RWP

READING: almost done with james baldwin's another country. not sure what i'm going to read next--i have several things to choose from. for diss work i've also been reading foucault--i read an interview about method and the essay "governmentality" from the foucault effect and i'm reviewing discipline and punish at the suggestion of one of my committee members.

WEARING: nothing remarkable. i don't have to be anywhere until much later today, so i'm not getting dressed until then. so...i'm in PJ's.

PLANNING: running this afternoon. diss writing group at 5. going to see the new pirates after that. tomorrow i'm going to do some diss work and also help my friend L in her yard. not sure what's on deck for tomorrow night. sunday i might be going to folklife for a bit, and this dog i know is having a barbecue in the evening. monday....what shall we do about monday....

ok...i must've lied on the test...

because this can't be right. and yet, i thought she was probably what the test would come up with. i think it's about right in the "class" department (my lowest score--heh) but i'm not that witty, and i think i might be a little bit more gritty. at times. flair...i don't think i know exactly what that means... do i have any flair???

(from glaucon, and i think i saw it in maeveh's journal earlier this week too...)

Your Score: Katharine Hepburn

You scored 14% grit, 52% wit, 38% flair, and 9% class!

You are the fabulously quirky and independent woman of character. You go your own way, follow your own drummer, take your own lead. You stand head and shoulders next to your partner, but you are perfectly willing and able to stand alone. Others might be more classically beautiful or conventionally woman-like, but you possess a more fundamental common sense and off-kilter charm, making interesting men fall at your feet. You can pick them up or leave them there as you see fit. You share the screen with the likes of Spencer Tracy and Cary Grant, thinking men who like strong women.

Find out what kind of classic leading man you'd make by taking the
Classic Leading Man Test.

Link: The Classic Dames Test written by gidgetgoes on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test

ADDED LATER: just for grins, i re-took the test, giving alternate answers in certain places (when i took it the first time, there were a few questions that i could have gone 2 ways on) and it still came out with kate hep. the percentages came out a little bit different, though: You scored 19% grit, 38% wit, 42% flair, and 16% class

creation science museum

gah! creation scientists are at it again. they have set up a creation museum in kentucky.

i don't even know where to begin. these people are fucking WACKO!

ABC has a video about it. it's just crazy to see actual people saying this crazy shit.

i don't normally like to ridicule people for their beliefs. the impulse is strong and difficult to resist in this case, however, because this particular topic hits several annoyance buttons for me. i don't like dogmatism of any kind, whenever and wherever i meet it; and for some reason fundamentalist christian dogmatism gets my dander up more than other dogmatisms. (probably because i grew up in an area dominated by the ultraconservative, fundamentalist, calvinist, christian reformed church.) it's the combination of proselytizing and disguising dogma as science to make it more "palatable" to mainstream, secular audiences. in other words...proselytizing that pretends to be something else. even worse, to my mind, is dressing this crap up as cultural criticism, as if this "critique" of science is simply one perspective within the realm of rational discourse on the subject. one guy, ken ham, in the video says that it's "great" if kids call their biology teachers "liars" because "this is meant to challenge people." whatever. but it's not actual cultural criticism, it simply mimics the form of cultural criticism in order to dupe people. the expressed goal of creation scientists is not to sustain dialogue on this subject, but to change public policy associated with the teaching of science in public schools, and ultimately to replace scientific education with religious education and the inculcation of a so-called "absolute morality" (to quote one CS guy from the ABC video). in short, the goal is to convert the world to fundamentalist christianity. the ABC video concludes with the reporter quoting the museum's official statement about who their 2 main audiences are: 1) "christians, who need scientific evidence to bolster and defend their faith"--this is the height of ridiculousness. why would you need "scientific evidence" (!) to defend your faith...and against WHAT??? well, science, of course. fight fire with fire and science with science, i guess. and 2) "non-christians who need to be saved."

thanks, but no thanks. if i have to swallow this syrupy pseudoscientific crap in order to get into "heaven," i'd rather risk hell.

i did get a laugh out of a couple of things in the video, though: the animatronic "adam and eve" that look like overgrown barbie & ken dolls (except that they're brunette) and live alongside frolicking animatronic dinosaurs; and the "angels" in the movie they show at the museum. i'd be laughing a lot harder if the piece hadn't opened with the factoid that 60% of americans believe that god created the earth in 6 days. one thing about the animatronic dinosaurs that i also find highly amusing and deeply ironic: they appear to be modeled on the current paleontological understanding of dinosaur anatomy and physiology (i.e. that dinosaurs were warm-blooded and fast, with spines oriented horizontally and tails extended straight behind them, as opposed to the older theory that they were cold-blooded creatures that stood more upright with their tails on the ground to sort of prop them up).

one more meme...

had to take the leading man test, too...

Your Score: Humphrey Bogart

You scored 42% Tough, 9% Roguish, 33% Friendly, and 14% Charming!

You're the original man of honor, rough and tough but willing to stick your neck out when you need to, despite what you might say to the contrary. You're a complex character full of spit and vinegar, but with a soft heart and a tender streak that you try to hide. There's usually a complicated dame in the picture, someone who sees the real you behind all the tough talk and can dish it out as well as you can. You're not easy to get next to, but when you find the right partner, you're caring and loyal to a fault. A big fault. But you take it on the chin and move on, nursing your pain inside and maintaining your armor...until the next dame walks in. Or possibly the same dame, and of all the gin joints in all the world, it had to be yours. Co-stars include Ingrid Bergman and Lauren Bacall, hot chicks with problems.

Find out what kind of classic dame you'd make by taking the
Classic Dames Test.

Link: The Classic Leading Man Test written by gidgetgoes on OkCupid Free Online Dating, home of the The Dating Persona Test