White Cane for a Black Dog

Um, wow. Trixie is making me famous. One thing that the school in San Rafael does is send press releases to local media about people coming home with their new woofs. I guess it caught the attention of the Guelph Tribune, so they asked me if they could get a photo and do a little story about us. I said sure, and here it is. I thought she did a pretty cool job. They apparently wanted to put my photo on the front. Um, eek. I don’t know if I need that much fame. But people are seeing us and commenting, so I guess the story did its job. Here it is, in case it ever disappears out of Tribune-land.

Guelph Tribune, Canada
Friday, May 11, 2007

White Cane For a Black Dog

Tribune photo by Paige Hilton

For Carin Headrick, a guide dog brought welcome freedom and a lot of adjustments to daily life. Headrick, 28, was born blind and until now used a white cane to get around. Enter Trixie, a two-year-old black lab. “Everything’s a bit of an art form,” she said, like making sure Trixie is seated properly on a bus so her tail doesn’t get stepped on. Headrick spent a month at the California school Guide Dogs for the Blind where she and Trixie trained together to learn how to navigate such things as escalators, busy public areas, stairways and overhead obstacles. Headrick said getting around with a white cane was slow going, and now she can’t believe how quickly she goes places with Trixie. The dog also attracts a lot of attention, but is learning to do her job and ignore the coos from passersby. “When you have a cane, people look at you but they don’t say anything. With a dog, everyone wants to talk to you,” she said. The process to apply for Trixie was a long one, and Headrick said one of the funniest moments was when people from the school came to interview her and they went for a walk to practise with a dog harness. “Except on the other end was a man holding the harness, and we were walking downtown. He was saying ‘hello’ to people. People must have been staring, and he said ‘Yup, everybody’s looking.'”

Wanna know something freaky? There’s this mailing list called blind news, where it’s some poor person’s job to hunt up all stories related to all things blinky, and they found me! And someone got me in a google news alert! Um, wow. I didn’t know I’d be this famous.

I tried to move the photo into the story, here’s hopin’ I didn’t break it. People tell me it’s cute. Hope it is, or I’ve just humiliated myself. Anyway, hope the people who come looking for things about Trixie enjoy it. I know I haven’t written too many Trixie things lately.

Who Neds a poofreader?

It seems that people don’t care to check their own writing for errors anymore, and in places where they should. Lately, Steve and I have come across tons of instances of bad wording in newspaper headlines and ads. Um, is that a good idea?

One of the ads on our own site claimed to sell deaf products for deaf people. So the products are deaf? I didn’t know my run-of-the-mill toaster, clock, lamp and TV could hear me. That’s a scary thought. Another ad said it had visual impairment magnifiers. Why would anyone want to magnify their visual impairment? Wouldn’t they want to lessen it? That seems to be a common mistake, because on another site that I was critiquing, because they asked me to, it told people to enhance low vision. Doesn’t that mistake jump out at you as glaringly obvious? It didn’t just tap me on the shoulder to make its presence known, it screamed at me. Another ad said it had equipment for people with severe disabilites. What’s a disabilite? That one might only stand out to us because the computer is reading the screen and it doesn’t fill in the missing letters like people’s brains and eyes tend to do. But then another ad told me to behave my dog better. I think the publisher of that site may need an English lesson.

I see stuff in the newspaper, too, that surprises me. Our newspaper had to print corrections on corrections, for crying out loud. But headlines have gotten sloppy. One read, “Man killed in city crash.” Our city crashed? Into what? How did I miss it? And how come more people weren’t killed? Another read, “Police Officers Risk Lives to Save Man.” Whose lives did they risk? Why would they risk other people’s lives, and was it necessary? Did they risk my life and the paper was nice enough to inform me of it just now?

I’ve seen a few people’s websites that are supposed to be the core of their business, and they’re littered with typos. Do people not care about image anymore? Don’t they want to look professional? Remember the candy shoppe? I wouldn’t have guessed they were a reputable business based on the horrid typing. When I told them about this, they wanted me to catalogue all the errors and tell their webmaster. Uh, dude…isn’t it enough that I brought it to your attention? Now it’s your job to fix it. And don’t even get me started on my friend the artist’s website.

Don’t people proofread anymore? Don’t they care about being accurate? Or do they not have time? It’s pretty sad, because they’re making themselves look like fools.

Wiley Coyote, or Roadrunner?

Wow. This guy sounds like a piece of work. Michael Wiley has no arms and only one good leg, but he has managed to get into several police chases and get his license suspended. In the last chase, he actually got away from police. Impressive! He’s not only known for his bad, or good, driving depending how you look at it, but he has beaten up his girlfriend with his head! What the hell? There are definitely some weird people out there.

I Don’t See Anything Wrong with This, Do You?

When I read this story, all I could think was, what? That mixed with disgust were my only thoughts.

Where do I begin? Researchers at the University of Toronto and the University of Lethbridge have joined together to conduct a study on pedophiles. They want to pay 250 sex offenders $60 each to view pictures of fully dressed children and measure their responses. They want to measure two different kinds of pedophiles: the ones who have only downloaded child porn and the ones convicted of abusing children. This is, apparently, so they can better manage and treat pedophiles.

Feel the rage. Can you feel it? I know I can. Everytime I read this story, I have to sit for a second afterwards so the rage can discipate. First of all, why oh why would you pay criminals to view pictures of things related to their crime? That is so wrong, it’s beyond words. Why why why would you think this is a good idea, and how in the blue bloody hell did you get it past an ethics board? I know the ethics boards are usually most concerned with the impact of a study on the participants, but even that raises red flags for me. If you’re getting people who are sexually attracted to children to look at pictures of children, you are intentionally feeding their depravity! It’s not like the only time they get the urge to sexually assault a child is right after they just saw one naked. They get attracted by watching kids play at the playground. And I think some of these guys are out on probation. So, by making them look at pictures of kids, you’re going to steer their mind towards kids, making them more likely to reoffend, which is already something that is highly possible. Smart thinking there, Sparticus, real smart.

Second, I have a problem with their two groups of offenders. I assume they’re dividing the sex offenders by conviction records. So, How do they know that the one group has only downloaded porn? How do they know they haven’t molested children and just haven’t been caught yet? They should know that the incidence of crime is much higher than the incidence of reported crime, which is higher than the actual conviction rate. I think most people know that. So how do they even know that they’re dealing with two different groups?

Third, if you must do a study on pedophiles, why have them look at pictures? Why not ask them questions? I know measuring actual responses is more accurate, but in this case, I don’t think measuring that stuff is such a good idea.

Finally, if you’re going to conduct a study like this, you’d better give me a detailed explanation of how this is going to help society. No, “It will help us understand pedophilia better so we can better manage and treat pedophiles” doesn’t cut it. Give me something I can attempt to grasp and has a snowball’s chance of justifying the risk and the money spent encouraging pedophiles.

I’m still processing the fact that this research got the go-ahead, and even got a grant! I would be disgusted if something like this was being conducted on a voluntary basis, but the money is the final straw. Let’s just hope that this study doesn’t cause any of the participants to reoffend. I don’t think any ethics board would want that on their head.

Barenaked Ladies are Mean

You know what’s sad? When a really good band releases an awesome album, and then follows it up immediately with something that spends half the time sucking monkey balls and half being sort of kind of decent. Why did the Barenaked Ladies have to do that?

They released Barenaked Ladies Are Me. It rocked! It was cool! I don’t think there’s a song on there that I don’t at least like, and lots on there that I love. Plus that album will always have a special significance because of getting to see them live right after listening to it, but I think it still would have been a cool album without the concert.

Then they go and release Barenaked Ladies are Men. Ug why why why? Let’s be logical. If you know this album consists of 16 rejects from the good album, why would you think it’s a good idea to throw them all in the same album? Maybe it’s time to rethink this. You’re a good band, obviously you know what a *reject* is. Why would you release them all together? Maybe, if you thought they were ok enough to put on albums, you could squish them into albumvs slowly. But why make all your crap stand out?

It’s a strange album. I don’t know if I could really properly judge it because the crappy crap makes the sorta good stuff seem like the best stuff you’ve ever heard in your life. I did rip about half of the album because it was either listenable or I liked it. But the stuff that sucked, oh it sucksucksucksucked! It was like you were on a treadmill, never going anywhere. It actually made me try and figure out what makes good music good. Should I have to do that? I thought about how I like a pattern in music, but what’s wrong with this pattern, and why is it boring?

When I listen to an album of theirs the first time, I like to give it all my attention, but the sucky stuff was so monotonous that I started doing other things, and waiting, praying for the song to end. Some stuff would start off sucking right from the beginning, and some songs would make you think they had potential, and then promptly crap all over themselves. And some songs would just go on too long.

And then there were the few good songs. They did a really good one about the George W. Bush government, that oddly sounded like Bank Job from Barenaked Ladies are Me…which brings me to another point. They must have really liked that Bank Job tune, because they created 3 songs along the same lines. It’s pretty neat that you can make 3 different songs out of the same tune, two of them being good. The third one was just weird. Quality biology enhanced with high technology? What the hell? Oh well, they’re the Barenaked Ladies, and if they can get away with “Hey I’m a cow, I’m curious, hey watch me now, I’m furious.” I guess they can do this.

So the moral of the story is this album is far from hot stuff. If you really want it, wait for someone to buy it, go “blech!” and turn it in so you can buy it used. Otherwise, I think you can do without it. You, and your pocketbook, will be much happier, trust me.

Say A Prayer For The Kids Today

A little over a year ago, I
posted
a short note about a Sudanese man who was forced to marry a goat after he was caught having sex with it. Well, today I have the sad duty of reporting that the goat has
died
after choking on a plastic bag she tried to eat while picking up scraps on a local street.

I know that I will be keeping the “goat defiler” in my thoughts today, and I hope that all of you will do the same. It’s the least we can do to help him through this tragic time.

So Who’s Flinging the Bullshit?

I got an email the other day filled with rage at a couple of TV talkshow hosts. According to this email, the hosts in question were spewing hate-speech, being disrespectful and patronizing, calling people with disabilities “the handicapped,” and were making fun of every kind of disability, leaving noone untouched. They were bashing the ADA and calling it bullshit. This email was demanding that everyone approach disability advocacy groups and get these horrid men off the air. The email also mentioned that there were videoclips up on YouTube of this disgusting display of disrespect. That made me too curious, so off I went on a YouTube search to see this for myself.

It didn’t take me too long, since the email mentioned the cohosts’ names were Penn and Teller. Weee! Jackpot! here, here, and here. It’s all the same 30-minute or so show, just split in 3 parts with no attempt to split in logical spots, just splat! in the middle of a word.

I watched all three parts. Were they disrespectful? Sort of, but that’s just their style. That’s the way they act for their audience. Oddly, I got the feeling they were trying to tone some of it down. Did they use the words “the handicapped?” Sure, but I could give two shits about the word they used. I believe it’s the sentiment, not the word, that counts. Were they mocking every disability? I didn’t see it as such! Sure they mentioned lots of disabilities, but that’s the point of doing a show on the Americans with, um, disabilities, act. If they didn’t mention certain disabilities, I would bet money that people would be pissed that their group was excluded. Was it hate-speech? Absolutely not! They were trying to make a point, and doing it in their loud-mouthed style.

Yep, they called the ADA bullshit, but not in the way that the email claimed. They felt it went too far, was too vague about what a disability was, and they felt it made it too easy for people to sue people on the grounds of not being accommodated under the ADA. They spoke to people with disabilities who didn’t like the ADA, they spoke to a few who were in favour of the act, and they made a huge point of one dude who used the ADA as an excuse to sue the asses off of anyone he could. They made some good points about how some things that sound ridiculous are classified as a disability. They talked about how it was a good idea, but now it’s gone out of control.

Do I agree with everything they say? Hell no. They think that the government should not be forcing public places of business to be accommodating because if they want the business of people with disabilities, they’ll just do it. Obviously these folks have no grasp of how many barriers there are out there, how long they have been there, and how slooooowly they are being taken down. They say that it should be up to the people with disabilities and their families to advocate for what they want, case by case. A fine idea, in theory. If they truly put it into practice, they might run smack into a wall. They talk about how people can get sued under this law and get threatened with it all the time. Um, that’s the case with any law. The ADA is no different. And there’s one statement that kind of mystifies me. Maybe I’m missing something and someone can help me out here. At one point, Penn says that ADA advocates compare the fight of people with disabilities to the fight that Rosa Parks had to have a seat on the bus. Then these same advocates say that at the end of her life, Rosa Parks had to fight for her ability to get on the bus using her wheelchair…except, he says, that never happened. And Rosa Parks was kept off the bus because of Jim Crow laws of segregation, where as people with disabilities are being kept off the bus because of Sir Isaac Newton’s laws of Physics. So what is he saying there, that the two shouldn’t even be compared? That Newton’s laws of physics is a more justifiable reason to keep people with physical disabilities off the bus? I hope it’s the first, in the sense that I hate it when advocates for any cause whip out the Rosa Parks card. They have to realize that it just makes people mad. It doesn’t help. But he didn’t make it clear what he meant, so I was left trying to process what he’d just said for a while.

So should these so-called assholes be dragged from the airwaves kicking and screaming? No! They have the right to express their views as much as we do. We may not agree with them all, but that’s the way things go. Sometimes, people get way too protective of their point of view. Chill out, people! Use your energy to fight a real battle, and let this go.

I can feel our IQ dropping.

Ug the news. Sometimes it pisses me off. I’ve already bitched about the lameness of some news stories, but the story I saw tonight brought lameness to a brand new low.

Ok, the story was that some coffee-consumption could help prevent colon cancer and would help your liver, but drinking too much of it would cause you to get other cancers. They then said that children and pregnant women are strongly advised against drinking coffee. Um, duh! Do we need this stated again? What a waste of time.

And it gets better. The World Health Organization, you know, the body that tracks epidemics and the containment of these epidemics, said that we have a one in ten chance of being the victim of a medical error if we are hospitalized. And here were their three big pieces of advice for doctors and nurses. Get ready for these, these pearls of wisdom will knock your socks off. Can I have a drum-roll please? They are:

  1. Double-check the names of similar-sounding drugs.

  2. Wash your hands frequently,

    3. and the scariest of all,

  3. Use needles only once!

Are you gasping? I hope so. These nice reporters must be telling me that these are things that doctors and nurses don’t already know and use as well-established practices! Was I transported to the third world without knowing it? I’m scared that the WHO felt it necessary to remind doctors and nurses that they need to check meds, wash their hands, and throw away used needles. The first one, I can half understand happening rarely, like in an insane shift where you barely have time to breathe and stuff just keeps happpening. but this apparently happens frequently! Yikes! Ug I need to know what hospitals they visited so I can never wind up in one of them. Sometimes the news frightens me, but not in the way you’d expect.