Texas Church Shooting Video Shows Gunman’s Methodical Attack, Official Says – The New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/us/texas-shooting-video-devin-kelley.html

If there are no criminal negligence charges filed against those people in the Air Force who didn’t do their job and report his assault convictions to the federal background check system…I don’t even know.

Will Republicans who have been bitching for years about how perfect the background check system is (“there can’t possibly be a way for someone who shouldn’t get a gun to get through the system! We don’t need more gun laws!”) finally understand what we (moderate) gun control folks want?!?!

1) A comprehensive background check (extreme vetting? Sure, IF we’re going to be assholes to refugees, too.) And a life sentence in prison if your negligence leads to someone purchasing/using a weapon that they use to do harm.

2) Comprehensive and regular gun safety training. No one should be stupid enough to leave ANY gun where a child can find it! Regular reminders of how badly gun ownership can go IS A GOOD THING! And, yes, I’m cool with having similar retraining for a driver’s license!

3) A limit on the number of guns a person can buy in a month (ideally in a lifetime). A gun is a WEAPON, not a toy! It should NEVER be an impulse purchase. If you start crying like a three year old because you can’t get a toy RIGHT NOW!! you are part of the problem. Grow up!

Guns become illegal when a person with no (recorded) criminal past purchases guns to sell to people who can’t purchase guns themselves. Period. Limiting the supply (with limits on purchases) not only increases the price on the black market (which will cause purchasers to need more money, leading to more non-gun using crimes (because they can’t afford one yet) that will make it easier to catch them before they buy the gun), but will obviously reduce the total number of illegal guns on the streets… eventually. TL;DR: Make it harder for criminals to buy guns on the black market=more slip ups=more arrests=ultimately less crime.

No, these 3 demands AREN’T perfect! Probably nothing would have stopped Paddock in Las Vegas. But I live in a place where between the 7 cities where is usually a gun related murder (or 2) every night. The status quo doesn’t work. There is a hole in the system that can be closed IF we quit pretending it doesn’t exist or worse care so much about our own ability to purchase guns like candy that we feel no guilt when someone’s death is directly related to our own greed and entitlement.

Advertisements

Reading Journals

This week in my class on Language Acquisition and Reading, our lesson is on Reading. The first section was on reading for content classes (science, history, etc) and the second section is on reading literature.

I wish, I wish, I WISH the teachers I had in school had simply done a better job explaining what we were doing! I’m recognizing a lot of things I did in English classes for analyzing literature and I vaguely remember it being called “Close Reading”, but I seem to have missed the memo on “Close Reading” being a specific way of reading literature. I mean, I knew it had a set structure, but I never understood why it was WRONG to pay too much attention to just getting lost in the story!

Had they done a simple compare and contrast of “Close Reading” (paying attention primarily to the structure of the story) v. “Reader Response” (paying attention primarily to ideas the story evokes), I think I would have enjoyed English a little bit more. Because as it was, I hated English because I felt like I wasn’t allowed to just enjoy books and I really didn’t understand why it was so important to look at the structures used by the author since I have no desire to be a professional literary writer.

Now that I understand why it’s important to learn about structure as much as content, I’d be fine with analyzing a piece of literature based on it’s structure! It’s not that one way of looking at literature is better or worse (which I thought back in high school), but that they are different.

Especially with poetry.

I don’t like poetry because you can’t read poetry. I mean, you can, but it has to be read aloud. Which is fine if you like reading aloud! But I like seeing a story and I can’t see a story if I’m stumbling over pronunciations and making sure that I’m pausing in all the right places (which are never at the end of a line even though the lines don’t take up the entire width of the page….WHY?!?!?!). It bugs the crap out of me.

Ooh! Brainstorm! Whenever I have to deal with poetry in my future classroom, I will always prep for the class by re-writing the poems! I will write them out as though prose (except without the distracting /s) and use ellipses (…) as necessary. Though, I’m pretty darn good at pausing at the commas! Haha. This way I can read them as they are meant to be read (and continue to wonder why the heck they’re structured stupidly to start with!).

Anyway, Bitching about poetry wasn’t the reason I started writing this  post. I’m supposed to be writing about Reading Journals.

There are 4 types:

  1. Response Journals: where the student reflects after each chapter, usually in response to a prompt given by the teacher, though they can be free-written.
  2. Literary: the student pretends to be one of the characters and reflects from that POV.
  3. Double Entry: where the left side of the page is a quotation and the right side is a question or reflection (I remember doing this for Pride and Prejudice, an assignment I actually enjoyed).
  4. Dialogue Journals: where the student and teacher (or two students) have a written discussion about the book within the confines of a journal.

As a letter writer, I think I will rely heavily on Dialogue Journals! I’m 1000x more confident on paper than vocally and I feel much more comfortable writing to my professors than I do speaking to them, especially when I have a question. I imagine this is true for many students who do not want to look silly in front of the class.

Thinking about the Double-Entry Journal we did for Pride and Prejudice, I felt self-conscious about my teacher reading it because I wasn’t sure if I was on the right track about things. I knew that I was getting graded for my work in it and the feedback was always about creating a correct Journal and making the right kinds of connections/inferences, not about specific things that I’d written. Not a conversation about the book and my ideas on it. An actual conversation about it would have been really nice, since I rarely talked in class.

I’m sure a lot of the questions I wrote in that Journal never got answered. I assume that my way of approaching a book hasn’t changed much, so many of the quotes I questioned or reflected on were things that made me laugh or made me cringe. The journal is long, long gone, but I know it would have been nice if it’d had some dialogue with my teacher in it where she gave her opinions on the book and my thoughts rather than simply “that’s interesting” and “good insights” or whatever other generic statements she could make. There was nothing that made me want to dive deeper into what I’d already written about in the journal. Why go back to a previous chapter when the next chapter’s reflections are due this week?

Probably one of the best responses I ever got from a teacher on an assignment was in the Environments of Lewis and Clark course in college where on a homework assignment we were asked to list 3 uses of water in the home. One of mine was “watering the cats and dogs” (because I couldn’t figure out a better way to word this particular chore). The professor drew a little picture of a cat with a watering can over it’s head that let me know that she had smiled at my terminology. I felt like we were on the same page about the question and that we were cool. It let me know that she’d read my answer and had a personal response to it. That meant a lot.

Since I’m an avid reader, I hope to have read many of the books that my students will read so that I can have a real conversation with them about their books in their Journals. I’d treat it like a mini, private book club where the students are free to share even their wildest ideas about the books because everyone is entitled to have any reaction they want to a particular book.

And if we’re learning about the structure of literary works (which is important!), I will make sure that my students understand that analyzing structure is different from having merely an aesthetic response to a book. Because there are a lot of crappy books being written today which lack even a semblance of literary structure and that’s not cool!

As Architects say, “Form Follows Function”. In reading as many sources of news that I do, it’s critical to realize when a form exists for a very specific reason (poetry be damned).

Okay. I relent: A haiku exists only as a form: meaning has nothing to do with it’s structure. I think?

Question: How often to homeschooling parents “grade” their children’s reading journals? Do many curriculum require that children keep such journals?

I nag, my tween complains — how do we end the struggle over chores? – The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/on-parenting/help-my-12-year-old-wont-complete-chores/2017/02/21/582a1992-f553-11e6-8d72-263470bf0401_story.html?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.00fb79b0ac9d

On tying chores to allowance, here is how I would do it:

Once the kid grasps the concept of money (needing money to buy things), they are old enough for their chores to be linked to their allowance. Since they should have already been doing age appropriate chores°, they will love getting paid to do what they’re already doing and will probably not realize over the years that an increase in the number and type of chores they’re doing is related to their age and development not an increase in allowance.

Let me explain. At 5 years old, the kid learns about the importance of money. They want money, so you say, “okay, if you complete all your chores this week, I’ll give you X dollars on Friday”. The kid thinks, “Sweet! I already do all my chores every week, so this is easy money!!”

As the kid gets older, they will want more money and you know they need to do more chores. They will gladly consent to doing more chores for more money. But, you were already planning to increase their allowance because you know a 10 year old probably can’t survive on $5/week. They think they’re getting the payraise for doing more work, when in reality, the payraise and work is unrelated… sort of.

You see, there’s a big problem that can arise with tying chores to allowance: what do you do when the kid doesn’t do their work? The simplest strategy I’ve thought of is that the kid loses money for every chore not done. $1/chore, depending on how the numbers crunch?

Since I believe that kids should be given reasonable choice as much as possible, I think that they should be allowed to choose their chores as much as possible.For younger kids, they may pick their daily chores for a given block of time* while older kids, have a master chore list^ for them to check off that let’s them choose the chores that fits their mood on a given day.

Any overlap between younger and older kids chore charts should be hashed out at the ~monthly meeting when the younger kids pick their chores for the month. Younger kids should be given first dibs on chores that are age appropriate, but be allowed to take on more responsibility if appropriate (like, they want to scrub the shower every week or help cook dinner).
°Note: There is a difference between chores and good habits.Chores are things that need to be done regardless of whose doing it. Habits are personal responsibilities that everyone has to do to be considered a responsible adult (brushing teeth, picking up their toys, etc). Chores can be mixed and matched depending on one’s roommates, spouse, or children. When a person lives alone, all the chores fall onto their shoulders. When living in a group, chores can be spread around (you don’t need 3 people washing dishes every night), but everyone, no matter their living situation, needs to automatically take care of their personal hygiene and pick up after themselves; teaching good habits is different from teaching how and when to do chores!
*So, every month or so, the younger kids decide on what they’re chore list is for every day: feed the dog, set the table, wipe up the bathroom, etc. When they get bored with these chores, they can choose a new set of chores. Younger kids take longer for their interests to change and they do better with a strict daily list of tasks.

^Older kids are capable of doing just about everything moms and dads can, which means they, like moms and dads, can decide what needs to be done and when. Someone needs to figure out dinner every night; who’s in the mood to cook? I’d suggest making the agreement = the total number of chores per week×/the number of people covered by that chore list @the amount of allowance that is appropriate. The teen is going to look at the list of everything that needs to get done in a week (7 dinners, 7 dish washings, etc, etc, etc) and pick the things they like best, based on their ever changing mood. If there’s more than one older kid, there will be competition over the choiciest chores, which seems like a good problem to have! Moms and dads, as members of the household, should also be included in the chores equation. School=Work, so none of this “I have a job and you don’t” argument (truthfully, school is more work than most jobs because of homework).

×However, it’s important to remember that not all chores are created equal. I’d suggest ranking chores by difficulty and making a hard chore like washing clothes count for more than an easy chore like feeding the dog. To adjust the equation, simply add together the rankings rather than the base number.

Here’s an example of a partial master chore list:

Family members: 2 parents, 2 teens = 4 participants

Dinner (7×2 (ranking)) = 14 points

Feeding dog (7×1) = 7 points

Washing clothes (includes washing, drying, folding, sorting/putting away) (3 or 4 (or however often as necessary) ×4) = 12 or 16 points

Dishes (7×2 (4 in my real house because we don’t have a dishwasher) = 14 or 28 points

Take the number of points (47 or 61) and divide it by the number of people responsible (4) so, each person is responsible for about 11 or 15 points worth of work. The ranking score above is how many points you earn for doing a chore once. A person who primarily feeds the dog will have to cook or wash dishes a couple days while that cook/dishwasher gets the day off.

Of course, your milage will vary.

Christianity Is Just A Better Religion Than I | The Daily Caller–A Rebuttal

http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/02/christianity-is-just-a-better-religion-than-islam/

“But the ‘renaissance’ injected into western man an absurd inferiority complex in regard to pagan antiquity and then the ‘Enlightenment’ insisted on eliminating from public policy and public law the very Christian revelation which defined and ennobled western man. “

Except, the Renaissance and Enlightenment literally brought Christians out of the dark ages. Education was quite stagnant in Christendom during the dark ages. There was minimal innovation and little exploration. Then, Christians invaded the right places in the Islamic world and REDISCOVERED the philosophical works of the Greeks and Romans. Art, Literature, Science,Mathematics were REBORN in Western Culture. 

Excerpt, this wasn’t pure Greek and Roman. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and possibly 0 are known as ARABIC numerals (as opposed to Roman numerals: I, II, III, etc). You see, while Christians were busy planning invasions of the Holy Lands (the Crusades), the Islamic world was translating and expanding on the philosophical works they were protecting, probably stolen, but that’s okay in 1000CE, because they were stolen manuscripts depicting educational materials. Would you think a manuscript with Pathagorius’ (sorry about spelling!) notes on triangles valuable enough to steal in a world where Christians were looking for the Holy Grail?

I’m not sure when Islamic scholars decided that the Earth circled the Sun, instead of the Sun circling the Earth, but Copernicus sat on his research until his deathbed, some 20 years after he more or less figured it out (1543), because he was certain he’d be jailed or killed for his heresy. Galileo WAS placed under house arrest ~70 years later when he proved Copernicus’ theoretical mathematics correct after building his own version of the telescope.

What is most telling about Fimister’s complete ignorance of history is this:

 The ‘Enlightenment’ is a parasite, it will not survive the death of its host. But it is strong enough to weaken the West to the point where its traditional external enemy the Islamic Ummah can strike the killer blow. Deep down the liberals know this is case, as they contracept and abort and legislate our civilisation into extinction, but in the end they don’t care. Their ultimate motive was always less the love of ‘liberty’ and more the hatred of Christ.

Without the Enlightenment, and it’s emphasis on the intelligence of man, there would not have been a Reformation!

Martin Luther is as much a child of the Renaissance and Nicholas Copernicus! They wereboth seeking answers outside of the monopoly that was the Roman Catholic Church. They both were heretics with ideas that threatened Church Doctrine. Both men show that anyone, not just Catholic Priests, are capable of making discoveries on their own.

Probably the stickiest part argument in favor of Christianity (which I assume is modern Evangelical Christianity) is that the most important person other that Luther for the spread of Protestantism is King Henry viii, who changed England from Catholic to Protestant solely so he could divorce Catherine of Aragon. After 6 marriages and 3 divorces, the Tudor line started many started many religious wars, but didn’t extend their reign. Had Henry stayed Catholic, America would probably be a more Catholic nation where divorce and birth control are taboo.

Of course, America would still be ruled by Britain because Democracy? Freedom of Speech? These are totally Enlightenment things.

Mansplaining Amongst Men

I just watched a pressman mansplain how ink looks differently on different paper to the general manager.

They’re both men.

It was sadly hilarious as I’m sure neither think mansplaining is a real thing.

From my experience, there are three reasons for mansplaining and none are limited to a single gender.

  1. For any number of reasons, the mansplainer assumes the victim has no prior knowledge of the topic in question and doesn’t bother to inquire before mansplaining.
  2. The mansplainer has a pathological need to show how smart they are by reciting what they know.
  3. The mansplainer’s brain needs to complete the thought before it can move on to the next topic.

All 3 of these are definitely mansplaining rather than simply explaining because the victim is usually saying “yup, I know all this stuff” or if they’re polite, they have a very pained smile on their face. Other non verbal cues include rolling eyes, disinterested nodding, fake yawning, real yawning, checking phone, squinty eyes of death, etc, etc, etc.

Only in the case of the 3rd type is mansplaining “okay” IF the mansplainer immediately apologizes and explains that their brain sometimes threatens to “Blue Screen of Death” if interrupted, because then we know that the mansplainer is speaking more for themselves than the victim.

I have tried to stop my hubby from telling me things I already know and have nearly caused him to Blue Screen with my interruptions. I didn’t realize how big an issue it is until I started mansplaining to him about something and he kept interrupting me and I realized it wasn’t about me teaching/telling him the story/thought, but was me organizing my thoughts out loud and his interruptions were literally interrupting my thought process. 

So now when hubby starts telling me things I already know, I give him a quick “yup, I know this” and if he continues, I ignore him. It’s better for both of us this way since I know he’s talking to appease his brain and not because he thinks I’m stupid.

Gluttony: The Acceptable Sin – The Transformed Wife–A Rebuttal

https://thetransformedwife.com/gluttony-the-acceptable-sin/#comment-16140

By why is your condemnation of gluttony limited only to the consumption of food?!?

Do you see Christmas decorations in the stores you shop in now? This is the most visible form of American gluttony.  The “gimmie, gimmie, gimmie” mentality.

The man who was elected president in 2016 is a glutton. Not satisfied by his first wife, he replaced her.  Not satisfied again, he replaced her, too. He bought an airline and had the planes repainted again because the T wasn’t big enough! Also with this airline, he ignored customer surveys that wanted  their flights to be on time, and instead invested in ultra plush carpet (telling flight attendants to push harder) and gold plated sinks.

Not satisfied with owning one nice casino in Atlantic City, he had to have 3, which in competition with each other, led to all of them losing money and ultimately all 3 closing their doors.

Trump doesn’t just want to have more, he wants the MOST. Trump doesn’t just want better, he wants the BEST. He claims that he’s trying to get the most and the best for everyone, but that is logically impossible. Besides, everything he and Republicans have done so far take things away from others, which is the exact opposite of giving everyone the best!