two different engines in my last car. The first engine was a factory rebuilt engine. Unfortunately, there was an error in assembly at the factory and it busted a bearing after I had it for two weeks. The second engine was on them.
88. Like the Ranger, I got rid of the Saturn because it two had a major transmission malfunction after the second engine replacement. However, there was a nine month gap between the two incidents. (Since I had put a new transmission in it four years ago, I decided it was time for a new car.
89. I used to argue religion with the person who is now my brother-in-law. I argued the Christian viewpoint while he argued the agnostic viewpoint. Ironically, we’ve done an almost complete role-reversal since then.
90. I have four nieces (two by my sorta brother and two by my sister) and two nephews (both by my sister). I love kids, but I’m not sure I’d ever want to have any of my own.
91. I will babysit my nieces and nephews as long as I don’t have to change any diapers.
92. I live only five hours from NYC but have never been there.
93. I tend to make fun of myself a lot. I think I learned to do that because people at school would make fun of me. It was a defense mechanism.
94. When I was younger, I tended to get along with most adults better than most kids my own age.
95. I believe that what most people call “fate” is utter nonsense.
96. I believe the same thing about what most people consider “karma.” (I do find myself struggling to understand some of the “less popular” concepts of karma — such as the traditional Hindu doctrine of karma — and am therefore less likely to outright dismiss them, though.)
97. I worry about what other people think about me more than I should. A lot more.
98. I also think some people think way too highly of me.
99. I first got interested in computer programming when I was seven.
100. The second programming language I ever learned was Assembly language. I learned it on a Vic20. I didn’t have an assembler for that computer, so I actually had to hand-assemble my code to machine code. I did this when I was…14, I think. I was an odd teenager.

Health

Don’t want to do that often

Leave a comment

So, I had quite the adventure yesterday. I got up at 10 in the morning, checked my blood sugar, and took my pills. Then I sat down to my computer and played Insaniquarium (I beat the adventure!) while I waited the requisite thirty minutes. Once that time elapsed, I decided to go ahead and have breakfast. I got everything around and ate, then spent the rest of the morning puttering around online. It gave me a chance to get caught up on friends’ diaries and respond to a few emails and posts on message boards.

As it got to be about 12:30, I decided it was time to think about lunch. I decided that I wanted to go out for lunch, as I was having a restless day and just needed to do something to get my mind and body in a calmer state. So I took my shower and grabbed an apple out of the bag. I ate it as I drove to the mall.

I got to the mall at about 2:00. I knew I had to take my walk (it was my last chance to get the third day of exercise in for last week), so I decided to get that out of the way before I ran upstairs to eat. I wasn’t all that hungry since I had the apple, and I was feeling great. So I took my usual circuitous route through the halls of the mall and through a few of the anchor stores. Towards the end, I was getting hungry, but I finished my twenty minutes before getting my back out of the locker at the entrance and heading up to the food court. Once inside Friendly’s, I gave my waitress (Diane) my order and then headed for the bathroom. I was feeling a bit lightheaded, so I decided it was time to get out my glucometer and check my blood sugar again.

Well, I had trouble with it. For whatever reason, the first time I stabbed myself with the lancet, my finger didn’t want to bleed. I got a tiny drop and decided to try it. Unfortunately, there wasn’t enough blood there to fill the test strip and the machine errored out. So I grab another strip, and poke another finger. Now by this time, I’m starting to get concerned because I’ve started sweating profusely. I know I just went for a brisk walk, but I didn’t exert myself that much.

The second time, I got enough blood and the machine flashed up a number. That number was 50. So I immediately spotted Diane, flagged her down, showed her the results (fortunately, she understood what I was showing her) and asked her to get me something sweet NOW. She blinked, ran back into the kitchen and came out with a full glass of Coke for me. (She didn’t even take time to put ice in the glass, bless her heart.) Needless to say, I chugged that down. By this time, the patron sitting at the table across the aisle from me has figured out what’s going on and starts in asking “are you okay”? (Note: While the concern is appreciated on some levels, diabetics are not exactly in the best state of mind when they’re blood sugar is critically low. As such, overbearing acts of concern like CONSTANTLY asking if they’re okay is not a good idea. If you’re in that situation, give the diabetic person something with lots of sugar — fruits are best — and then leave them alone. I managed to be courteous, but not much more than that.)

I get the impression that Diane also went back in the kitchen and told them to move my order to the front of the line, because it wasn’t that long after that incident that my food came out. It may have just been that they were having a slow day, but it just seemed rather fast to me. But I got the soda and real food in me and in fifteen minutes my blood sugar was up to 72. That’s not fantastic, but it’s generally stable for me. And by the time I got home, I was clear up to 166. To tell you the truth, I’m surprised that it wasn’t even higher with all the sugar from the soda. Not that I’m complaining, mind you.

So I learned a very important lesson. Even if I had a late breakfast and a light snack, I will NOT go walking before I eat if I’m having a late lunch. I should’ve known better, really. But I figured I ate breakfast late enough and had that apple so that my blood sugar should be just fine. Apparently, I was wrong. Not that this totally surprises me. I’ve found incidents where my blood sugar level seems to be time-dependent as much as food-dependent. For example, I’ve noticed a tendency to have higher blood sugar in the evening if I eat supper after 5:30 than if I eat it around 5:00. The fact that I take my medicines later and test my blood sugar later when I do that doesn’t matter. Even with everything moved the same amount of time later into the evening, the results come back higher. So apparently, this is another of these oddities.

The thoughts of a gay witch living in upstate New York.