rinue: (Default)
[personal profile] rinue
Today, on the radio, I heard someone talking about how her family kept the Sabbath. (This was in the context of Passover traditions in different families.) She said something like "well, we do turn on lights and drive the car and have adventures and all that. Our rule is nothing electronic." I am sure she meant this to mean video games, computers, televisions, and so on, and did not mean she didn't use her microwave or the car she just said she drove, not to mention those lights she turns on.

I've filed it away with the many times someone has said to me that they didn't want any chemicals in their body. One particularly egregious example was a villification of "ascorbic acid," because that sounds scarier than vitamin c. A paralell is the awful "corn syrup can't be bad because it comes from corn!" commercial, which is an argument I can make about how heroin can't be bad because it comes from opium, a plant.

I am perhaps more disturbed by these - slips? mistakes? misunderstandings? - than I should be; I feel like they're part of a larger trend which makes a distinction between nature and science - an odd distinction to someone who has studied science. This false dichotomy also tends to color one good and one evil. It's an update of God's Will versus witchcraft, but much less examined a thought.

My sister, as I mentioned, is planning a move to a mountainous part of South America, and when I was on the phone with her, she started to worry that she wouldn't know how to cook when she moved, because cooking is different in the mountains. I explained that the only thing she needed to worry about was the boiling point of water, and this has to do with the relationship between pressure and gasses, not with properties of heat - a hambuger is going to work the same, or pie; just not soup.

It upset me quite a bit that she didn't already know this, although not upset with her - she at least remembered there was something different and was going to look it up, in the same way I might need to look up a currency conversion or how many tablespoons are in a cup. It upset me because it felt, again, like a view of the world through magic - we are in the mountains, and must make a different deal with the gods for fire. I'm probably blowing this out of proportion, but I haven't been able to shake it weeks after the fact. (I have not mentioned this to her, since it's not really about her.)

Ciro and I are both sleeping badly, partly as a result of interrupted sleep patterns and partly because we are both naturally restless. It is sort of nice that we are both sleeping badly, as I think there would be resentment otherwise, but I also worry that we are setting each other off. It was easier last week, when we could placate ourselves with Season One of Friday Night Lights; the pilot of the second season was so I-Know-What-You-Did-Last-Summer awful that we've decided to skip to season three, but we haven't had the energy. Our trust was broken. We may officially declare the show has only one season (which does finish off nicely), in the same way we deny the existence of the Star Wars prequels. (And the studio edit of A Touch of Evil.)

In other news, I am in a continuing battle with the U.S. Postal Service that I may soon escalate to my congressional representative. This is not about suspension of Saturday service, which I think is a perfectly fine idea in an era of e-mail, faxes, and telephones.



I generally like the changes being made at the post office. However, there is one that snuck in which is already in effect; if a postal carrier doesn't think you live at an address, they can make a personal decision not to deliver mail addressed to you there. This is a major hassle for someone like me who travels a lot and has no permanent address; I pay to file temporary changes of address and individual postal carriers still choose not to give me my mail because they know the people who live there and I'm not them.

Aside from the inconvenience, this is offensive on the face of it, because when I pay to send a letter to an address, I expect it to arrive at that address, "in care of" or not. To do otherwise subtly disenfranchises those of us who are not homeowners. It's also troubling because the decision devolves on the individual mail carrier, and there is a lot to suggest there is racial profiling going on; we get all kinds of mail for people who don't live at our address as long as they have names like "lindsay" and "scott," but I've never seen a hispanic-looking name even though I live in a predominantly hispanic neigborhood. I've also noticed that mail to Romie Stott does better than mail to Ciro Faienza, even at addresses where he has lived longer or more recently.

If this bothers you as much as it does me, please send a letter to your federal representative. I've also been e-mailing the postmaster general's office - pmgceo@usps.gov - although they keep referring me to customer services as though it is a local problem. (It's national. I've encountered it in multiple states.) Don't try to go through the USPS website; the "contact us" form is extremely limited.

(no subject)

Date: 2010-04-01 01:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] valancy.livejournal.com
This is all just brilliant.

Hoorah science!

On a very tangential sidenote, we are all terribly pleased that all of Sara's kids have decided to become nurses or doctors because they want to be like Sara and are doing extremely well in science. WIN! WINNNNNN!!!!!

Profile

rinue: (Default)
rinue

April 2025

S M T W T F S
  12 345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 1st, 2025 10:45 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios