Department of Archery Haiku
I’ve taken up a
new sport, game, activity –
whatever it is
“Zen and the art of…”
Yep; archery. Just for fun.
(I don’t hunt Bambi).
Blownup balloons pinned
on target – they’re better than
hitting the bulls-eye.
I think it’s the sound:
A sharp, satisfying “pop”
and the balloon sags.
I’ve learned what improves
my aim: mean faces, drawn on
balloons, with Sharpies.
It only takes me
one or two arrows to burst
Vladimir Putin.
I do not have a picture of one of my Putin balloons (I popped ’em all), but I can share something even better: a video of Vladimir Putin making a balloon animal.
Is this a great world, or what?
* * *
Department of No Comment Necessary
From psychologist and author Valerie Tarico’s interview with Sarah Morehead, executive [1] director of Recovering From Religion, a support group for people reconsidering the role of religion in their life and who have negatively affected by religion.
VT:Your commitment to supporting people in religious transitions comes from your own transition, which started with you as a life-long member of the Southern Baptist Convention and ended with you as an atheist.
SM: Yes. It was a long journey. Twelve years ago, I separated from my Promise Keeper husband. He had been violent toward me, but when he turned that on our kids, it was over for me. I found myself strapped financially, and in desperation I went to the benevolence committee at my church and asked for $600 to help pay the bills. This was a huge, successful mega-church, and the benevolence committee was their mechanism for helping members in need. The committee—all men—said they needed to pray about my request, and that regardless I needed to go to counseling about how to be a more godly wife so that I could lead my husband back to Christ through my submissiveness. They said this even though they knew he was physically abusive. Then, after praying, they let me know that Jesus wasn’t keen on them giving me the money.
* * *
Favorite crossword puzzle clue I’ve encountered this year:
Clue: They are taken to go. [2]
* * *
Department of Paying Attention
Frozen Embryos Have A Right To Live was the absurdly provocative title of an op-ed in last Thursday’s New York Times. The byline belonged to someone described as Sofía Vergara’s Ex-Fiancé, aka, Nick Loeb. (SVEF/Mr. Loeb admitted up front that the issue at hand would likely not be newsworthy save for the Famous Person © involved.)
Ms. Vergara is one of the stars of (yet-another-popular-series-I-don’t-watch) Modern Family, a show in which the fiery, heavily-accented Latina plays the stereotypical heavily-accented Sexy/Fiery Latina ®, a pandering stereotype breakthrough performance for a Latina actor as a regular sitcom cast member.
I am familiar with Ms. Vergara in the vaguest celebrity knowledge way; i.e., twice or thrice I’ve seen her on late night talk shows, where I found her manners and mannerisms at once irritating and charmingly reminiscent of…someone…. Oh, yes – Charo. [3]
We now we pause in our deliberation of Serious Events ® for a moment of cuchi-cuchi to celebrate the first – and hopefully not last – mention of Charo in this blog.
Once again, I digress.
The subject of SVEF/Mr. Loeb’s op-ed is the lawsuit he has filed against his ex-fiancé, re control of the frozen embryos the two of them created, back when they were on embryo-creating terms. Ms. Vergara does not want these frozen embryos implanted in a surrogate now that she and Mr. Loeb are no longer a couple.
In his opening paragraphs SVEF briefly outlines questions he would like readers to consider, re the rights of parenthood, the idea of embryos as property vs. the “sacredness” of life/religious beliefs. SVEF uses the bulk of the article to establish his I am a sensitive man and have always wanted to be a father credentials…which are superfluous after the first two sentences of paragraph 3 of his article (below, my emphases):
In 2013 Sofia and I agreed to try to use in vitro fertilization and a surrogate to have children. We signed a form stating that any embryos created through the process could be brought to term only with both parties’ consent.
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude? Really?
Not to be insensitive, but holy frozen ballsack, [4] buddy, do you have even a remedial understanding of reading comprehension?
Both parties have not consented. You changed your mind — a cognitive alteration which may be a major bummer for you but which in no way nullifies the legal document you signed which stated the terms to which you agreed.
We signed a form stating that any embryos created through the process could be brought to term only with both parties’ consent.
I wanted to stop reading the article after that one simple-yet-explicit, concise sentence. How elegantly clear can an agreement be? Game over.
* * *
Department of Yes, I Do Have a Heart
Lest you think me unsympathetic to SVEF, after reading the article I did pause to consider his emotional well-being, and that of others in his situation. I think he would be well-served by channeling his (what he feels to be) thwarted parental energy into acting on behalf of even one of the millions of orphaned/neglected/needy, real live, non-frozen children currently residing on this planet.
Also, I think he should meditate upon pictures of a star-pajama clothed baby sloth.
As should we all.
* * *
May hitting your favorite target provide you with a bulls-eye experience…and may the hijinks ensue.
Thanks for stopping by. Au Vendredi!
[1] A word like executive deserves its own footnote, n’est ce-pas?
[2] Answer: Laxatives.
[3] You know and/or remember who Charo is? Dang, you must be old.
[4] Have you checked out the frozen ballsack section of your natural foods store? What are you waiting for?
