The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort. -- Robert A. Heinlein
One of our favorite activities is going to see movies at the theater. It's great seeing things on the big screen, with the big sound, and having that larger-than-life experience. But for some reason, a fair number of those around me seem utterly enamored with the idea of going to a big movie on opening weekend. They apparently revel in the crowd, the excitement, the electricity in the air. As the recent viewing of Iron Man has once again confirmed however, I am not that sort of person.
A crowd in the theater means there are more people talking, more babies crying, and more un-silenced cell phones going off. Not only that, but it feels downright claustrophobic to have all those bodies around me. I know real claustrophobes who get jittery in elevators and tunnels. Such things have never bothered me. But put me in a room bigger than my house, then fill it with people, and my skin begins to crawl. There's a constant perception of a sort of awful weight pressing in on me from all sides. If I dwell on it too much (and I try not to), the perception tends to lead to a feeling very much like panic.
I've tried to explain this to my opening weekend friends, but the message never seems to get through. Going to the movies in a packed theater is a decidedly unpleasant experience even if I love the movie, as I did Iron Man. I much prefer to be in a theater that's at 50% or less capacity, as it is the second and subsequent weekends that a movie is open. In fact, I tend to think of weekend #2 as "opening weekend" for me.
Even if we discount my little hang-ups, I believe it's an objectively superior moviegoing experience as well. There are lighter crowds, fewer babies, fewer cell phones, easier trips to the bathroom if necessary, and a greater chance that my friends and I can all sit together instead of being scattered all over the theater.
This summer promises to be a banner year in the kinds of movies that I like to see. It also promises to be a banner year in requests for opening-weekend crowd-alongs. I went to Iron Man, now I need a break. The request for seeing Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, not just on opening weekend, but -- horror of horrors! -- at the Thursday opening, was politely declined. I'll be seeing Prince Caspian instead. Indy can wait a week, and will bump another movie, which will bump another, and so forth, all through the summer until the summer movies dry up somewhere around Labor Day. I may see them later than some of my friends, but I'll enjoy them more than I would otherwise. Given the price of tickets these days, I think that's pretty important.
OK, this has gotten a little to weird for words... According to Tulsa World:
U.S. Rep. Dan Boren on Wednesday announced his appointment to the National Rifle Association's board of directors.
"The Second Amendment is an important part of Oklahoma and this nation's heritage, and I pledge to uphold it for all who wish to keep their families safe and for sportsmen, shooters and hunters everywhere,'' the Oklahoma Democrat said.
Boren was born in Shawnee, Oklahoma to Janna Lou Little and David Lyle Boren, current University of Oklahoma President
This would be the same OU president who said he'd "get down on his knees and beg" the Oklahoma legislators to kill a bill that would have allowed concealed carry on college campuses. So the son of one of Oklahoma's biggest anti-gunners is now on the board of directors for the NRA.
I'm not saying he's not his own man...
...I'm just saying I hope this particular apple fell a good distance from the tree.
One of the hardest areas to exercise seems to be the back. It's involved in a lot of exercises, and is probably one of our largest muscle groups, but we don't use our backs consciously. If I do a bicep curl, I can focus on the entire movement, both mentally and physically, but the back muscles are a different animal altogether. My early attempts, it turns out, really went into shoulder and arm development instead.
We don't often pay much attention to how our back muscles are moving, and it's hard to move them consciously. I discovered that my attempts at chins and pullups were all largely shoulder and arm strength. I couldn't figure out how these translated into back exercises. The dead lift and squat certainly put pressure on the back, but it's really not a matter of truly flexing those muscles as much as the legs. About the only exercise that really seemed to be working was weighted hypers, and even that felt more like a butt workout than anything else, until I tried changing my position on the pad to try and take my rear end out of the equation.
In my new routine, I've been doing a lot of bent-over rows. At first, these also translated into arm exercises, before I discovered that taking a wide grip on the bar forced me to use my back muscles instead. Now I'm actually feeling it in the right place. I don't know if I've gotten to the point of knowing how to use my back muscles consciously for a pullup yet, but I'm getting there.
It occurs to me that maybe the reason we have so many back troubles in this country is that we just don't know how to use those muscles. Other than what comes unconsciously as a result of standing and walking, we don't really try to work them. There's a lot of jokes among bodybuilders about how some guys will come to the gym day after day and work nothing but their biceps, developing huge guns but being puny everywhere else. It makes me wonder what someone would look like if they did nothing but their back.
Not that I'm about to try it, mind you. I'm here for strength, and that requires everything to work together. In fact, I've found that the best exercise for handgun gripping strength is the dead lift, with a double-overhand grip instead of an alternating one. Sure, I'm working those huge leg and back muscles, but I'm attached to the bar by some of the smallest muscles in my body -- my fingers. After trying it that way once, the added focus required to keep the bar from slipping out of my grasp made the lift a lot more entertaining. Can't wait to do it again tomorrow.
As I prepare to make my shift in carry guns, the subject of how to carry them naturally comes to mind. And since I've been carrying a gun for about 10 years now, I've tried quite a few different modes of carry, some better than others.
My first holster was a $10 piece of crap by Uncle Mike's. It was essentially a neoprene pouch with a plastic belt clip on it, an inside-the-waistband (aka IWB) thing that did little more than keep the gun from sliding down into my pant leg. I carried for far too long in that thing, and in hindsight was very lucky that it didn't fail at a worse time than it did. At some point, I don't remember exactly when, I was out in public, I think at a store, and whatever I was doing required a bunch of bending and reaching and stretching. In the midst of this, I heard a clattering sound, and looked down to see my 9mm bouncing on the floor. I quickly grabbed it and stuffed it in my pocket, looking around to see if anyone had noticed, then ran to the bathroom and put the thing back where it belonged. Since then, I haven't been a fan of Uncle Mike... their belt holsters (outside the waistband) are fat and clunky, and none of their holsters are really anything more than a pouch, perhaps with a retention strap.
At the time I got my 9mm for carry, we also bought a Walther PPK/S for my wife. We had a small IWB holster for it as well, but it had a metal clip and a retention strap, and was made out of cheap leather. I can't remember if it was made by Bianchi or Galco, but it probably cost about $20. Anyway, I carried the PPK a time or two, and that holster worked very well for that gun. (UPDATE: it may have been one of these, or something like it.)
I also have a fanny pack holster, but it's just not that great. To properly use a fanny pack, you're supposed to put all your other pocket items in it, such as wallet, keys, and cell phone. This hides the fact that you're attached to this thing just to have a gun. Unfortunately, having all this crap in that one spot makes it all seem twice as heavy. Rather than distributing the weight around your body as happens when you put stuff in various jeans pockets, it's all focused in one spot and pulling on your back at the opposite side.
Some time later, I bought a Para-Ordnance P13 for carrying, and toted it in a Galco Jackass Rig. This is a shoulder system with an angled gun holster on one side and a double magazine pouch on the other. It is the most expensive (and best) holster I've ever owned. It was very comfortable, concealed easily under a jacket or open-front shirt, and being a shoulder holster, had a retention strap that also eased my nerves a bit about carrying a 1911 cocked and locked. I'm not saying that 1911 safeties are prone to swipe off, or that the grip safety won't stop it from firing in any case, I'm just saying that it can feel a little... "edgy"... to be toting one for the first time, and I really appreciated the extra safety of having that retention strap between the hammer and firing pin.
Unfortunately, my P13 had "issues" that made it less reliable than I would have liked. The double-stack magazines were nice for their capacity, but I could not get them to feed reliably, even with return trips to Para-Ordnance for repair and tuning. I gave up on the gun and traded it for a Glock 19.
The Glock is an equally nerve-wracking gun at first, because even though you don't really carry it "cocked and locked" the way you would a 1911, it has no external safeties. Pull the trigger and it goes bang, end of story. I figured I needed some good holsters that completely enclosed the trigger guard, because even though I'm rather fanatical about the "finger off the trigger" rule, I didn't want anything else to work its way into place and pull the trigger for me.
For some reason, the Glock seems like a perfect gun for these newfangled Kydex (aka plastic) holsters that everyone's turning out these days. I bought a paddle and an IWB, one by Blade-Tech and one by Fobus (can't remember which was which). The Glock clicks into place rather solidly, and both holsters did a great job of retention even without a strap, due to the way they grab the trigger guard. Once in place however, the gun had a tendency to rattle in the holster, which can be annoying.
The paddle holster was my favorite, as it was the most comfortable. I don't know who the manufacturers think they're kidding, but Kydex is NOT a good idea for IWB holsters. It chafes like crazy, and the shape is such that it really doesn't feel good against your body. For those who haven't tried it, it's rather like trying to conceal a PlayStation controller in your pants. There's always something poking you in the wrong way.
Paddle holsters, on the other hand, are generally great pieces of equipment with one big flaw. Something about the way they're built seems to dictate a lot of extra material between the paddle and the holster, so the gun feels like it's hanging off into space rather than being snugged up against the body. It tends to sway as you walk, and bounce all over the place if you try to run. I still have one, but don't use it much for this reason. On the good side, paddle holsters are great for slipping on and off if your day dictates that you'll need to spend some time in a criminal empowerment zone (aka "gun free zone").
I eventually sold the Glock to pay off some debt, and went back to my original S&W 9mm for carrying. It now rides in a Bianchi Accumold belt holster (about $30) with a retention strap. This is a decent setup, though the holster only has one belt loop, so it still feels a little floppier than I'd like. I've got my belt cinched up tight enough that you could use it to put a saddle on me, but this holster's weak attachment point remains problematic. If I could find a good leather belt holster for the gun, I'd buy it, but the 908 is the unwanted stepchild of the holster industry, near as I can tell. It's very difficult to find holsters made specifically for it, and the slide is squared rather than rounded like on its sister gun the 3913, so holsters made for the latter may or may not fit.
And this brings me to my currently planned purchase. I've carried a 4" 1911 before, and that's what I'll be getting in a Kimber. I've decided that retention straps are definitely good things to have, as I like the extra margin of safety with a cocked and locked pistol as well as the "oops prevention" capabilities. As I've practiced drawing, I've noticed that once the technique is known, disengaging a retention strap takes absolutely no extra time for the draw, so I'm not worried there. Stability and comfort are also very important, especially since the Kimber will weigh more than the 908.
I plan to get another Galco Jackass rig, just because I really loved that holster. After some searching, I've also decided on a Galco "Fletch" holster, which is a belt model with a retention strap. It also has two widely-spaced belt loops instead of one directly behind the body of the holster, which should greatly improve stability. I'm still looking for a good IWB model. I'm not necessarily married to the idea of a retention strap, but I at least want one with extra protection on the "skin side" for things like the safety lever and so forth, which I imagine will dig in to the skin just as bad as the Kydex IWB did. Maybe I'll save IWB carry for the pending Glock 30SF or 36.
I also plan to order all holsters in black. My logic is that with so many cell phones and PDA's and other gizmos being toted around in black belt pouches, any "peekaboo" moments where my holster might become visible below the hem of my shirt are likely to be dismissed by onlookers as a cell phone case or somesuch. Brown leather on the other hand might say "gun" a little louder. And black tends to not catch the eye in the first place. At least that's the theory.
Anyway, you non-gun people are probably bored out of your minds. Moving on...
After yesterday's post, I decided to call up Continental Airlines and find out what the policy is on transporting firearms. Turns out it's not as bad as I thought. Basically, I have to buy a hard-sided suitcase that can be locked, declare my handgun at the counter, and ship it unloaded in said suitcase. Ammo is also not a problem, much to my surprise.
I asked if anything had to be done beforehand, like getting forms or pre-clearance or anything like that. The lady said nope, just show up at the counter with luggage and weaponry, declare everything, sign a form, and off you go. Groovy!
The main disadvantage is having to check luggage, which I'll be doing anyway for the Alaska trip. Weekenders to Missouri or Ohio might be less wonderful, since I would normally just take a carry-on, but I've got a nice large case that would do the trick in that situation as well.
I'll have to blog about the experience with the Alaska trip. I'm intensely interested in how all this goes down in practice. If it's as smooth as the brochure, I might start looking for more opportunities to fly. The more you know...
It's a running joke in my local circle of friends that if you come to my house, we check you for weapons. If you come up short, we'll loan you one. Honestly though, it's not far from the truth as far as my attitude goes. It's just proper hospitality, if you ask me, and I wonder why it doesn't happen more.
As I've been reading through Massad Ayoob's book, The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery (6th Edition), I've been learning a lot about all sorts of things. One of the things I just read tells me that the "gun culture" I long for actually does exist:
In my circle of friends, certain protocols are observed, and when you pick up a stranded friend at the airport, you have more in the car for him than a cool CD on the Boze. Tony knows I'm legal to carry in Pennsylvania, and knew that my weapons were locked in my lost checked baggage, so when I got into the car a couple of things were already waiting for me. One was a neat little Elishowitz folding knife.
The other was Heckler and Koch's new subcompact pistol, loaded with hot 9mm hollowpoints: the Model 2000SK.
Now THAT is the kind of hospitality I would love to both provide and receive, depending on which end of the traveling I was on. I recently went to Ohio and drove the whole way in no small part due to the fact that I'd have more headaches trying to get my carry gun into checked baggage if I went by air. It's not impossible, mind you, it's just a hassle. I'll probably do it for the trip to Alaska, but that's a different animal altogether. I think there are prohibitions on taking ammo in any case, so I'd probably need to plan a shopping trip on arrival.
Anyway, I just think it'd be really cool to be able to fly to these various destinations, get picked up at the airport, and have a suitable carry gun waiting for me. It would save a whole lot of boring driving AND a bunch of messing around with the airlines.
"One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that 'violence begets violence.' I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure--and in some cases I have--that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy."
-- Col. Jeff Cooper, USMC (Ret) (1920 - 2006)
I previously blogged about Intermittent Explosive Disorder and its tenuous link to my own life. Now some twit has had the brilliant idea to use this "condition" as a defense in a criminal trial:
The scion of a prominent Bay State family was jailed last week for a vicious attack on a Cambridge woman after a judge rejected efforts by his well-heeled kin to keep the man free due to a condition his lawyer dubbed “intermittent explosive disorder.”
Christopher Gardner Beaman, 24, a descendant of Henry Cabot Lodge, was sentenced to a year in jail after his petite former girlfriend told a rapt courtroom about the unprovoked attack that lacerated her liver and temporarily put her in a wheelchair.
As my brother put it in the comments to the previous post:
Does diagnosis with a disorder mean that you have a disease process? What I mean is, if I have intermittent explosive disorder, am I "suffering" from an "illness" that needs "treatment"? Or am I just an asshole?
Appropriately, the judge in this case chose option B.
I previously mentioned Reason's expose on Dr. Stephen Hayne, Mississippi's exemplar of government corruption and incompetence. Their latest update makes me hopeful for the state's future, though of course the various DA's sound like they plan to fight it, given that he gives medical opinions written by prosecutors:
The Hattiesburg American—Mississippi's second-largest newspaper—asks DAs around south-central Mississippi if they're still using Dr. Steven Hayne to perform autopsies, in spite of the allegations against him to come out over the past several months. Not surprisingly, all of them said they have no problem with Hayne, and plan to keep using him. At this point, I think you could make a pretty good case that continuing to use Hayne amounts to a breach of ethics.
In a perfect world, continuing to use Hayne would amount to something that would put the DA's in prison for at least as long as the minimum sentence they've inflicted on someone using his testimony. But I'll take what I can get. At a minimum, Hayne needs to burn for his fraud against the people of Mississippi.
I especially love the part where he adjusts the sights by whacking them with a hammer.
Note that his friend's H&K doesn't fare so well.
After I get the Kimber, I'm almost certainly going to look into another Glock. I got rid of my first to pay off some debt, and I've got my eyes on either the model 30SF or the model 36.
UPDATE: The original "torture test", published awhile back by Chuck Taylor in some gun rag or another, can be found here.
Today, after a long hiatus, I finally returned to the range. As expected, my skills are rusty as an old wheelbarrow. I still managed to get shots on paper, but my groups were downright embarrassing.
I've been reading Massad Ayoob's Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery, and I decided that my return to active shooting was probably best done by following the advice from the book. So after reviewing the parts on grip and stance, I went to the range with my small collection of handguns, a bunch of assorted ammo I had lying around, and a friend.
First up was my tried-and-true Smith & Wesson model 908. It was my very first carrying gun, and as I've been looking at getting a Kimber for toting around, I've been thinking about getting rid of it. I like the idea of being down to just two handgun calibers (.45 ACP and .38 Special), and this 9mm doesn't really figure into that.
I loaded up each of its magazines, ran them through one by one, then repeated the process. As expected, the gun functioned flawlessly, with holster lint all over the slide, magazine springs that have been fully compressed for at least a couple years, and a mishmash of mismatched ammunition.
After due consideration, I've realized that I can't get rid of this gun. It's not because I'm sentimental (and I am), but when you've got a gun that's this reliable, functioning flawlessly every single time you step to the firing line, it just doesn't make sense to get rid of it.
Next, I moved to a Taurus model 85 that I acquired from a friend. I've had this gun for a couple of years, but never really did anything with it other than run a few rounds through it to make sure it worked right. It's just been sitting on the nightstand in case we're home invaded in the middle of the night.
It turns out I like everything about this gun except the grip. When I try to get a high hold on it, the shape of the grip points the dang thing at the ceiling. Looks like I'll be finding me some Hogue aftermarket grips to make it a little easier to handle.
I also ran a few rounds through my "summer carry" pistol, a Smith & Wesson Airweight 638. It's light and easy to carry, but of course kicks like a mule since it doesn't have any weight to resist recoil. Ayoob's tips on grip for these things really helped out, and I'm sure that with more practice I'll be able to tighten up those groups.
Somewhere in there, the guy next to me offered to let me try his Smith & Wesson 340PD. This is a 12 oz Titanium revolver that shoots full-power .357 Magnum loads. Recoil is, to say the least, stimulating. I don't consider myself "recoil sensitive", but even wearing a padded glove, I was pretty much done after 5 rounds. This gun is the very definition of "carried a lot, shot very little."
Finally, just to keep it in good working order, I ran a few magazines through my wife's Colt 1911, customized by Marianne Carniak. No surprises there.
Mostly I was knocking the dust off my shooting skills, and I'd say mission accomplished on that count. It was also a dry run of the book, and I've got to say I'm really liking Massad Ayoob's advice for grip and stance, because I'm getting better results from the little .38's than I ever have before. Being out of my comfort zone with my semi-autos shows that I need more practice with Ayoob's system. After having read about 75% of the book, I'd say that anyone who owns and especially anyone who carries a handgun should have a copy of it. It's well worth the time and money, even if a lot of the advice is "old news" to the person reading it. Personally, this book has taught me more about handguns than I ever thought possible, and showed me mistakes I've been making for years that have been costing me accuracy. As I get back into shooting, I'm looking forward to many good practice sessions with Ayoob in my head.
I got a link to this personality test from a friend who's fascinated by such things. I don't know how much stock I put in these things, but I do relate well to some of the descriptions they have for my "type":
Beneath the quiet exterior, INFJs [aka "counselor"] hold deep convictions about the weightier matters of life. Those who are activists -- INFJs gravitate toward such a role -- are there for the cause, not for personal glory or political power.
INFJs are champions of the oppressed and downtrodden. They often are found in the wake of an emergency, rescuing those who are in acute distress. INFJs may fantasize about getting revenge on those who victimize the defenseless. The concept of 'poetic justice' is appealing to the INFJ.
...
INFJs are distinguished by both their complexity of character and the unusual range and depth of their talents. Strongly humanitarian in outlook, INFJs tend to be idealists, and because of their J preference for closure and completion, they are generally "doers" as well as dreamers. This rare combination of vision and practicality often results in INFJs taking a disproportionate amount of responsibility in the various causes to which so many of them seem to be drawn.
INFJs are deeply concerned about their relations with individuals as well as the state of humanity at large. They are, in fact, sometimes mistaken for extroverts because they appear so outgoing and are so genuinely interested in people -- a product of the Feeling function they most readily show to the world. On the contrary, INFJs are true introverts, who can only be emotionally intimate and fulfilled with a chosen few from among their long-term friends, family, or obvious "soul mates." While instinctively courting the personal and organizational demands continually made upon them by others, at intervals INFJs will suddenly withdraw into themselves, sometimes shutting out even their intimates.
I don't know if they're accurate depictions of what I'm like, as I tend to think the best judges of such things are usually those in relationship with us. So I'll wait and see what my friends and family have to say. The friend who sent me the link seemed to think it was pretty accurate.
My wife and I have been doing a lot of cleaning lately... the sort of cleaning where you look at stuff you haven't used in a few years and decide it'd be better off at someone else's house. Mostly we use Freecycle for this, as we don't really want to mess with trying to get people to pay for our old crap. I don't know what we've gotten rid of so far, but it's been a lot, and there's more to come. The stuff we do actually care to try and get some money from, we put on craigslist for dirt cheap.
We've found that the best stuff to put on craigslist so far is major appliances. People will really go nuts over those, and are generally willing to pay your asking price. The Freecycle folks, on the other hand, are a whole different breed, as this next anecdote will surely demonstrate.
My company, which doesn't use its office space much (a few days a week), is planning to move from Oklahoma City to Norman. Most of our people live in Norman, and the one guy who's way up in Edmond never comes to the office anyway.
So anyhow...
We have this big old server rack...
...that has been in "the company's" possession for well over 10 years. It's got a bunch of old servers in it that really aren't good for anything. My boss has been bellyaching about moving the thing again, and really wanted it out of our hair. He didn't want to try and sell it, because to him/us, it's worthless, and he wasn't happy about the idea of having to pay a disposal company to come and drag it away.
Enter Tom and his Freecycle account. "Let me post it," I say. "It'll be gone in no time."
Nick doesn't believe me, but agrees to give it a shot at some point in the future.
Well, today was the day. "Go ahead and post it," he says. We take a quick inventory, I write it up, and email the description to the local Freecycle list. Included in my description is the dimensions (7' x 2' x 3') and the fact that whoever moves it will need at the very least a truck and two strong guys.
Nick expected to get a couple nibbles of interest over the course of a week.
In 5 minutes, I had a dozen. Two of them wanted to pick it up today.
Nick wanted to start taking bids, but I reminded him that the conditions of Freecycle were such that everything had to be FREE.
So we started going through the interested parties. It quickly became clear that most had no idea what they were getting into. I wound up writing a second email, which I forwarded to all the seriously interested parties, where I explained what they were up against... the thing is HUGE. When we brought it into the building, it had to be put on top of the elevator because it wouldn't fit inside. With all the equipment installed, it probably weighs over a thousand pounds.
I threw in some more scary verbiage so that people would get the idea, and invited those who were still interested to respond and get added to "the list". I currently have a guy who I'm giving a 50/50 chance of bailing out. He came over to look at the problem, and seemed intimidated by the scope of the task and the fact that he doesn't have a truck. He wanted to know if one of our employees might have a truck, but I said that our guys needed to be doing their jobs, not playing truck driver. After all, the reason we put it on Freecycle in the first place was so that we wouldn't have to mess with it.
I kept getting inquiries all day, and sent all of them the same "scare mail". It's amazing how many people seem to think they're going to swing by in their Honda Civic with their 13-year-old son and just toss it in the trunk to use in their home office. It's equally amazing (not really) how few write back to say they're still interested after they've been given a full picture of what the task entails.
I think I've finally eliminated all the tire kickers, the people who just thought "free computer!", and those who really didn't know what they were getting themselves (or their spouses) into. If our truckless guy bails out, I've got at least two others who sound genuinely serious about it, though only one really seems to appreciate the fact that these servers are really old and not worth much. The other person's expectations seem a bit... elevated.
Oh well, it's not my problem. My problem is making the thing disappear. Once that's accomplished, they can turn it into modern art for all I care.
I learned my lesson on the next item... some kind of small office telephone switch dealie. I wrote "Key system with 2 phones... if you don't know what it is, you probably have no use for it." That trimmed the inquiries WAY down. I'll have to remember that for next time.
Lesson for the day: never underestimate the power of "free" to make people lose all ability to reason.
One of my favorite types of music is what I call "non-Christian Christian music". This is music produced by a band that is not specifically a Christian band, does not label or market themselves as such, but where the message of the music is highly compatible with Christian ideas and ideals. One of my favorite examples (perhaps my most favorite example) is Change Your Mind, by Sister Hazel, which was on the soundtrack for the 2000 version of Bedazzled (which explains the video). Enjoy.
For as long as I can remember, I've had this unsettling tendency to see the world in superstitious terms. I'll find myself making up little rules for how to do things, not based on whether it's easier or more efficient, but based on some weird idea that it's "good luck" or "bad luck" to do it a certain way.
I'll give you an example: while lifting weights, I have this odd idea that it's "bad luck" if I load the bar from only one plate rack -- the bar has to be loaded evenly from both plate racks. Even though there might be enough plates on one rack (and the racks are loaded identically), I find it severely unsettling if I don't take half the desired load from one rack and half from the other. Even worse, all the plates from one rack have to go on the same end of the bar. Oh, and God help us all if the plates don't face the same way on the bar, or if the 10 pound grip plate is on the inside on one end but the outside on the other.
This happens to me in a bunch of different activities. Most of the time I can, by force of will, overcome whatever it is and move on. But sometimes it's just so disturbing if I do things the "wrong" way, it's easier to just do them the "right" way. Such is the case with my weights. If I do those "wrong", I get so shaken by the disharmony that I can't focus on the lift and I fail out much sooner than I should.
This goes way back, too. Remember all those little superstitious sayings from grade school? I followed them religiously for the longest time. "Step on a crack, break your mother's back" -- I think I was probably 30 years old before I could consciously and deliberately step on a crack in the sidewalk. It took me a long time to get over all those stupid little things, but for some reason my mind just keeps coming up with new ones.
Another example: Ever since I was in grade school, I've had this strange thought that watching a digital clock flip from XX:59 to XX:00 is "lucky", while watching it flip from XX:00 to XX:01 was "unlucky". I can't explain it, I don't know why, but for some reason I get trapped in that thought pattern every time I just happen to see a clock on one of those three number patterns. If it's on 59, I feel like I HAVE to watch it until it flips. If it's on 00, I feel like I HAVE to look away for at least a minute until it flips, then check it again. It's OK to see it at 01, it's just not OK to see it change.
I remember feeling incredibly guilty when someone told me that good Christians aren't superstitious, and that it was a sin to be so. I think I was probably about 12. I kept trying to purge the thoughts from my head, certain I was going to Hell because Jesus wouldn't love me if I kept thinking in terms of "good luck" and "bad luck". I remember feeling hopelessly evil because I couldn't stop those associations from popping into my head. I think I eventually resorted to obsessively trying to be "hyper rational" in part as a result of this. I started taking everything extremely literally, and parsing the words that I'd hear in conversation, picking apart the way people used them, especially if they used them incorrectly. I didn't have many friends when I did this.
Occasionally the need to do things "right" can be harnessed constructively. It helps, for example, that I have this "thing" when I'm handling firearms. I'm a stickler for safe handling, and I need to know at all times the condition of the firearm. Some would call my constant checking and re-checking fetishistic, but it works for me. It also helped me maintain straight A's in spelling -- when there's a clear "right" way to do something, I find it most comforting.
Most of the time though, this habit is just annoying. It gets in the way of what I consider to be a "proper" worldview, free of references to "luck" and impossible cause-effect chains. I don't know why all my shirts have to face to the left on their hangers in the closet. I just know that they do. It drives me buggy if they face right... though perhaps not so buggy as when some face right while others face left.
The worst part of this is that it happens automatically, and takes me completely by surprise. I don't try to come up with these stupid little rules, and I actively avoid anything that even smacks of something similar. But sometimes it just happens. I wasn't aware of the thing with my weights until I'd been doing it that way for several months, and then one day did it the "wrong" way and completely lost my mindset (that was a crummy workout). Most of the time I don't even know I'm doing it until I try to do it "wrong". I'm having trouble coming up with other examples that I know exist, because it usually takes being "in the moment" for me to be conscious of it.
I know that at least once I caught myself counting the steps between point A and point B. I'll get up and go to point B, arrive at it and think "7 steps". Then when I turn to go back to point A, it becomes incredibly important for that journey to have exactly the same number of steps. It'll be so important that if it's not the same number, I'll start retracing the path back and forth until it all matches. I put a stop to that one REAL quick, by forcing myself to think of something -- anything -- else when I become aware that I'm counting. I just don't have enough time in the day for that nonsense.
I don't know where this falls on the "crazy" scale. I don't even know what to call it... it's probably some form of OCD or something. It wouldn't even bother me if it weren't for the discomfort I experience from doing things the "wrong" way. Most of the time, I can ignore the "right/wrong" ideas and just do things however they need to be done. With the worst cases, I feel successful to just be able to convince myself that it has nothing to do with "luck", and is just an expression of my desire for order or balance or something stupid like that. At least then I don't have to be superstitious. I'm happy to say that I think I have most of them licked, and it's really only the weight thing nowadays. I've forced myself past the clock issue quite a few times, and now I can resist it if I'm feeling even moderately strong.
Most of the time, what other people wear doesn't really catch my attention, but there are some things that just drive me insane. Sometimes it's the article(s) of clothing in and of itself. Other times it's the clothing plus an associated behavior. So here they are, in no particular order... my fashion pet peeves.
Too tight/too revealing: What is "too" tight or revealing? When the person wearing it is obviously uncomfortable. I'm no prude... I see nothing wrong with ladies in skimpy outfits. But when they're dressed to draw attention to themselves, and then walk around with their arms folded up around their bodies like they're feeling naked, it's obvious they're not comfortable in the clothing they've chosen. Why would anyone do that to themselves? There's a reason I don't wear spandex. Well, two reasons. First, I wouldn't look good in it, and second, I wouldn't feel comfortable in it. Take a hint, ladies. If you have to walk around with your arms crossed over your chest or hiding behind the guy you're with, you probably should have put more on.
Baseball caps: What is with the ubiquitous ball cap? It's not an attractive piece of headwear. It only looks good on a very few people (pretty girls with ponytails), and even then not wearing one would be better. Unfortunately, people all over wear them as though they are the pinnacle of personal fashion. There are literally dozens of unexplored hat styles out there, but everyone comes back to these godawful things.
Socks with sandals: Nothing says "I'm trying to air out my athlete's foot" like wearing a pair of sandals with socks. Yick.
Dark socks with shorts: On those same lines, wearing dark socks with shorts says "I'm not really comfortable in shorts". White, ankle-length socks are much better, and then only if you're not wearing sandals (see above). Dark socks make me think of a congressman walking around without his pants on. No, I don't know where that came from.
Platform heels: I'm not going to quibble about the attraction of high heels. Personally, they never did much for me. But high heels plus 2 or 3 inches of platform? What is that all about? It looks like you nailed a couple blocks of wood to your feet. It takes the normally attractive, delicate foot of a female human being and turns it into a blocky, grotesque homage to bison hooves. If it weren't mean to do so, I'd be sorely tempted to go around pushing women over who wore these ugly things. Seriously. And they're such clodhoppers -- walking in them makes a sound like the cows got loose.
Flip-flops: At the other end of the spectrum from platforms are these noisy, virtually useless pieces of footwear. Their only real upside is the amusement I get from watching people try to run or hurry while wearing them. It's hard to run with your toes curled like that, because your toes were meant to bend the other way while running, you doorknob. You'd be better off barefoot.
Empire waist: These are those shirts/dresses where the "waist" is directly below the bustline. The only women it works for are pregnant ones. Other women look like they want to be asked if they're pregnant. A woman's real waist is somewhere lower, and in my opinion is meant to be shown, not hidden.
Hip huggers: Just like the empire waist, I think it utterly ruins a woman's waistline when she wears these things.
Shirt and tie with no jacket: It screams "car salesman" to me, even if that's not your profession. And since I don't particularly like car salesmen...
Pants hanging below the butt: Nah, that's too easy...
Of course, some people want their preferences to be codified into law and to have government ban all things they don't like. I'm not one of those people. I'm not saying nobody should be allowed to wear the things I find distasteful. I'm just saying that the clothes/fashions above make me find the person wearing them less interesting/attractive/intelligent/worthwhile. I'm sure there are tons out there who can say the same about the stuff I usually wear, so it's all good.
I got the call tonight, after apparently having dodged it (unintentionally, of course) for a couple of days. Fred's dead. He died Sunday. I don't have any other information, not that any is really necessary.
I previously blogged that I had decided to be done with the topic, and had made the decision to insulate myself from the situation he was in.
All that was well and good, but it doesn't explain the sudden surge of emotion when I hung up the phone. What the hell is that all about?
I never have. It seems like every one of my friends who also enjoy science fiction absolutely loves the show. They talk about it, quote it, reference it, trade recordings of it, and so on. For 20 years, I've been hearing about the greatness that is Doctor Who, but every time I sit down to watch it, I find it at best boring and at worst ridiculous and annoying.
Granted, there's not much I like about British television. Monty Python is barely palatable. My wife and I occasionally watched Are You Being Served? early in our relationship, but even that was only because there was nothing else on. The only British show I ever really enjoyed was Absolutely Fabulous, and that was only because the daughter was kind of cute in a nerdy sort of way.
When it comes to science fiction, I guess I'm just picky. My favorite shows are of course Firefly, followed by Babylon 5 and Farscape (though Farscape did get uncomfortably wacky at times). I enjoy Smallville during my cardio workouts, and I'll generally watch any of the various Star Treks, Stargates, Andromeda, and the like without complaint, though I don't seek them out. All of these shows have their quirkiness, but the universes generally make sense, and there's nary a sonic screwdriver in sight. I don't know why these are OK, but Doctor Who and its spinoff is not, but please don't ask me to like those anytime soon. It hasn't worked in 20 years, it probably won't for another 20.
It's been a while since I posted any pictures of my home gym setup, so I was bored and took one. A few items have been added, a few removed, and here's what I'm working with these days. Click for embiggenation.
Yeah, I know. Boooooring. I feel like I'm stuck in a "weights and guns" rut as far as my posts go lately, but maybe something will shake loose soon.
