Date: Wednesday, January 26th, 2011
Word of the Day: dharna(DAHR\nuh); In India, the practice of exacting justice or compliance with a just demand by sitting and fasting at the doorstep of an offender until death or until the demand is granted
Weight: 206 pounds
Goal: lose 100 pounds in one year duration
Pounds to lose: 74 pounds
Waist Size: forty-one (41) inches
Days until Royal Wedding: ninety-three (93)
Rowing Duration: sick leave
I have alot on my mind today, and I don't know if I will get around to writing everything down here, but I certainly shall try. I am glad so many of you enjoyed reading about "The Greenbrier Ghost," I really enjoyed reading it as well, and if any of you know any other stories (true) in that vein, please let me know about them, I would appreciate reading them.
Okay, yesterday I had a doctor's appointment, and consequently I was thinking more about it, then about the content of my blog, and as a result, I forgot to mention things that I had wanted to talk about yesterday, so, you guessed it, I am now going to write about some stuff that might already be old news to you, but, what can I say?
On Monday, I, like millions of other people, tuned into watching on television "The Oprah Winfrey Show" to find out the family secret Oprah Winfrey had been keeping. It turns out that our beloved Oprah, she's beloved to me, has another half-sister, who is named Patricia.
Ironically, Oprah already had a half-sister named Pat who died from a cocaine overdose in 2003. Oprah grew up knowing about this deceased half-sister, Pat, as well as her half-brother named Jeff, who died from AIDS in 1989.
The reason that there are two half sisters with the same name is one of the half-sisters was given up at birth, which is a crux of our story, and Patricia was named by somebody outside Oprah's immediate family.
As some of you know, when Oprah Winfrey was a teenager, her mother, Veneeta Lee, sent her to live with her father, Vernon Winfrey (who lived in another state,) because Veneeta was having difficulty raising three (3) children and also felt Oprah was getting too wild and promiscuous. While Oprah was living with Vernon, Veneeta became pregnant and gave birth to another baby girl in 1963, to which she gave the baby up as she felt by doing so, she would be able to get off of welfare.
Anyway, the baby girl that was given up was also named Patricia, as aforementioned, and had a rather difficult life being in and out of foster homes. Patricia became a single mother of two children and always wondered about who her biological family really was and set out to find her family.
Like alot of adopted children, many doors were closed to Patricia, and information was scarce and difficult to come by, but to make a long story short, Patricia, with the help of her grown-up children, did learn that her biological mother was Veneeta Lee and that Oprah Winfrey was her half-sister.
I wonder if that moment of learning she was related to Oprah Winfrey ever scared Patricia, because in spite of the possible benefits of having a rich sister, it would dramatically change her life forever, and quite realistically her life will/would never be the same.
One of the things that I really enjoyed about this story is that Oprah's half-sister, Patricia, found all of this out in 2007 and did not go to any media to reveal the truth about her family. Patricia persevered in letting "the family" learn of her before any media, or us, would know about it before now.
Oprah and Veneeta learned of Patricia in October 2010, and Oprah and her mother met Patricia, for the first time on the last American Thanksgiving Day. The sisters are getting to know each other, but one thing that Oprah already really appreciates, as would I, about Patricia, is that Patricia is obviously a person of character, and she did not sell Oprah out, like so many others have, by selling her story, Patricia kept it in the family, and I think that lady deserves alot of credit.
So now that I have spent nine (9) paragraphs writing about this stuff, I suspect that I will hear from alot of you stating you already knew this stuff, either because you watched it on television, like me, or that you heard it from the news media because the story really was everywhere!
Now, news about my doctor appointment from yesterday. My general practitioner, Dr. Alladin, had the hospital report from my visit there last week, as well as a copy of my ct scan that was taken to reveal the kidney stone that gave me so much trouble. Evidently, the kidney stone that is now gone is just the beginning, let me explain.
The ct scan also shows that I have at least six (6) other kidney stones that at some time or another are going to give me trouble like the one that last week turned me into something out of the movie "The Exorcist." Really the pain was so intense that I was not myself.
It is being arranged for me to go into hospital so that some of the rather large kidney stones that I will not be able to pass, can be surgically removed, (why they don't, or won't remove all of the kidney stones is something that I will be asking,) hopefully, this will be done before any of those stones decide to make a nuisance of themselves. Just in case one or more of the stones decides to visit before surgery can be arranged, Dr. Alladin has supplied me with some rather strong medication to help me combat the obvious pain that will occur.
Evidently, I am predestined to getting kidney stones because my medication, and you guessed it, the steroids cause alot of calcium buildup in me, and alot of calcium can cause one to get kidney stones.
I am trying not to whine about this, but the memory of the pain that was caused by the kidney stone is still fresh, and I am not looking forward to having to go through anything even remotely similar. I also wish that my doctors could change my medication, because I am so frustrated and upset about all of the other medical problems that ensue. (I don't think the medications can be changed, I just wish that they can, you might too if you were me!)
I did have some positive news from the doctor. Dr. Alladin did inform me that most of my weight gain is water retention, and that with the help of using some water pills, I should lose most of the weight that I gained in Gainesville, Florida. That really is encouraging and good news, and I am grateful!
I was so pleased that the temperature outside yesterday was not as brutal as it was on Monday, heck, I didn't even wear my ear muffs!
I don't suppose that what I'm about to say will give any of you too much a shock, but I am rather surprised that there still is alot of negative views towards women, and one that really gets my goat is the gender bias in writing.
Gender and ability bias in language doesn’t register for many people, but that’s often because many of them do not belong to the classes who have been subjected to the bias. For example, many writers persist in referring to our species, collectively, as man or mankind, even though several reasonable alternatives exist: the human race, humankind, and humanity. Most (though not all) are men, does my disclosing this information mean I'm disloyal to my sex?
“Get over it” is a common counterargument to the assertion that because half of mankind is womankind, a gender-neutral alternative is more sensitive to that fact; man and mankind, the reasoning goes, have sufficed for most of recorded human history, sorry, I mean “man history,” and everybody knows it refers not just to the breadwinner, the man of the house, the king of the castle but also to the weaker sex, the little woman, the housewife.
Get my drift? Get over it, indeed. Man up, and join the human race. One justification for opposing gender-neutral language is that it can be so cumbersome. Why convolutedly change he, as a generic term, to “he or she,” or his to “his or her”? We all know he or his can refer to a man or a woman, and English lacks an inclusive pronoun. (Except that it doesn’t, but I’ll get to that in a moment.)
Yes, repetitious use of “he or she” or “his or her” is ridiculous, but it’s easy to mix it up with it, the magical indeterminate pronoun, or to alternate between he and she or his and her in successive anecdotes, or to pluralize a reference and use they in place of a specific pronoun.
Or, gasp! you can replace “he or she” with they. Kill the klaxon, switch off the warning lights, and think about it: They has been long used as a singular pronoun as well as a plural one. But not everybody agrees, so be prepared for push back if you employ this solution.
References to physical disabilities are even more fraught with risks to sensitivity. Such constructions as “confined to a wheelchair” identify people by their limitations, which is discriminatory. It’s more respectful to refer to someone who “uses a wheelchair.”
What about, simply, “wheelchair users,” or “blind people,” or “deaf children”? These phrases violate what’s known as the people-first philosophy, which holds that any reference to a person should emphasize the person, not their disability.
So, refer to “Smith, who uses a wheelchair,” “people who are blind” or “people with visual impairments,” and “children who are deaf” or “children who are hearing impaired.” And it should go without saying that references to a disability are extraneous unless it is relevant to the discussion. So there!!!!!!!
The Academy Award nominations were announced yesterday, and I on the whole was pleased. I was quite surprised that Javier Baderm got an Oscar nod for the Best Actor category when Leonardo DiCaprio did not get one for his amazing performance in the movie "Inception." That's the Oscar business, don't you know?
Annette Bening, whom I adore, did get a nomination for her performance in the movie "The Kids Are All Right," and I am hoping that she takes home the statuette. I have not seen the movie, but I love Annette Bening and feel that she really should have an Oscar, don't you agree with me?
I guess now I have to come up with some new outfit to wear in front of the television on February 27th, which is the day the Academy Awards will be televised for all of our pleasure.
I guess on that note, I will end today's post, the day is really just beginning but there is much I want to accomplish today, which if I do successfully, I will tell you all about tomorrow.
All the best and take care out there, black ice is everywhere!
Topics coming soon:
Art
Politics
Image via Wikipedia
Cartoons
Word of the Day: dharna(DAHR\nuh); In India, the practice of exacting justice or compliance with a just demand by sitting and fasting at the doorstep of an offender until death or until the demand is granted
Weight: 206 pounds
Goal: lose 100 pounds in one year duration
Pounds to lose: 74 pounds
Waist Size: forty-one (41) inches
Days until Royal Wedding: ninety-three (93)
Rowing Duration: sick leave
I have alot on my mind today, and I don't know if I will get around to writing everything down here, but I certainly shall try. I am glad so many of you enjoyed reading about "The Greenbrier Ghost," I really enjoyed reading it as well, and if any of you know any other stories (true) in that vein, please let me know about them, I would appreciate reading them.
Okay, yesterday I had a doctor's appointment, and consequently I was thinking more about it, then about the content of my blog, and as a result, I forgot to mention things that I had wanted to talk about yesterday, so, you guessed it, I am now going to write about some stuff that might already be old news to you, but, what can I say?
On Monday, I, like millions of other people, tuned into watching on television "The Oprah Winfrey Show" to find out the family secret Oprah Winfrey had been keeping. It turns out that our beloved Oprah, she's beloved to me, has another half-sister, who is named Patricia.
Ironically, Oprah already had a half-sister named Pat who died from a cocaine overdose in 2003. Oprah grew up knowing about this deceased half-sister, Pat, as well as her half-brother named Jeff, who died from AIDS in 1989.
The reason that there are two half sisters with the same name is one of the half-sisters was given up at birth, which is a crux of our story, and Patricia was named by somebody outside Oprah's immediate family.
As some of you know, when Oprah Winfrey was a teenager, her mother, Veneeta Lee, sent her to live with her father, Vernon Winfrey (who lived in another state,) because Veneeta was having difficulty raising three (3) children and also felt Oprah was getting too wild and promiscuous. While Oprah was living with Vernon, Veneeta became pregnant and gave birth to another baby girl in 1963, to which she gave the baby up as she felt by doing so, she would be able to get off of welfare.
Anyway, the baby girl that was given up was also named Patricia, as aforementioned, and had a rather difficult life being in and out of foster homes. Patricia became a single mother of two children and always wondered about who her biological family really was and set out to find her family.
Like alot of adopted children, many doors were closed to Patricia, and information was scarce and difficult to come by, but to make a long story short, Patricia, with the help of her grown-up children, did learn that her biological mother was Veneeta Lee and that Oprah Winfrey was her half-sister.
I wonder if that moment of learning she was related to Oprah Winfrey ever scared Patricia, because in spite of the possible benefits of having a rich sister, it would dramatically change her life forever, and quite realistically her life will/would never be the same.
One of the things that I really enjoyed about this story is that Oprah's half-sister, Patricia, found all of this out in 2007 and did not go to any media to reveal the truth about her family. Patricia persevered in letting "the family" learn of her before any media, or us, would know about it before now.
Oprah and Veneeta learned of Patricia in October 2010, and Oprah and her mother met Patricia, for the first time on the last American Thanksgiving Day. The sisters are getting to know each other, but one thing that Oprah already really appreciates, as would I, about Patricia, is that Patricia is obviously a person of character, and she did not sell Oprah out, like so many others have, by selling her story, Patricia kept it in the family, and I think that lady deserves alot of credit.
So now that I have spent nine (9) paragraphs writing about this stuff, I suspect that I will hear from alot of you stating you already knew this stuff, either because you watched it on television, like me, or that you heard it from the news media because the story really was everywhere!
Now, news about my doctor appointment from yesterday. My general practitioner, Dr. Alladin, had the hospital report from my visit there last week, as well as a copy of my ct scan that was taken to reveal the kidney stone that gave me so much trouble. Evidently, the kidney stone that is now gone is just the beginning, let me explain.
The ct scan also shows that I have at least six (6) other kidney stones that at some time or another are going to give me trouble like the one that last week turned me into something out of the movie "The Exorcist." Really the pain was so intense that I was not myself.
It is being arranged for me to go into hospital so that some of the rather large kidney stones that I will not be able to pass, can be surgically removed, (why they don't, or won't remove all of the kidney stones is something that I will be asking,) hopefully, this will be done before any of those stones decide to make a nuisance of themselves. Just in case one or more of the stones decides to visit before surgery can be arranged, Dr. Alladin has supplied me with some rather strong medication to help me combat the obvious pain that will occur.
Evidently, I am predestined to getting kidney stones because my medication, and you guessed it, the steroids cause alot of calcium buildup in me, and alot of calcium can cause one to get kidney stones.
I am trying not to whine about this, but the memory of the pain that was caused by the kidney stone is still fresh, and I am not looking forward to having to go through anything even remotely similar. I also wish that my doctors could change my medication, because I am so frustrated and upset about all of the other medical problems that ensue. (I don't think the medications can be changed, I just wish that they can, you might too if you were me!)
I did have some positive news from the doctor. Dr. Alladin did inform me that most of my weight gain is water retention, and that with the help of using some water pills, I should lose most of the weight that I gained in Gainesville, Florida. That really is encouraging and good news, and I am grateful!
I was so pleased that the temperature outside yesterday was not as brutal as it was on Monday, heck, I didn't even wear my ear muffs!
I don't suppose that what I'm about to say will give any of you too much a shock, but I am rather surprised that there still is alot of negative views towards women, and one that really gets my goat is the gender bias in writing.
Gender and ability bias in language doesn’t register for many people, but that’s often because many of them do not belong to the classes who have been subjected to the bias. For example, many writers persist in referring to our species, collectively, as man or mankind, even though several reasonable alternatives exist: the human race, humankind, and humanity. Most (though not all) are men, does my disclosing this information mean I'm disloyal to my sex?
“Get over it” is a common counterargument to the assertion that because half of mankind is womankind, a gender-neutral alternative is more sensitive to that fact; man and mankind, the reasoning goes, have sufficed for most of recorded human history, sorry, I mean “man history,” and everybody knows it refers not just to the breadwinner, the man of the house, the king of the castle but also to the weaker sex, the little woman, the housewife.
Get my drift? Get over it, indeed. Man up, and join the human race. One justification for opposing gender-neutral language is that it can be so cumbersome. Why convolutedly change he, as a generic term, to “he or she,” or his to “his or her”? We all know he or his can refer to a man or a woman, and English lacks an inclusive pronoun. (Except that it doesn’t, but I’ll get to that in a moment.)
Yes, repetitious use of “he or she” or “his or her” is ridiculous, but it’s easy to mix it up with it, the magical indeterminate pronoun, or to alternate between he and she or his and her in successive anecdotes, or to pluralize a reference and use they in place of a specific pronoun.
Or, gasp! you can replace “he or she” with they. Kill the klaxon, switch off the warning lights, and think about it: They has been long used as a singular pronoun as well as a plural one. But not everybody agrees, so be prepared for push back if you employ this solution.
References to physical disabilities are even more fraught with risks to sensitivity. Such constructions as “confined to a wheelchair” identify people by their limitations, which is discriminatory. It’s more respectful to refer to someone who “uses a wheelchair.”
What about, simply, “wheelchair users,” or “blind people,” or “deaf children”? These phrases violate what’s known as the people-first philosophy, which holds that any reference to a person should emphasize the person, not their disability.
So, refer to “Smith, who uses a wheelchair,” “people who are blind” or “people with visual impairments,” and “children who are deaf” or “children who are hearing impaired.” And it should go without saying that references to a disability are extraneous unless it is relevant to the discussion. So there!!!!!!!
The Academy Award nominations were announced yesterday, and I on the whole was pleased. I was quite surprised that Javier Baderm got an Oscar nod for the Best Actor category when Leonardo DiCaprio did not get one for his amazing performance in the movie "Inception." That's the Oscar business, don't you know?
Annette Bening, whom I adore, did get a nomination for her performance in the movie "The Kids Are All Right," and I am hoping that she takes home the statuette. I have not seen the movie, but I love Annette Bening and feel that she really should have an Oscar, don't you agree with me?
I guess now I have to come up with some new outfit to wear in front of the television on February 27th, which is the day the Academy Awards will be televised for all of our pleasure.
I guess on that note, I will end today's post, the day is really just beginning but there is much I want to accomplish today, which if I do successfully, I will tell you all about tomorrow.
All the best and take care out there, black ice is everywhere!
Topics coming soon:
Art
Politics
Image via WikipediaCartoons
No comments:
Post a Comment