Karma Reads: The Regional Office is Under Attack! by Manuel Gonzales

Words, words, words

Two Waltonens agree: this book is a fast, enjoyable read.

Gonzales lets you experience the attack of the Regional Office through two points of view–the attackers and the ones being attacked. In doing so, he challenges our traditional action, superhero, and scifi conventions.

Is the agency that recruits assassins good? Or are those who resist good? What does everyone know and when? If you don’t know what your agency really does, are you culpable? Is extra-judicial justice by those with certain powers or talent ever justified? What if the other recruits don’t you? If your whole life is ruled by a secret agency, what happens when you date (within that agency)? And then what happens when the relationship sours?

The narrating female voices are distinct, dangerous, and fun.

Share
0 comments

The Thanksgiving Play at CapStage (Review)

Movies & Television & Theatre

The Thanksgiving Play at CapStage closes on July 22nd.

See it before then, please.

I was able to see it last night. I loved this play, but what struck me most was the audience’s laughter. I have never heard more hearty, desperately-trying-to-catch-a-breath belly laughs in a theatre before.

(Was the spelling of “theatre” correct there? It’s a big debate, but I’ll have to explain it later.)

The humor comes from many angles, intersecting in a strongly directed piece, with great comic timing, about race, gender, theatre, voice, agency, shopping habits, eating habits, stress, simplicity, collaborative theatre (insert shudder of recognition from my acting days), education, selfies, and performativity.

The Thanksgiving Play is about a school drama teacher trying to construct a culturally relevant play about Thanksgiving in a way that will both appeal to our post-post racial, #metoo time and honor Native Americans.

Except they don’t have any Native Americans.

This is a beautiful, biting, clever satire. You’re watching a cast of white actors (playing a cast of white actors) talk about the problem of the invisibility of Native Americans, as they try to construct a play about Thanksgiving with no Native Americans. If this weren’t meta and weren’t written by a Native American playwright, we would be in trouble.

But it is and it is, so laugh away.

If I had more time this month, I’d see it again.

 

Author: Larissa FastHorse

Director: Michael Stevenson

The awesome cast: Gabby Battista, Cassidy Brown, Jouni Kirjola (we’re probably related, in the way that all Finnish Americans are), Jennifer Le Blanc.

Share
0 comments

The Continuing Adventures of OnLine Dating (86): (In)Attention from Non-Progressives

dating

There are generally four kinds of non-progressives who see my profile, which clearly states that the man I want “will share my basic values, so he will be liberal/progressive (conservatives, libertarians, and anarchists need not apply).”

First, there are the men who can read and leave me alone. They may be thankful I warned them; they may hate me for being a “libtard.” I have no idea, and for that, I’m grateful.

Second, there are the men who message me to tell me I’m being close-minded. They think I’m attractive, so they think I should put politics aside to let them enjoy me.

They say things like this:

The problem with liberals is they believe that we conservatives are all alike.

I point out this thing called irony.

Opposites attract.

I say, No one who would vote against equality, affordable education, healthcare, or reproductive rights will be able to share my bed.

I don’t care about what gay people do or what you do with your body.

I then have to explain that I’m looking for someone who does care about what gay people are allowed to do and who does care what I can do with my body, instead of voting against us.

This is where guy type 2 usually gives up.

Then, there is the third type, who refuses to go down without an insult.

Last week, I thought a guy was type 2, but he just kept making those ridiculous claims: liberals think all conservatives are alike, liberals want to ban guns, liberals don’t think people should have to work for anything.

Then why did he want to date me, I asked.

Oh I don’t think we could have a relationship. But you’re cute and I thought we could have some fun.

I reminded him that I was looking for long-term.

Then he said I was just looking for a weak man to boss around, that I was afraid of a real man.

(He had already said he pictured all liberal men as having manbuns and being unable to change a flat tire.)

I told him real men weren’t badgering, whiny, mansplainers and blocked him.

And then there’s the fourth type, who thinks that he’s the exception to my rule (he thinks he’s a “centrist”).

Recent example:

Him: Hi there, so I did read your profile as requested. 
I’m fairly sure at least politically We are gonna be like minded. [story about some Fox news watching woman who came on to him. I shared a story in kind.]

I’ve always been pretty open minded politically, socially very liberal and more middle of the road fiscally but I just cannot figure out why anyone would support this guy. Politics aside he’s just a really horrible person. He’s a textbook bully. Ugh 
Resist resist resist. Lol

Me: I used to date socially liberal/fiscal conservative guys, but I can’t do it anymore if they vote Republican. If a guy willing to throw voting rights, gays, reproductive rights, the environment, science, education, etc. under the bus for his wallet, then I can’t be with him.

He never answered me, so I guess he usually votes Republican.

What is it that makes these Republican voters think they get to count as liberals/progressives? Because when they vote to fuck the rest of us over, they’re only being selfish, instead of overtly racist/sexist/homophobic/nationalist?

Share
0 comments

The Continuing Adventures of OnLine Dating (85): It’s Not Fun for Women Either

Misc–karmic mistakes?

A lot of men tell me they’re frustrated because

  • women don’t write back
  • women won’t agree to a date after a nice conversation
  • women flake
  • women stand them up
  • women aren’t honest in their profiles
  • women have too many conditions for dating
  • women don’t start conversations enough
  • women are hypocrites who don’t practice what they preach

Guys, women are people. So are you. Almost everyone does this.

I sometimes try to start a conversation with people who have “liked” me, only to be met with silence.

(One guy just sent a message back to a first message I sent 11 months ago!)

I have proposed a drink after a day or so of messaging, only to be met with silence. (Two months ago, a guy kept sending me long messages (average word count: 750). There were days and days of this. He scheduled a date, asked for a reschedule, and then ghosted me.)

Last week, I got stood up for a date. (Not for the first time.)

Last year, a guy arrived to a date, told me he had to move his car, and then never came back (he wrote later, saying he had a migraine, but never asked for a do-over).

Some men I meet don’t look like their profile pictures.

Many men have been shorter than they claimed to be.

There’s a guy on POF who has sent me the same cut and paste opening twice. Within three days. And I had answered him the first time. I asked him why he didn’t have a profile picture when he had set the following conditions for someone to message him:

“To send a message to [redacted] you MUST meet the following criteria:
Female
Lives in United States
You must have a picture to contact this user.”

Many men search for and say they want “thin”; I don’t contact them to tell them what a beautiful person I am inside.

Many men search for and say they don’t want a woman who already has a child; I don’t contact them to say, “but mine is an adult.”

Less than an hour ago, a guy blocked me after I told him we were incompatible. What were we incompatible about? He said he didn’t believe in sex before marriage.

To all the guys who are struggling out there, we are struggling too.

Share
0 comments

Karma Reads: The Best of All Possible Worlds by Karen Lord

Words, words, words

I wanted to like this more than I did. It is reminiscent of early LeGuin–practical sci-fi, with an often cool detachment. But I couldn’t get into it deeply, emotionally.

I really liked the way the author created a full world and real characters, especially given the premise of the novel, one in which a small group of survivors of planet annihilation have to rebuild their lives and their gene pool on an alien world, inhabited by other hominids.

The small group of survivors are a lot like Vulcans in temperament, so I kept easily imagining this story as one that might happen after Vulcan’s destruction.

The main Vulcan finds his Uhura, which is rewarding, though I thought the two leads were coy about their attraction for each other for way too long.

Share
0 comments

Continuing Adventures in OnLine Dating (84): The Alt-Right in My Inbox

dating

Yesterday, I got a message from a Canadian living in San Francisco on Plenty of Fish. He quoted a sentence from my profile and said that we wanted the same things.

When I went to his profile, I saw my sentence.

He confirmed that he stole it.

A message or so later, he asked me what I thought about something he read on the internet that day, which claims that black people are stupid and that that’s why Jewish people want gentiles to mate with them–so that Jews can make gentiles stupid.

Me: I think that’s racist bullshit.

Him: Yes, it’s racist. But why is it bullshit?

He doesn’t mind, in other words, that it’s racist. He knows it is and that he is, but thinks that’s okay.

He said I must not be aware of the Jewish plan to create a dumb slave race through generations of interbreeding.

I blocked him.

And thanked the universe that no one was conspiring to make me date guys like that–talk about IQs going down.

My profile literally says: The guy I want: smart, funny, secure in himself, sexy, nonsmoker, pro-science, pro-equality, supports reproductive rights, very close geographically. He will share my basic values, so he will be liberal/progressive (conservatives, libertarians, and anarchists need not apply).

How dumb do you have to be to think neo-Nazi is what I’m looking for?

I had to log off for most of the day and vigorously shower.

I also now have to live knowing that a sentence I wrote is on a white supremacist’s dating profile.

This is the one time when not being cited works in my favor.

 

Share
0 comments

The Museum of London, June 2018

Museum Musings

I (Karma) first went to the Museum of London in 2006. On its grounds are the remains of the original Roman Wall.

The Roman Wall, from a 2007 trip

When Courtney and Liam suggested we go there this June, I was excited about the exhibition, London Nights. I quickly discovered, however, that the Museum had undergone a massive renovation since I’d last been there–it was much bigger, much grander, but still had its senses of wonder and humor.

This Museum tells the history of London itself, from its “prehistory” days through the Romans, the dark ages, the Enlightenment and the ages after.

London is a grand city, deserving of this grand museum.

I saw the Harry Potter play in this theatre, The Palace.

“Teddy Boys,” though they look like T-Birds to me.

London Nights is an amazing photography exhibit, featuring antique pictures of London at night, from the days of early photography from now. Our favorite sections were the oldest photos, the collection of pictures from the infamous Night Bus by Nick Turpin, and Damien Frost‘s photographs of London’s Drag Queens.

by Nick Turpin

by Damien Frost

The Museum also had a small exhibit about a current plague on the city–Fatbergs.

It is my sad duty to inform you that fatbergs are collections of solid toxic waste in sewers, clogging London and the developed world–the problem is exacerbated by our use of wipes instead of paper. They had dried samples at the museum, in layers of protective glass, to protect us from ourselves.

This exhibit is arguably one from the anthropocene–a newish term for our time, in which we acknowledge that humans have forever altered and harmed the Earth for our own purposes. The term is contentious, but it’s hard to disagree with its use when one encounters a fatberg.

After considering our waste, we retreated into the past to feel slightly better about ourselves, encountering

  • statues of the cardinal virtues, standing on what I guess are demons–they certainly don’t like whatever is happening to them (the placard said who the virtues were, but nothing about the dudes they were balancing upon);
  • a stylized re-creation of a Victorian-era pleasure garden*;

    In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
    A stately pleasure-dome decree:
    Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
    Through caverns measureless to man
    Down to a sunless sea.

    A damsel with a dulcimer
    In a vision once I saw:
    It was an Abyssinian maid
    And on her dulcimer she played,
    Singing of Mount Abora.

  • the famous London stone, which has a twitter account;
  • an old “on this site” stone, about how they totally executed a patsy for the Great London Fire (this stone had to be removed had to be removed from the street in the mid-1700s–readers were causing “traffic jams”);

    Bragging about scapegoating–Americans are definitely descended from these folks

  • an exhibit on how they made the amazing opening of the 2012 London Paralympic Games; 

    some of the Olympic cones used to create the torch

and many other treasures.

Then, on our way to Nando’s, we stopped to take some pictures of and with St. Paul’s.

This obscenity is aimed at the photographer, dear reader.

St. Paul’s

Note: Like most UK museums, the museum was free–only the London Nights special exhibit required cash.

 

*Victorians were weird. They were in great denial about their obsession with sex. (Well, maybe not so weird. The South has the highest rates of sexual issues (unplanned pregnancies etc.) in the U.S., and Utah has the most porn searches, so hypocrisy is technically normal.)

They were big on gardens, nature, and pleasure, though, combining a burgeoning understanding of the natural world through science (this was the period where they named every damn kind of fern, remember) with the ability to talk about reproduction–in plants, at least.

In the UK, by the way, gardens are gardens, but they are also yards. And British people love them in all of their forms, as evidenced by this wonderful song by Laura Mvula.

Talk of the famous pleasure gardens (elaborate playgrounds for the rich) always reminds me of Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s “Kubla Khan.”

Coleridge said he awoke from a dream and started writing the poem down in a fury, until he was interrupted by a knock on the door, causing the poem to be forever unfinished.

One of my professors once gave a lecture about how it’s a metaphor for writing. Khan calls forth the dome by fiat, like god creates, like writers write.

Go back and read it again.

I’ll wait.

The writer metaphor theory is sound.

My theory is equally sound, however.

As I have explained to several classes, this poem is about wet dreams.

Go read it again.

There’s a pleasure dome, with its sexy gardens and romantic chasms and references to sex with incubi. Hot Abyssinian maids . . . fast thick pants and mighty fountains:

“And from this chasm, with ceaseless turmoil seething,
As if this earth in fast thick pants were breathing,
A mighty fountain momently was forced . . .”
Mayhaps he spent too much time in a pleasure garden that day.
Share
1 comment

Continuing Adventures in OnLine Dating: 83

dating

I just don’t even know what to say about this one. Here’s the entire conversation:

Him: Very nice!
Love your hair and that lovely smile too!
Care to chat?

Me: Hi, Sean.
I’m about to head out to a physical therapy appointment (for TMJ).
You are very cute, but Napa is pretty far away to try to have a relationship. I only manage to get out there once or twice a year.

Him: I am moving to sac.:)
text me…[redacted]

Me: When are you moving?

Him: end of the year 

Text me [redacted] let’s meet tonight

Me: I don’t agree to meet people without knowing something about them–there have to be a few messages with some content first.
And I’m on my computer more than my phone (I’m working), so texting wouldn’t make anything go faster. What are the things we have in common?

Him: I just want to get together and have some fun is hard as it is this online dating thing so if you’re interested text me and let’s meet

Me: If we met at a bar, you’d have to talk to me for a few minutes to get my number and a date. Why is that so odd to want here?

Him: I’m not here to negotiate why how where and when I just want to meet women and have fun…

Me: Ok–I think we are on here for different reasons then–or at least with different dating styles. I wish you luck in your search. I hope you find a beautiful and spontaneous woman! Have a great rest of your day!

Him: K

[Ten minutes later.]

Him: Do you have any knowledge with electric cars and hybrid

Me: Just that they exist.

Him: I’m sure you’re aware of their basic efficiency lost in every one of their component… an average of 10% or so

Me: No–I’m not into cars, so I don’t know much about any make/model.

Him: And maybe I could pick your head over it

I’m all about the efficiency and need second brain

Me: I don’t like or care about cars, though. So I’m not interested in talking about them.

I’m still not certain what went on here. Is he on the spectrum, or did he think I would find an electric car conversation alluring enough to agree to a date? Or both?

Share
0 comments

The Continuing Adventures of Online Dating (82): How to Lose a Girl in One Day

dating

I should really just start ignoring conversations that begin inauspiciously.

Yesterday, a guy opened with this:

“Hi this is Garry looking for friendship first if we click we can go from there

“Hello dear are you seriously interested to get together soon”

I tried to patiently explain that I can’t be interested in someone before I even exchange messages with them.

Then, I had to explain that I would not be giving him my phone number.

“Tell honestly since how long are you on this dating site? Did u talk any one face to face”

Serious lack of empathy here–some guys think that if you won’t meet them right away, if you won’t give them your phone number right away, that you aren’t serious about dating. Do their demands ever work? Are other women saying yes with no preamble?

And then: “When u had dated last time seriously as romantic way”

Me: I am not sure what you mean. Are you asking when I last had a date or when I was last in a relationship?

“When you had dated last time sexually? And also when u was in relationship???”

Me: It’s rude to ask someone when they last had sex.
I broke up with my last boyfriend three months ago.

“Any way on first date normally Just to hug kisses or more then that you likevto do honestly?”

Me: Look, I know you aren’t trying to make me feel uncomfortable, but you are, so I am not going to continue this conversation. I hope you find the right person for you.

He didn’t get that he was being obtuse or creepy at all. Based on the grammar/esl stuff, I figure there are cultural differences. But come on. A woman says it takes a little conversation. But the only conversation you want to have is about when she last had sex and if she puts out on the first date? In what culture is that NOT creepy?

Share
1 comment

Karma Reads: The Perfect Nanny by Leila Slimani

Words, words, words

I first heard about this novel on NPR. The reviewer read the first sentence, and I’ll start with that too: “The baby is dead.”

It’s in medias res storytelling–starting quite close to the end and then circling back, and this classic structure works well for the tale.

I know a lot of my friends who have recently had children won’t be able to read this, but if it helps, you don’t actually see what happens to the child(ren). You only know that something did.

This novel was originally written in French and won the Goncourt, making Slimani the first Moroccan woman to win, though it wasn’t her first award.

Slimani is also a journalist, which perhaps explains her eye for detail and her fluid prose.

In short, the novel explores several modern-world tensions. What happens when a woman doesn’t want to just stay home with her children? How do you choose “the perfect nanny”? If the nanny is too perfect, how do you keep yourself from depending on her too much or from exploiting her generosity? Who should decide what the children eat? The person who buys the food or the person who cooks it? Do you really want someone to feel like family or do you secretly want deference and respect? How do you navigate intimate employees in a world where race and class and power conspire to confound us?

Share
0 comments