Glenn Beck is The Voice of Reason? What the Hell is In the Water?

I watch The View. We all know this. I am secretly an old lady. My greatest desire is to have a Snuggie. (Not really)

Barbra Walters is an adorable, partially-clueless old lady. Sherri Shepherd occasionally says intelligent things. Elizabeth Hasselbeck is mostly an airhead, but at least she is a good mom. And Whoopi. Need I say more about Whoopi Goldberg?

And then there is Joy Behar. Most of the time, I agree with her. I mock her thick New Yorker accent. She's entertaining.

But the other day, she opened her mouth about something that made me realize she should stick to comedy and leave intellectual debate to us grown-ups.

They were discussing the would-be Times Square bomber. I call him "would-be" because he didn't actually bomb anything. To be honest, that had to be the most pathetic attempt at terrorism that I have ever seen. I mean, for fuck's sake, I cause more terror when driving on the connector on a fresh layer of snow. The dimwit should have stuck with something simple. Like dynamite. Or McDonald's. Hey, it takes awhile, but heart disease will kill more people this year than any silly bomb.

All Osama has to do to cause another media circus and mild panic is release a video tape. But this fool, Faisal, couldn't even blow up a car. He should have hired some Manchester United fans. They would have taught him some things about properly destroying cars. And then supposedly he's connected to the Pakistan installment of the Taliban. One would imagine that their leaders would be backing away from this so fast they'd leave skid marks. Who wants to claim responsibility for the world's most epic fail?

I don't mean to make light of someone attempting to blow up a clunker SUV in tourist central. I'm just pointing out that this was pretty much the worst recorded case of terrorism ever. The man sucked at making bombs, the people on the ground in New York reported the SUV, and the FBI caught our wannabe anarchist in record time. I mean, talk about the best anti-terror response time I've ever seen. Nothing was harmed, the dumb-ass was caught, so one would think that we could just all chill the fuck out.

But oh, no, Americans suck at chilling out. We have perfected the act of over-thinking things. We invented the "What If" game. You would think we'd all be shitting diamonds, with all this intensity.

John McCain (and others) claims the FBI screwed up by reading this idiot his Miranda Rights. Somehow, our Crazies-In-Residence seem to think we could have better pumped him of information has we not informed him of his Constitutionally-given rights. Funny enough, all the reports coming out have stated he's been entirely cooperative.

Now, a Miranda warning is pretty much a no-brainer- you don't give someone their Miranda rights before interrogation, and anything he says is guaranteed to be inadmissible in court. There have been plenty of court cases dismissed on the technicality of the accused not being given their rights. In the case of a moron who tried to bomb a public area, not giving him his Miranda warning could, in essence, allow him to walk away unscathed. Is that really what you want, John McCain? Funny, the actual court case that gave us the Miranda warning was Miranda v. Arizona. How easily they forget.

Anyway, back to The View. Joy claimed that while he may be a naturalized citizen, our government still should have been monitoring him. Basically, her attitude was that because he had ties to a volatile region in Pakistan, and he wasn't "born here," his citizenship should be conditional.

I'm sorry, Ms. Behar, but citizenship isn't conditional. You either are, or you are not. He's a citizen, and should be treated like a citizen. You didn't see them arguing over Timothy McVeigh's citizenship, and he actually killed people.

All this side, my biggest beef with Behar was this: Whoopi said that Miranda warnings are a part of your constitutional rights, to which Joy claimed that Whoopi was wrong, it has nothing to do with the Constitution, and that it is just a law. This, of course, is absolute bull. Miranda warnings are an extension of the Constitution; specifically, Miranda warnings are in place to guarantee the observance of the accused's fifth and sixth-amendment rights. One would think the staff at The View has access to the internet. Maybe even Wikipedia. It angers me when a program with thousands, if not millions, of viewers misrepresents the facts.

And so, Joy Behar is a moron, just like Faisal Shahzad. Her biggest problem is that she is a comedian, not a reporter, and certainly not a scholar. She doesn't know what the fuck she's talking about. If she doesn't want to research something, she has no right to talk about it. For so many people, shows like The View are a major source of news. There are people out there who, unlike myself, take this show seriously. Blatant ignorance should not be tolerated. Xenophobia amplifies ignorance.

I might just be a college student with a blog, but I never form an opinion, much less express an opinion, unless I've researched the topic. God gave us Google for a reason. I realize how alarmed New Yorkers must have been by the actions of this idiot and his SUV, but that is no reason to spew bullshit. Especially when Glenn Beck is the one defending the observance of Miranda laws. I mean, you know you're in for a world of hurt when the voice of media reason is Glenn Beck.

Suck It, Whore. I Don't Need No Vaccine.

So just as I hit "Post" on my last entry, a commercial interrupts a rerun of "Royal Pains." It's this goofy medical show I watch. It's not House, but it's not half bad.

"What if you meet someone?" the commercial says. "What if he likes you too? What if he gives you HPV?"

For fuck's sake, people. Shut up about the stupid Human Papillomavirus. WE GET IT ALREADY. STDs are bad. I went to Health class all through junior high and high school.

For one, I think it is ridiculous that a drug company can post commercials masquerading as informational when all they're trying to do is sell you another drug. Yes, in case you didn't notice, Merck pays for those OBNOXIOUS commercials. This is like if Camel paid for a commercial that talked about how nicotine makes people happy and alleviates the symptoms of Parkinson's Disease. I mean, does this whole bit shout "Ethical Dilemma" to anyone else? Never-mind that the vaccine only protects against a few of the various types of HPV. Never-mind that it has been shown to not actually work for some populations of people. Never-mind that it claims to be a vaccine against cervical cancer when it isn't. They don't feel the need to actually say any of these facts, because the commercial was written by a drug company, not medical personnel. I feel like this is the equivalent of Viagra saying that their product will cause you to always sleep with attractive females.

Also, this whole HPV vaccine doesn't address any real problems. It's right in line with the whole "abstinence- only" education strategy. Rather than teach people how to be responsible about sex, we're just going to vaccinate them and not talk about it. You wouldn't get HPV if you wore a condom and knew with whom you're having sex. If you know your partner, and you get tested regularly, and you're partners get tested, then you know what is going on medically in everyone's pants. And yes, I realize we are all immature and no one in this country can talk about sex with a straight face. I'm serious, too. Come on. Say penis and then say vagina with a straight face. If you didn't just giggle, even a little, I will give you a cookie.

We're so nervous about talking about sex that we behave like a bunch of children. I'm tired of people acting like no one has sex unless they're married. Welcome to the human race, people. Humans have sex. It happens. Humans pass each other diseases when they have sex. Conveniently, at some point we invented small rubber jackets that prevent the spread of disease. Inconveniently, for some odd reason, some religions have decided that these are somehow a bad thing. Inconveniently, our education system refuses to teach people how to use these seemingly simple devices.

I'm so sick of people having fourteenth-century attitudes about the twenty-first century. Come on, people! We have a president who has a high melanin content! Not only did we get Facebook, but we can also use it on devices the size of our hands. The Vatican has its own radio station, for fuck's sake. So does the LDS Church. You would think that if they can embrace some technological advances, they could at least tolerate some others.

Okay, I realize that the day the Mormons accept condoms is the day the Earth itself ignites on fire and burns out of oblivion. But here's to wishful thinking.

The US has a higher teen pregnancy rate than any other developed nation on the planet. If our government really wants to do something about this, they'll start offering comprehensive sex education. They should do this, and declare those god-awful commercials illegal.

Honestly, I do not care that the chick in the video is pretending that she has cervical cancer. I hope that she really gets cancer, for profiting off someone else's misfortune. These commercials are just stupid, and they're obnoxious. There's nothing I hate more than a misleading commercial.

Honestly, I'd rather go back to Trojan condom ads and the "Viva Viagra" song. They're more entertaining, and while they are over the top, they aren't trying to scare anyone into buying something.

City Slickers and Farmers

So, there are a few hippies in Portland.

Yes, I am being glib. Yes, this is a bit tongue in cheek.

Saying there are a few hippies in Portland is like saying there are a few dogs at the Westminster Dog Show. Portland is progressive. We recycle everything. There are two different buttons on the toilets that change how much water is used. The light-bulbs are the kind that burst out unflattering light and last for forever. There is a giant farmer's market across the street from where I live.

As far as cities go, this is a pretty "green" thinking one.

So it's understandable that people here are fairly idealistic. I mean, how can you want to be extreme about your carbon footprint and NOT be an idealist?

As you know, we're talking about the Zapatista movement. Last time, I was pretty upset. In fact, I'm still pretty upset. But that's beyond the point. The Zapatistas were interested in making it so the indigenous people of the Chiapas region could be able to farm the land that belongs to them in a way that would be sustainable to their community. The Mexican government was (and still is) interested in giving this land to companies that will turn it into industrialized farms. This is not the model the indigenous Mayan people want. Obviously.

So my class (filled with hippies) got into this discussion about farming practices and urbanization. We talked about the fact that the Zapatistas have used the internet to transmit their cause to the world. The consensus amongst some of my classmates was that urbanization is bad and we should all have our own plots of land so we can be "sustainable."

So, my opinion of all of this is that subsistence farming works for Chiapas. It doesn't necessarily work for the US. But that doesn't mean that we are in some kind of wrong and they are in the right. Nor does it mean we're right and they're wrong.

When it comes to culture, there is no "right" answer. I feel like I've stressed this before, but I'll mention it again. We cannot pass judgement on a culture unless we have lived a life there and we can truly relate to their way of life. Not to mention, any kind of comparison is ethnocentric; you cannot make a claim that some culture is "wrong" or "right" unless you're using your own culture as a comparing base.

And it is pretty entertaining to listen to a bunch of city kids talk about how wonderful subsistence agriculture is. It's pretty funny to listen to people who have no clue about farming talk about how it is the best way to live.

I grew up in Boise, Idaho. We all know this. And after struggling with my identity for what felt to be an eternity, I will be the first to say I am a hick. I've been to Cabela's. I have a knife collection. I have had to herd cattle before, and I've seen a bear on my porch. I've ridden a horse; for the record I hated it. I've gone on hayrides. I've been to corn mazes. Stetsons are cool. Guns aren't a big deal. I am a hick. It's okay; quite frankly, it could be worse. But I am also a city kid. I grew up in a city- as small as it may be, Boise's still a city. I found amusement in dropping things off the roofs of parking garages. I can jay-walk like a New Yorker.

And so I feel I have a foot in each realm. I can relate to a rancher and an accountant. So when I hear someone romanticize farming, I can't help but laugh.

I mean, are you kidding me?

Without urbanization, we would not have most of our modern medical technologies. Or laptops. Or those infernal iPads.

Farming is necessary for our society. But it isn't easy. The people making these claims have probably not dealt with rogue cows. My guess is that if handed a shotgun, they would flip out. These are the kind of people who are shocked to find out I carry a three-inch knife in my pocket. It's silly.

My mom pointed out a good thought. Most cities on the Pacific Coast tend to think along East Coast lines. They're not like Denver or Salt Lake. They don't know many ranchers. When these people talk about farms, I can't help but think of a Vermont dairy farm. They're thinking of some clean little farmhouse and the big red barn. I have some news for these people- this isn't what farming looks like in the West. In the West, if you live in a rural area, you go to the grocery store, like Costco, once a month. You drive an F-150. You probably own a tractor.

And it is not a nice life. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of good things about it. But there are a few bad things, too. The opportunities at Cascade High School are not quite as numerous as those found at Boise High. 4H is pretty big. You neighbor is probably a good fifteen-minute walk away.

City people tend to view rural life through rose-colored glasses. Take, as an example, a family up at my cabin that is from Eagle, Idaho. Now, they are from the new Eagle- the one that involves planned communities and stucco-covered buildings. The one that looks like someone flew it up from California. Now, these people bought property out in the middle of nowhere and built a log cabin- not Little House on the Prairie style, more like plasma screen in every room style. They put a salt-lick on their porch because they thought it would be cute if they got some deer to come and visit. Because, you know, we all love Bambi.

Instead, they got a dozen cattle camped out around their place. The fence was down a ways down the line, and the cattle figured shade and a block of salt was as good as it gets. The guy who owned the place was furious and immediately tried to sue the owners of the cattle. The wrong owners. In the wrong county.

I mean, what did he expect? If he wanted tame wilderness, (oh, the irony) he should have bought a place in McCall. Or Sun Valley. Or Pasadena. Here he was, romanticizing what a place in the middle of nowhere should look like. Instead, what he got was reality. And he tried to sue someone over it.

People from a rural setting are probably going to go with what they know; same thing with people from an urban setting. We can only help but romanticize the other side of the fence- certainly, I thought moving to Portland and living in a city would be awesome. Instead, I realized I was happy with the culture in which I resided. I think that if we all just stopped trying to tell each other how to live, our own lives would get better. If you want to live on a farm, that's fine. But making an assertion like "everyone should live on farms" is like saying "everyone should only be in heterosexual relationships" or "everyone should vote Republican." I'm tired of listening to people talk about what everyone else is doing wrong. Why don't we all work on what we're doing in our own lives.

And, I realize I'm rambling. Again. I guess I just think it's interesting when people glamorize rural life, when for so long I glamorized what it would be like to live in a city. There's no right way to live life, and the sooner we stop telling each other how to live, the better.

America and Mexico: A Love/Hate Story.

So, I'm an anthropology student.

Yes, I am certain we all know this. I'm studying people. It is fascinating. I mean, don't get me wrong, I love lizards. Reptiles are, for lack of a better term, the shit. Same thing with bats. Canines are pretty cool, too.

But no other species is as complex as the human. I feel I can say this safely- you don't see monitor lizards dividing into groups based on who worships what god and building shrines. I'm not going to say we have dominated the planet, because we regularly have our butts serves to us by volcanoes (thanks, Iceland), earthquakes, hurricanes, and the pig sniffles. This said, we've done a fair job of manipulating the top layer of the Earth. This is a positive and/or a negative thing. I'm not going to lie, I'm a big fan of cars, but it is rather silly of us to use up resources we know won't exist forever. It is ignorant of us to muck up the only air we've got.

All this aside, we are pretty incredible. I don't mean incredible as in "we're so rad," but I mean incredible as in "we are a massive force with which to be reckoned." In our existence of approximately 200,000 years, we've come a long way. We have become increasingly complex. We've moved from the manipulation of rocks to the manipulation of sub-atomic particles. All ethics aside, that is pretty cool.

In southern Mexico, there is a region called Chiapas. It is home to a large group of indigenous people- they far outnumber the state of Idaho. These people have no real system of education, let alone running water. Life is pretty harsh.

Now, I am sure you've heard about the Zapatista uprising of the 1990's. This happened just as the US, Canada, and Mexico entered the North American Free Trade Agreement. Now, I'm not going to explain it all, because that would take far more time than I am interested in giving. If you were not an adult, or at least a cognitive being, during the 90's, Google it. The internet is filled with information.

It boils down to this: here is a group of people fighting for their way of life, and the Mexican government is perfectly okay with abusing them. More than ten years later, nothing has changed. If anything, the situation has gotten worse. Mexico is nearly a failed state. The drug cartels rule the streets, and people in Mexico have nothing. I mean, nothing. Some people have no shoes to wear. They cannot even write their names. As someone whose livelihood will potentially rely on my ability to write, the thought of not being able to so much as sign my name makes my stomach knot.

The only real solution anyone in this situation can see is to risk his life to come to the US in search of work. Let's face it: illegal immigrants from Mexico do the jobs no one here is willing to do. Sure, I would go out and do manual labor like yard work, but not at the wages people want to pay. We hear politicians and uninformed Americans claim that "illegal immigrants are taking our jobs," but they aren't. They're picking up the slack by working the bottom-of-the-barrel jobs we aren't willing to do.

And I do not support this model for multiple reasons. Having people that are willing to do a job at any price degrades the value of labor for the rest of us. Having people who are not formally part of our country throws the system out of whack. When a person who is here illegally has a child, that kid is an American, regardless of what some would say. This causes the child to either be forced to move out of its own country, or be forced into a broken system like foster care.

However, the solution is not what the state of Arizona would have us believe. Their way of doing things causes racial profiling and creates a more volatile environment for everybody, not a safer one. It is akin to the "abstinence only" education policy. It's not fixing the problem at the right spot. The solution to immigration is not kicking people out or building a higher wall- we need to examine why people from our southern border would rather put their lives in the hands of scum like coyotes, and risk their lives in the dangerous desert lands around the border, than use legal methods to come here. We ought to be helping Mexico regain order and be able to provide for their people. We ought to make paths to citizenship easier.

When our own neighbors are suffering as badly as the country of Mexico, we have no right to be invading nations half a world away. Nowhere else in the world do you see such a huge difference between average incomes as you do between the US and Mexico. Even most of our homeless make more money than our neighbors to the south.

I realize that times are hard here in America. We have not had a financial crisis this bad in some time. People are taking huge hits because of the faulty system we built. However, in all this debt, in all this turmoil, we still have shelters for those who have lost their homes. In cities across America, we have places that try to get food to those who need it. If a person is ill or injured, we have ERs that will take them. We do not appreciate just how high our standard of living really is. It sickens me to listen to people in this country- mostly white, mostly men- complain about how "bad the Mexicans are." We aren't appreciating the other side of the argument- the side where a person is willing to leave his home and family, risk his life, and be treated like dirt in a foreign country just so he can provide for his folks back home. No, it is not alright that people are coming into our country illegally, because it disables the system. But it is equally unfair for us to flaunt our wealth in the face of a neighboring nation and then criticize its people for wanting a tiny piece of what we have. We go to Mexico to take advantage of their relaxed liquor laws, their cheap medications, their resorts built on the backs of the poor, and we claim to understand them. I have heard white people who live in gated, protected communities down there claim that they somehow relate to the people who live in shacks built from reeds and cardboard only a few miles away. So many of us see two Mexicos- the colorful parts preserved for tourists, and the faces of the immigrants looking for something better in a foreign place. We get so wrapped up in these two stereotypes that we forget these are humans. Mexico has had its own struggles. They have their own problems with discrimination. The people there, particularly those in Chiapas, suffer in true squalor. We cannot relate. None of us. Those who claim to be "gangsters" have no clue. Even those who are considered "poor" in this country have so much more than the people just next door.

I am so enamored with humankind; we are truly the most powerful species on this planet, for better or worse. My amazement turns to disgust, however, when I think of what we are capable of doing to one another. We can do so much for each other- think the aid after the earthquake in Haiti- but we are capable of being just as cruel as we are kind. You won't see bats kill each other because they believe in different gods. You're not going to see frogs execute an entire population of their same species simply because they have different ideals on the right way to live.

We are capable of passing laws that essentially authorize ethnic profiling because we dehumanize that ethnicity. Illegal immigrants are not people with mothers and fathers and siblings and children to Rush Limbaugh or Lou Dobbs. They aren't people who have friends, and like to play soccer. They're just a bunch of things, objects. It's a lot easier to discriminate against an entire population when you don't have to think about them as people.

But we are also capable of protesting in the thousands when someone discriminates. We are capable of gritting our teeth and banding together because we do see other groups as people, rather than just a population. We are capable of getting in trucks and bringing aid to people when our government drops the ball.

And after contemplating all of this, after listening to just how awful a government can be to its people, my blood boils. It makes me want to get in a truck and go down there myself. It makes me feel guilty to be living in a dorm with indoor plumbing and a heater.

But then I realize I'm an anthropology student. I'm not going to school to be able to get a good job or make a lot of money- I'm here to learn how to speak for people who cannot adequately speak for themselves. I am part of the most privileged group on Earth; I'm a white kid in upper-middle class America. I feel, not just duty-bound, but impassioned to learn about other people and help them. Anthropologists are not just aid workers or sympathizers- we are empathizers. I have been told that my loyalty lies with the people I'm studying, and I think this is true. I'm not out to use a culture to prove some point, and I'm not out to change the attitudes of the culture. I'm out to try as best as I can to be one of them, try to understand them, and finally, to try and explain their goals in terms my own culture can understand. I'm in school because I want to be able to go to places like Chiapas, learn how to relate to the people, and try and help them in the Western world. It is a hell of a lot harder for someone to disregard a white person with a doctorate than an indigenous person with no shoes.

And I realize this has been long-winded and has wandered a bit. I'm angry. I'm having to justify to myself why I'm in school, rather than on the front-lines. I guess I felt that my justification needs to be shared with at least one other person in order for it to feel authentic. It's easy to be an angry American sitting at a desk ranting on a computer. It's a lot harder to be an angry American sitting at a desk ranting on a computer who feels she should be somewhere else.

Thank you for taking the time to read all this. I hope, as always, that my words have entertained, if not enlightened.

Why Vegetarians are Loonies (Yes, I Can Sense the Irony)

And now, I turn my ugly, sarcastic head towards vegetarians.

This comes with some irony, as I myself am vegetarian.

Well, not really. I am technically what is called "pescetarian." That's with a "sk" sound. Don't believe me? Here's the Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pescetarianism

Basically, I eat fish and shellfish. Yes, I know, I am a sinner in the eyes of "true" vegetarians everywhere. It's just awful, I'm a terrible person, I'm a liar, yes, yes, I don't care.

I call myself vegetarian because people know what that is. Few people know what pescetarianism is. In fact, even SpellCheck doesn't know what it is. Hence why I go with vegetarian. I just call myself a lazy vegetarian. It works.

I really am a lazy pescetarian, actually, because I (gasp) eat things that contain gelatin. Yes, I know, yet again, I am a horrible person. Whatever. Bother someone else with your silly PETA crap.

The drawback from associating yourself with being vegetarian is that, like calling yourself a Satanist, people immediately view you in a certain light. Especially if you're from Idaho. Idaho is an agriculture state. Yes, it has Micron, and some other dandy things, but let us face the music; we are known for our cows and our spuds. When I call myself a vegetarian, I can almost see the other person thinking this over. He's thinking about that hamburger he ate for lunch and wondering how soon I'll start ranting about animal rights.

Happily, he'll discover that I'm not going to do that. Why? I'm not a vegetarian for the reasons that most people are vegetarians. I'm not interested in saving animal lives. I mean, don't get me wrong, I like baby animals just as much as the next schmuck, but saving them is not my top priority.

We all know now that I like Portland. It's a great place. However, the amount of crazed PETA fans that reside here is astounding. And let me tell you, the amount of misinformation they spew is just as bad as Faux News.

"Humans aren't supposed to eat meat."

WRONG. We have been eating meat since antiquity, you fool. We are omnivores. Omni- means everything. We eat meat, we eat fish, we eat plants, we eat grains. Welcome to science. Put down the clipboard and go back to school.

"We have no right to eat animals."

WRONG. We are omnivores. We eat meat; this is inevitable. We need protein, and it is a hell of a lot easier for us to get those from flesh than from a wide variety of nuts and grains. Most people on this planet do not have access to a Whole Foods store. We have as much right to eat animals as any other omnivore/carnivore species.

The truth is, supporting animal rights and eating meat are not mutually exclusive. A person can enjoy a steak and still believe animals deserve to be treated humanely. We eat meat, and eating meat is not bad. If you think that it is wrong for anything to eat meat, you are a loony.

The problem is not eating meat; it is our culture surrounding the processing of meat. We are an industrialized country. In fact, we are a hyper-industrialized country. Our schools are built like factories. And, unfortunately, so is our food production. We don't treat animals like living, breathing beings; we treat them like bits of plastic. Whether or not you support baby bunnies, does factory-produced food sound appetizing? Cars should come from factories, not food. No creature's last moments of life should be in a machine. This is as far as my poetic animal rights self goes.

The traditional attitude towards livestock is that they are a source of well-being. Most cultures regard animals as income, as assets, and as a source of food. I prefer this cultural attitude towards meat over one that wants meat to be completely separate from its original form- chicken nuggets are a form of meat that does not remotely resemble a chicken. We have essentially taken the meat out of meat; people are disgusted when their food still has eyes or a face because most people in America don't think of their food in terms of a living thing with which we share a few traits. I've eaten shrimp with their heads attached, and I've had fish that still had eyes. It doesn't gross me out simply because when I think of fish or shrimp or shellfish, I think of them as living things, not as nicely-shaped patties. My mandate, as both an anthropology student and a vegetarian, is that I will eat meat while in the field, simply because most cultures think of meat in terms of the living animal, not in terms of a shaped and processed thing. People who live closer to livestock better appreciate the meat they eat. I think this is where meat in America should go- people should become more involved in their food, whether that means we all should keep chickens in the back yard, or we should at least bring back more traditionally-modeled butcher shops. I want to see whole birds and halves of beef in a shop window because I will appreciate its origins. When we see a carrot, we can appreciate its origins as a root. When we see a steak, we should be able to appreciate its origins as well.

So, you see, I'm not a bleeding heart like some of the nutters over at PETA. I'm not interested in running about naked holding a fake hatchet to make a statement. This doesn't cause people to be better educated on your position, it makes people feel alienated. Stop lecturing people on why they shouldn't eat. Try, instead, to modify your behavior. This is the only thing any of us really can do to create change. I'm not interested in saving a bunch of domestic cows only to have them die of natural causes a few years later because of the way they've been bred. All I'm interested in is addressing the culture that has made it okay not to care where our food started in life. This is what has led to our "obesity crisis." People are okay with putting vile chemicals in their bodies simply because they don't understand where it came from, and needn't be bothered with how their food was processed. This isn't an issue about whether or not to eat meat, or about animal rights- this is about people who are obsessed with eating, but don't care about food.

I realize I've been incredibly long-winded about this, but this is a genuine issue to me. Food is vital, (I mean, hello?) but we don't care about the preparation of it. We've become such a specialized society that we cannot even be bothered with doing our own food production. If everyone lived with just a little bit more awareness of their food, we would all be a little bit healthier. It astounds me when people say they cannot cook- I mean, how does one feed oneself if one cannot cook? Food is simple, or at least, it can be. All we have to do is gain a little bit more personal interest in it.

My last month in Portland.

Greetings, Earthlings.

First of all, I realize there are maybe three people who read this blog. But that's alright. This is more my thoughts on a computer screen than my attempt to captivate readers. If you like what I say, congrats. If you don't, well, the internet is a big place. You can find pretty much anything out here.

And now, to my rant. I realize that was a poor transition, and I can feel the souls of English teachers past writhing in agony. Then again, the internet is filled with poor writing skills. Why not add to it?

Anyway, I have forty-one more days in Portland. That is just shy of six weeks, for those who dislike math. Six weeks have never felt so long.

Portland is a cool place, don't get me wrong. It's fun to visit- Voodoo Doughnuts, Powell's bookstore, the Saturday Market, et cetera. Portland is practically the food mecca of the US. There is an abundant supply of Thai cuisine.

But I am not crazy about living here. I moved here to be with a guy. He, in turn, stopped talking to me the moment I moved here. It sucks, but I am over it.

Unfortunately, this means I have been living here in order to participate in a plan that no longer exists. So that sucks, as well. However, within this, for lack of a better word, interesting situation, I made an incredible discovery- I was studying the wrong major. I am here at Portland State to study International Studies. What I really love, however, is Anthropology. I love it. Absolutely love it. Unfortunately, I would have to pay a lot of money if I switch majors here. So this summer, I am relocating to University of Utah.

I'm not going to lie- it's tough to live in a place that reminds you of a plan that no longer exists. I wake up here on a regular basis and feel overwhelmed by the amount of time I have left. However, there are moments- when I'm shopping at Powell's, when it is sunny out and I go for walks- when living in Portland is not a burden. Rather, I cannot help but feel like leaving Portland will be difficult. In a weird, twisted way, I've developed Stockholm Syndrome towards this city.

That's right, after everything, after all the complaints of hipsters, smokers, and homeless people, I will admit it- I like Portland. I can remember why I wanted to move here in the first place, and it wasn't just for a man. I wanted to be here because Portland manages to be a city without giving up trees. They have a rich and gritty history. Most of all, Portland is that rare gem of a city- it's urban and western. New York and Chicago are impressive places, no doubt; I respect both places, and not just because the best Anthropology departments are located at Columbia and University of Chicago. However, they are a part of the eastern US- the old US. To toss aside grammar and twelve years of English education, the West is where it's at.

And yes, this is basically the most emotional and metaphorical I'm going to get on a blog. I'm about as openly emotional as a printer. Some would call a person with my characteristics a "bottler." Those people are also psychiatrists, and I don't put much stock in their snake oil.

I will miss Portland. I will miss the farmer's market. I will miss Voodoo Doughnuts. God, will I miss Powell's. All this aside, I cannot wait to leave. Living in Portland is a fragment of a plan that ended in September, and moving to Salt Lake is the first step in my "un-plan." I don't have any goals besides enjoying life and investing my time in things that seem valuable to me. I listen to my younger friends fret about "what they want to do with their lives," and I know just how they feel. My only piece of advice to them is that they never have to know where their lives are going. They don't have to plan ahead. We're all so centered on what's happening in the future that we end up making our present miserable. And when the only thing guaranteed in our future is that at some point, we will die, who wants to live in a constant state of planning?

Meg Fills Out the Census Form

Ah, the US Census.

No, my conservative friends, it is not Big Brother's attempt to know where you live and who you are. I regret to inform you, but Big Brother already knows where you live. How do you think they got the Census form to you?

In fact, let us stop calling Obama's administration "Big Brother." Especially if you're a conservative. Just give up. You have no right to compare a moderate to Orwellian paranoia. Ever heard of the PATRIOT Act?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

And stop calling Obama a socialist. Do you even know what a socialist is? Did you sleep through your government class? Obama is about as socialist as Reagan.

But I digress.

The US Census form. I got mine today; it's different from yours because I live in a dorm. This one is called the "Individual Census Report." It only has seven questions.

Let us go through them now; it will only take approximately five minutes, according to the form.

Question One: My name.

Now, this seems that it should not be necessary; after all, they were perfectly able to print my full name on the envelope.

Question Two: What is my sex?

They were clever and went with bubble-in answers, rather than a fill-in-the-blank. My answer, in that case, would have been no thank you.

Question Three: What is my age and date of birth?

Now, seeing as the government is the group that gave me my social security number, as well as recognized my birth certificate, you would think they would already have this info. So we go to...

Question Four: Am I Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?

Now, here is a very interesting question. Ignoring the fact that they do not go into depth in any other minority, I must point out the obvious- Spain is across the pond, kids. Spanish origin is from a different continent than Hispanic origin.

Question Five: What is my race?

Now, here is the most flawed question of all. They offer me a minimum of twelve choices, with two places where I may write-in my own. However, of these, the only choice applicable to me is "white." I argue against this, however. I am not Italian. I'm not French. I'm not Polish, Hungarian, or Belgian. My ancestry comes from the British Isles. And yet, the entire continent of European origin (except Spain) is represented by "white." I could be Hawaiian, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Samoan, or Chamorro, but I can only be "white."

And beyond all this, there is no such thing as "race," dear children. Race denotes subspecies. There is no subspecies of Homo sapiens, thought Rush Limbaugh would indicate otherwise. What you are looking for, dear Census Bureau, is ethnicity. Get it right, or don't ask.

Climbing down off my high horse and moving on.

Question Six: Do I live or stay in this facility MOST OF THE TIME?

Choosing yes completes the form. However, what do they mean exactly by this question? Arguably, I live in Boise more than I live here. In fact, I spend more time in the other buildings on campus than I do here. Thinking about it further, given my entire life span, I think I've spent more time at Winco (yay Winco!) than I have in this exact dorm. So what do they mean? Seeing as this form counts for the next ten years, I'll have to say "No," which leads us to....

Question Seven! Last question! This is misleading, of course, because question Seven takes up half the form. Tricky, Department of Commerce, very tricky. Anyway, Question Seven: (If No) What is the full address of the place where you live or stay MOST OF THE TIME?

Now, because I've been over-thinking things since I was born, what do they mean by this? Am I supposed to figure out what my address will be for the next ten years? Perhaps I should get a PO box. Certainly, in the last ten years it has been my parents' house. But my sister graduates high school in four and a half years. My parents might move. And then it will be inaccurate information. So what's a girl to do?

I'll tell you what I'm going to do- nothing. That's right, I'm not turning this sad piece of paper in any time soon. I'm an academic, sirs and madams. I believe in accurate research, and these questions are so flawed, the data recorded by this will be skewed. Supposedly, this will help the government assess where to send federal money that was allotted for me as a citizen. The last place I want it sent is Portland. This is why my parents have kindly counted me on their form. I know that's not exactly how it's supposed to work, but whatever. Like I said, this data is going to be poorly gathered, anyway. The Census is a part of our Constitution, this is true. However, I refuse to participate in a system that uses out-dated means of measuring the population. I'm ignoring my census form, not because I am conservative, but because I'm not.

Instead, I propose a few changes.

Question One- this needs to be eliminated. You already know my name. Next.

Question Two- this, too, is silly. Your people signed by passport, you already have this info. Next.

Question Three- I hear myself repeating earlier statements. Do away with this one, too. Onwards.

Questions Four and Five- should be combined. Origin and ETHNICITY are the same. Instead of asking people to choose bubbles that represent their heritage, how about a nice write-in-the-answer space? Give them at least a paragraph. Most of us are mutts.

Question Six- Be more god-damned specific. What the hell does MOST OF THE TIME mean,

you ingrates?

Question Seven- again, that silly MOST OF THE TIME crap. Why are you asking people to specify one address that will not be changed in your records until 2020? If any of the Department of Commerce's employees have changed addresses since 2000, they are fired.

Also, let's add a few questions. I realize people moan and groan about being inconvenienced by tedium, but these are typically also people who watch Fox News. I'm fairly certain they have more than five minutes on their hands.

Hypothetical Question Eight- What High School did you attend? (check if you did not graduate) This question will tell us much more about our current population than silly questions pertaining to skin pigment.

Hypothetical Question Nine- On average, how much time do you spend watching television, and what are your top five networks? (check box if you prefer books) These questions will give us an idea of where people are getting their information. Maybe then we will understand why an alarming percentage of America think Obama is a socialist.

Hypothetical Question Ten- On average, how many times per week do you cook your own food? Maybe then we will understand why America is fat.

Hypothetical Question Eleven- Have you ever read the Constitution, and if so, did it make sense? Perhaps then people will go out and actually examine a copy of our highest law of the land. It makes for a fascinating read.

This concludes my hypothetical questions. I'm sure I could write more, but they would get increasingly sarcastic. We don't need to know about skin color. Science has proven there are more genetic differences between two people if one is lactose intolerant and the other is not than between someone of African descent and someone of European descent. Give up the "race" questions. It's getting old. I'm tired of correcting people. Domestic dogs have races. Cats have races. People do not have races, idiots.

And I realize my words will not reach the sad sacks over at the D of C. I'm not here to begin a revolution. I do not suggest we "reload." I do suggest we give Sarah Palin her very own exhibit at the Smithsonian Zoo, but that is for another time.

I am here to entertain, as always. Thank you for obliging me my soapbox.