September 2002
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          
Aug   Oct


pages I visit regularly

The Aardvark Speaks

Aquinas

The Bleat

boing boing

Caveat Lector

Clark Hornbell

Crazy Apple Rumors

The Disseminary

Eeksy-Peeksy

Fragments

Fury

A Girl Named Bob

harrumph! still crazy!

Jonathon Delacour

Oblivio

ordinary morning

Pax Nortona

rabbit blog

reverend jim

runs with scissors

Russell Beattie

Ruzz

sour mash with a twist

Sainteros

Samurai Panda

Seb's Open Research

Time's Shadow

The Universal Church of Cosmic Uncertainty

Visible Darkness


Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.  Write to me!


more posts

Friday, September 27, 2002    permalink
Here's an idea...

I was talking with my brother and his wife about impending war with Iraq. They live in Geneva, and both work in diplomatic circles. Of course they know more about policy than I do, so it's hard to have a debate. At least for me, since if they state something as factual I have no recourse. After all, what do I know?

So we're discussing inspections and deployments and timing. And my brother suggests, jokingly, that maybe the best way for the US to proceed is just to announce: "If the UN requests to inspect a facility and Iraq refuses, the US will just bomb it."

Actually, this sounds like a pretty good idea to me. It's a little bit like the protocol kids use to ensure that everyone gets a fair slice of pie ~ you cut, I pick. You deny, I destroy. Neither of us gets what we originally wanted, but it's sort of fair. And it provides an incentive to NOT impede inspections.

I won't be holding my breath expecting this to be taken up in official policy, however.

11:54:30 PM    please comment []

Happy New Year

Join 15-year-old Pascale as the calendar turns over from 1973 to 1974 in this edition of the Wayback Journal. Just be warned, it's not a very cheerful occasion.

11:07:51 PM    please comment []

Pretty Petty

I grew up in a family where the visual was very, very important. Both my parents were sculptors, and aesthetic appeal was a significant factor in valuing anything. Including people. (My father, for example, was always pointing out interesting specimens ~ either for their overall beauty or for some intriguing feature or shape.)

Except, of course, it wasn't supposed to be. My family also placed great emphasis on moral character. Being a good person was supposed to be much more important than how you looked or how wealthy you were, how much you had accomplished or how much power or influence you had.

It was also important to have good manners. Even if you weren't a good person, you got points for acting like one. Politeness, courtesy, humility, and consideration were to be cultivated at all times. While not caring too much about how we looked, we were also to be well groomed and irreproachable in our personal style. Appearances counted.

So: beauty is skin deep. But everybody judged the book's cover anyway.

Some other data points. My immediate family was remarkably good-looking. My mother was a natural beauty ~ not a glamorpuss, but truly beautiful. My father was very handsome, and a fine figure of a man. My sister was extremely pretty, and a sexy creature too. My brother was universally acknowledged to be a remarkably attractive young man.

I was, well... okay. Certainly not ugly. But nothing special either. Average. Kinda... eh. Not in the same league with them.

Of course, no one ever said any such thing.

So it is with a wry irony that, years later, I realize that ~ at last ~ I'm the best-looking one of the bunch now. It's a Pyrrhic victory, since it's entirely based on the fact that I'm ten years younger than the youngest of the rest, and through no merit of my own apparently I age more gracefully than average.

And, of course, no one cares about something as trivial as looks in my family. That would be superficial and petty.

9:03:49 PM    please comment []

Letting Go

The mind is its own place, and can itself
Make a heav'n of hell or a hell of heaven.

Milton's Satan knew whereof he spoke. We're starting to get it too. Chewing over stressful situations is itself stressful.

Which has the greatest effect on your heart's health: arguing with a spouse or running a marathon? Arguing could have closer links to later heart disease, but for an unusual reason. Just thinking about the fight appears to lead to high blood pressure and later health problems, according to a UC Irvine-led study.

Both tasks raise blood pressure and cause some stress on the body, but arguments have an emotional side that creates longer recovery times in the body than non-emotional -- yet stressful -- events like running. The study appears in the Sept./Oct. issue of Psychosomatic Medicine.

[via Time's Shadow]

11:17:39 AM    please comment []



© Copyright 2002 Pascale Soleil.
Last updated: 11/10/02; 3:11:20 PM.
Comments by: YACCS
Click to see the XML version of this web page.