http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/ Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:50:47 -0700 MyBB http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=746 Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:34:43 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=746 2 days ago

OTTAWA — Critics of the Harper government's proposed changes to the Copyright Act have launched a cyber crusade to fight the controversial bill.

They're using everything from Facebook to YouTube to Wikipedia to blogs to get their message out. They want the government to either scrap or make serious amendments to Bill C-61 when Parliament resumes next month.

At the helm of the digital movement is Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa who specializes in Internet and e-commerce law. In addition to his own blog, Geist runs a Facebook group called Fair Copyright for Canada that boasts 90,000 members.

The group, which was created in December, has become so large that members have created local chapters by city and riding to better organize their efforts. Many of the local groups have also developed wikis - online encyclopedic web pages - to keep their members informed.

Geist said more Canadians are getting involved because they recognize how the proposed reforms could affect their daily lives.

"We're talking about more than just copyright here. We're talking about the digital environment," he said. "This legislation represents a real threat to the vibrancy of that online environment."

Industry Minister Jim Prentice introduced the bill in June, calling it a "made-in-Canada" solution to online piracy. But critics responded that the bill was a carbon copy of the American Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

If passed, Bill C-61 would make it illegal to circumvent "digital locks" on CDs and DVDs and impose a $500 fine on anyone caught downloading illegal copies of music or movies.

Geist also launched a video contest on YouTube inviting Canadians to give their thoughts on Bill C-61 in 61 seconds. A panel of five judges, including Ontario Privacy Commissioner Anne Cavoukian, will announce the winner on Sept. 15 - the day MPs return to the House of Commons.

An Industry Canada spokeswoman said Prentice is interested to see the number of Canadians involved in the online discussions, but it's up to Parliament to study the issue further.

"The activity online proves that a broad range of stakeholders, with varying interests and vantage points, care deeply about this issue," said Stefanie Power, in an email response.

The movement isn't confined to the digital world. The online protests have spurred offline activism.

Kempton Lam, a business consultant from Calgary, used his blog and Facebook to organize a rally outside a breakfast hosted by Prentice last month. Lam said the online discussions have fuelled potential activists.

"There are so many Canadians that have issues will this bill," he said. "And the online forum has helped us get informed, which leads to offline rallies.

"After we meet, members write about what we learned, post videos back on to the blogs and Facebook group."

Members of the online movement are also trying to make their voices heard through letter-writing campaigns and one-on-one meetings with local MPs.

Liberal MP Sukh Dhaliwal held a town hall meeting last month to discuss the controversial legislation after his office was flooded with letters from concerned constituents.

It's not the first time this digital community has bared its teeth. The Conservative government was slated to introduce the reforms in December but delayed the bill after heavy criticism flooded the blogosphere.

Geist said he is optimistic that the activism will make a difference.

"When you get tens of thousands of Canadians speaking out like this, there's big political risk for any political party who chooses to ignore it," he warned.

And of course, a clicky for CFScorpio

Bill C-61

More...
Federal e-copying proposals sow confusion for consumers, firms

Michael Geist
The Ottawa Citizen


Tuesday, August 19, 2008


Canadians watching the Olympic coverage from Beijing can hardly have missed the Bell commercial touting a new digital video recorder that features an external hard drive permitting users to "record forever." The archiving functionality may sound enticing, but last week several media reports noted that Industry Minister Jim Prentice's Bill C-61 forbids Canadians from recording television programs for archival purposes.

Indeed, the new "time shifting" provision in the Prentice bill contains at least a dozen restrictions that could leave consumers facing significant liability for those that fail to comply. Innovative businesses do not fare much better as they will also be forced to shelve potential new services if the proposals becomes law. For example, Bill C-61 explicitly prohibits a network-based PVR that Telus has considered introducing into the Canadian market.

These restrictions leave Canadians trailing the United States, where consumers have enjoyed the legal right to time-shift for more than two decades without the statutory restrictions that Prentice has proposed. Moreover, earlier this month a U.S. court ruled that Cablevision, a leading cable provider, can legally offer its network-based PVR.

While it is tempting to focus on the need to improve the bill's PVR provisions, the reality is that the spotlight on Bell's promotion highlights a pervasive problem within Bill C-61. Surprisingly for a political party that typically promotes "market-based solutions," the bill introduces a complex regulatory framework for everyday consumer activities and represents an unprecedented incursion into the property rights of millions of Canadians.

Just how far beyond restrictive television recording does Bill C-61 go?

The bill prohibits transferring a copy of most commercial DVDs to a portable video player. It blocks parents from creating backup copies of their toddler's DVDs. It precludes audiophiles from making copies of their store-bought CDs into multiple digital formats. It renders it an act of infringement to transfer music from a copy-protected CD to an iPod. It provides that students violate the law when they bypass digital locks on electronic books in order to copy a paragraph of text for a class assignment. It stops cellphone users from unlocking their phones in order to move to a different carrier. It even places backup programs and devices under a cloud of illegality.

Consumer and civil liberties groups have expressed their concern about these effects. The recent revelations about Bell's PVR raises the question about the corporate responsibility of companies that are effectively downloading legal risk onto their customers by marketing products that could raise the prospect of liability.

Many companies have begun to speak out against the proposed legislation; however, they may need to include more direct warnings with their products.

Bell is certainly free to market the record-forever PVR, but surely it should also advise customers that archiving television programs may lead to legal liability if the proposals becomes law. Similarly, as Apple touts the benefits of its Time Machine backup hard-drive, it should also warn purchasers that multiple backup copies of songs and videos would violate Bill C-61.

While the Prentice plan is still at an early legislative stage, consumers invest hundreds of dollars in these products with the expectation that they can use them as promoted for years to come. Given the prospect that the law could render everyday uses illegal, Canadian consumers should be entitled to know that they may be buying more than they bargained for with their purchases.

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. E-mail: mgeist@uottawa.ca

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news...72b84048c6]]> 2 days ago

OTTAWA — Critics of the Harper government's proposed changes to the Copyright Act have launched a cyber crusade to fight the controversial bill.

They're using everything from Facebook to YouTube to Wikipedia to blogs to get their message out. They want the government to either scrap or make serious amendments to Bill C-61 when Parliament resumes next month.

At the helm of the digital movement is Michael Geist, a professor at the University of Ottawa who specializes in Internet and e-commerce law. In addition to his own blog, Geist runs a Facebook group called Fair Copyright for Canada that boasts 90,000 members.

The group, which was created in December, has become so large that members have created local chapters by city and riding to better organize their efforts. Many of the local groups have also developed wikis - online encyclopedic web pages - to keep their members informed.

Geist said more Canadians are getting involved because they recognize how the proposed reforms could affect their daily lives.

"We're talking about more than just copyright here. We're talking about the digital environment," he said. "This legislation represents a real threat to the vibrancy of that online environment."

Industry Minister Jim Prentice introduced the bill in June, calling it a "made-in-Canada" solution to online piracy. But critics responded that the bill was a carbon copy of the American Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

If passed, Bill C-61 would make it illegal to circumvent "digital locks" on CDs and DVDs and impose a $500 fine on anyone caught downloading illegal copies of music or movies.

Geist also launched a video contest on YouTube inviting Canadians to give their thoughts on Bill C-61 in 61 seconds. A panel of five judges, including Ontario Privacy Commissioner Anne Cavoukian, will announce the winner on Sept. 15 - the day MPs return to the House of Commons.

An Industry Canada spokeswoman said Prentice is interested to see the number of Canadians involved in the online discussions, but it's up to Parliament to study the issue further.

"The activity online proves that a broad range of stakeholders, with varying interests and vantage points, care deeply about this issue," said Stefanie Power, in an email response.

The movement isn't confined to the digital world. The online protests have spurred offline activism.

Kempton Lam, a business consultant from Calgary, used his blog and Facebook to organize a rally outside a breakfast hosted by Prentice last month. Lam said the online discussions have fuelled potential activists.

"There are so many Canadians that have issues will this bill," he said. "And the online forum has helped us get informed, which leads to offline rallies.

"After we meet, members write about what we learned, post videos back on to the blogs and Facebook group."

Members of the online movement are also trying to make their voices heard through letter-writing campaigns and one-on-one meetings with local MPs.

Liberal MP Sukh Dhaliwal held a town hall meeting last month to discuss the controversial legislation after his office was flooded with letters from concerned constituents.

It's not the first time this digital community has bared its teeth. The Conservative government was slated to introduce the reforms in December but delayed the bill after heavy criticism flooded the blogosphere.

Geist said he is optimistic that the activism will make a difference.

"When you get tens of thousands of Canadians speaking out like this, there's big political risk for any political party who chooses to ignore it," he warned.

And of course, a clicky for CFScorpio

Bill C-61

More...
Federal e-copying proposals sow confusion for consumers, firms

Michael Geist
The Ottawa Citizen


Tuesday, August 19, 2008


Canadians watching the Olympic coverage from Beijing can hardly have missed the Bell commercial touting a new digital video recorder that features an external hard drive permitting users to "record forever." The archiving functionality may sound enticing, but last week several media reports noted that Industry Minister Jim Prentice's Bill C-61 forbids Canadians from recording television programs for archival purposes.

Indeed, the new "time shifting" provision in the Prentice bill contains at least a dozen restrictions that could leave consumers facing significant liability for those that fail to comply. Innovative businesses do not fare much better as they will also be forced to shelve potential new services if the proposals becomes law. For example, Bill C-61 explicitly prohibits a network-based PVR that Telus has considered introducing into the Canadian market.

These restrictions leave Canadians trailing the United States, where consumers have enjoyed the legal right to time-shift for more than two decades without the statutory restrictions that Prentice has proposed. Moreover, earlier this month a U.S. court ruled that Cablevision, a leading cable provider, can legally offer its network-based PVR.

While it is tempting to focus on the need to improve the bill's PVR provisions, the reality is that the spotlight on Bell's promotion highlights a pervasive problem within Bill C-61. Surprisingly for a political party that typically promotes "market-based solutions," the bill introduces a complex regulatory framework for everyday consumer activities and represents an unprecedented incursion into the property rights of millions of Canadians.

Just how far beyond restrictive television recording does Bill C-61 go?

The bill prohibits transferring a copy of most commercial DVDs to a portable video player. It blocks parents from creating backup copies of their toddler's DVDs. It precludes audiophiles from making copies of their store-bought CDs into multiple digital formats. It renders it an act of infringement to transfer music from a copy-protected CD to an iPod. It provides that students violate the law when they bypass digital locks on electronic books in order to copy a paragraph of text for a class assignment. It stops cellphone users from unlocking their phones in order to move to a different carrier. It even places backup programs and devices under a cloud of illegality.

Consumer and civil liberties groups have expressed their concern about these effects. The recent revelations about Bell's PVR raises the question about the corporate responsibility of companies that are effectively downloading legal risk onto their customers by marketing products that could raise the prospect of liability.

Many companies have begun to speak out against the proposed legislation; however, they may need to include more direct warnings with their products.

Bell is certainly free to market the record-forever PVR, but surely it should also advise customers that archiving television programs may lead to legal liability if the proposals becomes law. Similarly, as Apple touts the benefits of its Time Machine backup hard-drive, it should also warn purchasers that multiple backup copies of songs and videos would violate Bill C-61.

While the Prentice plan is still at an early legislative stage, consumers invest hundreds of dollars in these products with the expectation that they can use them as promoted for years to come. Given the prospect that the law could render everyday uses illegal, Canadian consumers should be entitled to know that they may be buying more than they bargained for with their purchases.

Michael Geist holds the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa, Faculty of Law. E-mail: mgeist@uottawa.ca

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news...72b84048c6]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=745 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:21:43 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=745
(It's a narrative, rather than a multiple choice survey, FYI).


Quote:Hello friends, friends of friends, etc.,

I am working on a project with a fellow sexuality educator and we can use your help. We are looking to explore how women experienced sex during their adolescence and how these experiences impact who we become as adults.

You can help by filling out a survey for us. You can find the survey at:

clicky

Forgive us as the questions may seem fairly invasive (and pretty long), but we are looking to conduct a thorough and meaningful exploration of teen sexuality through the eyes of adult women. Please know that for publication, all personal identifiers will be removed; we are committed to maintaining your anonymity.

You can also help by forwarding the survey to people you know. We are looking for a wide diversity of respondents including women of all ages. So please send it to your sister, your friends, your mom, and your sister's friend, your mom's sister, your friends' moms, etc.

If you have any questions or would prefer to fill out a Word version of the survey, please feel free to email me at marikempner@gmail.com

]]>
(It's a narrative, rather than a multiple choice survey, FYI).


Quote:Hello friends, friends of friends, etc.,

I am working on a project with a fellow sexuality educator and we can use your help. We are looking to explore how women experienced sex during their adolescence and how these experiences impact who we become as adults.

You can help by filling out a survey for us. You can find the survey at:

clicky

Forgive us as the questions may seem fairly invasive (and pretty long), but we are looking to conduct a thorough and meaningful exploration of teen sexuality through the eyes of adult women. Please know that for publication, all personal identifiers will be removed; we are committed to maintaining your anonymity.

You can also help by forwarding the survey to people you know. We are looking for a wide diversity of respondents including women of all ages. So please send it to your sister, your friends, your mom, and your sister's friend, your mom's sister, your friends' moms, etc.

If you have any questions or would prefer to fill out a Word version of the survey, please feel free to email me at marikempner@gmail.com

]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=744 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:19:27 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=744 This country is really going to the dogs (No offence to all dog owners. Its just a figure of speech)
Real estate is plummeting.
It is a buyers market. Cause of massive forecloses as people are losing their jobs left and right and all hell is breaking loose with this economy.
Are we better off then we were 4 yr's ago.
For hubby and I even though we manage to pay our bills we are way deep in financial debt.
Well Over 135K which includes the house. I can't imagine what my life will be like if Gawd forbid anything bad happened to my husband.

And I see families ripped apart every day in the news with one tragedy after another and it all boils down to people being able to support themselves and try to stay out of debt. But how can we do that when the job market pays squat!
So with that in mind, we also have endless commercials on the boob tube from
Cash & Go or Check into Cash and people fall for this crap.
Which is nothing more then legalized Bookies. I feel so sorry for people who get rooked into this crap.
Does anyone bother to read the fine print in those ads?
On a simple loan of $2,600 They want 214.60 a month payments for 42 months. Plus a $75 Fee up front. That is too fucked up for words.
And we wonder why this country is so screwed up.
We let companies like that stay in business and pray on the weak and feeble minded people who have no credit due to a bad set of circumstances. Or have no other way shape or form to get money due to illness or loss of job. And it is sad to say but there must be thousands of people like that right now. Or why else do these business STAY in business! Even cashing a simple check they take a high % off the top! So they are making their profit too.
And this is just one of many many reasons why we as a country are in so much debt. Oh I can go on with all the political ramifications of why this country is so deep in debt. But I will pass on that hot topic.
AND just simply state my questions to you, which are,
1.How much debt are you in?
2.Do you see yourselves getting out of debt anytime soon?
Or in the near future?

I know for us we will be in debt till the day we die. Bob never worries about it. He always tells me just to live every day for now. He never looks into the future.
I am hoping one day it will all hit him and maybe he will take action and start saving some $ for a rainy day.

And of course living CF there is no one to take on our bills after we die.
So we better pray we die together.
Cause I alone cannot pay our Mortgage and bills.
This is an issue that scares the crap out of me at times.
And I was just wondering if anyone else felt the same way?

All comments are welcomed as always. :) & Have a Great Day :)]]> This country is really going to the dogs (No offence to all dog owners. Its just a figure of speech)
Real estate is plummeting.
It is a buyers market. Cause of massive forecloses as people are losing their jobs left and right and all hell is breaking loose with this economy.
Are we better off then we were 4 yr's ago.
For hubby and I even though we manage to pay our bills we are way deep in financial debt.
Well Over 135K which includes the house. I can't imagine what my life will be like if Gawd forbid anything bad happened to my husband.

And I see families ripped apart every day in the news with one tragedy after another and it all boils down to people being able to support themselves and try to stay out of debt. But how can we do that when the job market pays squat!
So with that in mind, we also have endless commercials on the boob tube from
Cash & Go or Check into Cash and people fall for this crap.
Which is nothing more then legalized Bookies. I feel so sorry for people who get rooked into this crap.
Does anyone bother to read the fine print in those ads?
On a simple loan of $2,600 They want 214.60 a month payments for 42 months. Plus a $75 Fee up front. That is too fucked up for words.
And we wonder why this country is so screwed up.
We let companies like that stay in business and pray on the weak and feeble minded people who have no credit due to a bad set of circumstances. Or have no other way shape or form to get money due to illness or loss of job. And it is sad to say but there must be thousands of people like that right now. Or why else do these business STAY in business! Even cashing a simple check they take a high % off the top! So they are making their profit too.
And this is just one of many many reasons why we as a country are in so much debt. Oh I can go on with all the political ramifications of why this country is so deep in debt. But I will pass on that hot topic.
AND just simply state my questions to you, which are,
1.How much debt are you in?
2.Do you see yourselves getting out of debt anytime soon?
Or in the near future?

I know for us we will be in debt till the day we die. Bob never worries about it. He always tells me just to live every day for now. He never looks into the future.
I am hoping one day it will all hit him and maybe he will take action and start saving some $ for a rainy day.

And of course living CF there is no one to take on our bills after we die.
So we better pray we die together.
Cause I alone cannot pay our Mortgage and bills.
This is an issue that scares the crap out of me at times.
And I was just wondering if anyone else felt the same way?

All comments are welcomed as always. :) & Have a Great Day :)]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=743 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:59:00 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=743
To be honest, I'm a bit surprised it was available.]]>
To be honest, I'm a bit surprised it was available.]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=742 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:49:17 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=742 Fox 7, Austin TX
Last Edited: Friday, 15 Aug 2008, 10:55 PM CDT

AUSTIN, Texas -- Michael Gonzalez and Krystal Hernandez say their dog died while waiting for a San Marcos police officer to write them a ticket for speeding. They were speeding to an emergency clinic in New Braunfels to take their dog for treatment but did not arrive in time. Now they are angry that the officer who delayed them only received a verbal reprimand.

Watch the news video here:
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/myfox/pages/H...1.1&sflg=1]]> Fox 7, Austin TX
Last Edited: Friday, 15 Aug 2008, 10:55 PM CDT

AUSTIN, Texas -- Michael Gonzalez and Krystal Hernandez say their dog died while waiting for a San Marcos police officer to write them a ticket for speeding. They were speeding to an emergency clinic in New Braunfels to take their dog for treatment but did not arrive in time. Now they are angry that the officer who delayed them only received a verbal reprimand.

Watch the news video here:
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/myfox/pages/H...1.1&sflg=1]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=741 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:41:23 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=741
Look out! 'Beer goggles' are real
Strangers really do look sexier when you drink booze, science confirms
By Charles Q. Choi
LiveScience/MSNBC
updated 4:12 p.m. CT, Thurs., Aug. 14, 2008

For the first time, scientists have proven that "beer goggles" are real — other people really do look more attractive to us if we have been drinking.

Surprisingly, the beer goggles effect was not limited to just the opposite sex among the ostensibly straight volunteers recruited for the study — they also rated people from their own sex as more attractive.

Scientists in England gave 84 heterosexual college students chilled lime-flavored drinks that were either non-alcoholic or given a dose of vodka equivalent in alcohol to a large glass of wine or a pint-and-a-half of beer.

After 15 minutes, the volunteers were shown photos of 40 other college students from both sexes. Both men and women who drank booze found these faces more attractive, "a roughly 10 percent increase in ratings of attractiveness," said researcher Marcus Munafo, an experimental psychologist at the University of Bristol in England.

The researchers also asked volunteers to rate their mood, "and there were no differences on those measures in the alcohol group compared to the no-alcohol group," Munafo added. "This suggests that the effect we observed wasn't due to a general change in mood."

It did not escape Munafo that the results are rather obvious.

"Everyone knows about beer goggles," Munafo said. "But some of our results suggest that there's more going on than we might have thought."

The discovery that the effect is not specific to the opposite sex was surprising. One possibility is that alcohol generally makes us see things as more attractive, but when this occurs in social situations, such as at a bar, "this might become targeted at opposite-sex faces," Munafo said. By repeating the experiment with video clips shot at bars, the scientists hope to recreate those social cues and see what happens.

"The main question is whether these effects are specific to faces, or whether we would rate anything as more attractive after a drink," Munafo said.

Future research could expose people who have been drinking to landscapes or the faces of puppies and other animals, "to see if alcohol has a more general effect on perceiving beauty in the environment."

"It's also surprising to see this effect is happening at lower doses than you might think," Munafo said. "We're trying to build up a more complete picture of what happens when people go out for a drink, and we're interested in certain behaviors that are more common after drinking, such as unsafe sex, or violence. If this effect is happening at lower doses than expected, it might be helpful for people who are predisposed to such behaviors to anticipate those situations and prevent them."

The scientists would also want to vary the levels of alcohol that volunteers receive, "but there are practical and ethical constraints around how much alcohol we can give people in the lab!" Munafo told LiveScience.

Munafo and his colleagues detailed their findings online August 6 in the journal Alcohol and Alcoholism.]]>
Look out! 'Beer goggles' are real
Strangers really do look sexier when you drink booze, science confirms
By Charles Q. Choi
LiveScience/MSNBC
updated 4:12 p.m. CT, Thurs., Aug. 14, 2008

For the first time, scientists have proven that "beer goggles" are real — other people really do look more attractive to us if we have been drinking.

Surprisingly, the beer goggles effect was not limited to just the opposite sex among the ostensibly straight volunteers recruited for the study — they also rated people from their own sex as more attractive.

Scientists in England gave 84 heterosexual college students chilled lime-flavored drinks that were either non-alcoholic or given a dose of vodka equivalent in alcohol to a large glass of wine or a pint-and-a-half of beer.

After 15 minutes, the volunteers were shown photos of 40 other college students from both sexes. Both men and women who drank booze found these faces more attractive, "a roughly 10 percent increase in ratings of attractiveness," said researcher Marcus Munafo, an experimental psychologist at the University of Bristol in England.

The researchers also asked volunteers to rate their mood, "and there were no differences on those measures in the alcohol group compared to the no-alcohol group," Munafo added. "This suggests that the effect we observed wasn't due to a general change in mood."

It did not escape Munafo that the results are rather obvious.

"Everyone knows about beer goggles," Munafo said. "But some of our results suggest that there's more going on than we might have thought."

The discovery that the effect is not specific to the opposite sex was surprising. One possibility is that alcohol generally makes us see things as more attractive, but when this occurs in social situations, such as at a bar, "this might become targeted at opposite-sex faces," Munafo said. By repeating the experiment with video clips shot at bars, the scientists hope to recreate those social cues and see what happens.

"The main question is whether these effects are specific to faces, or whether we would rate anything as more attractive after a drink," Munafo said.

Future research could expose people who have been drinking to landscapes or the faces of puppies and other animals, "to see if alcohol has a more general effect on perceiving beauty in the environment."

"It's also surprising to see this effect is happening at lower doses than you might think," Munafo said. "We're trying to build up a more complete picture of what happens when people go out for a drink, and we're interested in certain behaviors that are more common after drinking, such as unsafe sex, or violence. If this effect is happening at lower doses than expected, it might be helpful for people who are predisposed to such behaviors to anticipate those situations and prevent them."

The scientists would also want to vary the levels of alcohol that volunteers receive, "but there are practical and ethical constraints around how much alcohol we can give people in the lab!" Munafo told LiveScience.

Munafo and his colleagues detailed their findings online August 6 in the journal Alcohol and Alcoholism.]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=740 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:36:04 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=740 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=739 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 09:12:27 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=739 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=738 Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:26:56 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=738
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, August 19, 2008


(08-18) 12:53 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- California doctors who have religious objections to gays and lesbians must nevertheless treat them the same as any other patient or find a colleague in the office who will do so, the state Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday.

The justices rejected a San Diego County fertility clinic's attempt to use its physicians' religious beliefs as a justification for their refusal to provide artificial insemination for a lesbian couple. The ruling, based on a state law prohibiting businesses from discriminating against customers because of their sexual orientation, comes three months after the court struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage.

"This isn't just a win for me personally and for other lesbian women," said the plaintiff, Guadalupe Benitez. "Anyone could be the next target if doctors are allowed to pick and choose their patients based on religious views about other groups of people."

The ruling is the first in the nation to address doctors' religious objections to treating gay or lesbian patients and should make health care more accessible, said Benitez's lawyer, Jennifer Pizer, of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Lawyers for the clinic and two of its doctors said they were considering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. One supporter of the physicians called the ruling a strike against religious freedom.

"This court is allowing two lesbians to force these individuals to choose between being doctors in the state of California or being able to practice their faith," said attorney Brad Dacus of the conservative Pacific Justice Institute, which filed arguments backing the doctors.

Benitez, now 36, sued North Coast Women's Care in Vista (San Diego County) and two of its doctors, saying they told her in 2000 that their Christian beliefs prohibited them from performing intrauterine insemination for a lesbian. The doctors later said they would have refused the treatment for any unmarried couple.

They referred Benitez to another clinic for the insemination, which cost her thousands of dollars because it wasn't covered by her health plan, her lawyer said. She did not become pregnant then, but since has borne three children and is raising them with her partner of 18 years.

The lawsuit has been on hold while courts decided whether the doctors could defend denying treatment to lesbians by invoking their religious beliefs.

A state appeals court ruled in the doctors' favor in 2005. But the state's high court said Monday that California's Unruh Civil Rights Act - which prohibits discrimination against business customers because of their customers' sexual orientation as well as race, sex, religion and other categories - applies to all businesses, regardless of their religious views.

The law "furthers California's compelling interest in ensuring full and equal access to medical treatment irrespective of sexual orientation," said Justice Joyce Kennard.

In language that would apply equally to abortions, Kennard said doctors who have religious objections to a particular procedure or treatment can refuse to perform it for any patient, but can't selectively reject gays and lesbians. She said they also have the option of referring a patient to someone else at the clinic who will perform the procedure, an option that wasn't available in this case.

Kennard cited the court's 2004 ruling requiring Catholic Charities to abide by a state law that compels company-sponsored health plans for employees to offer contraception for women. She also rejected the doctors' free-speech claim, saying they remain free to criticize the anti-discrimination law as long as they comply with it.

Kenneth Pedroza, lawyer for the doctors and the clinic, noted that the ruling leaves the physicians free to argue to the jury that they had religious objections to providing the infertility treatment to unmarried couples. The Unruh Act now bans discrimination based on marital status, but the rights of unmarried couples were not clearly established when Benitez visited the clinic.

"Our doctors aren't going to be silenced," Pedroza said.

In considering a U.S. Supreme Court appeal, Pedroza said the high court may be ready to reconsider its 1990 ruling that upheld states' authority to enforce laws that restrict religious practices even though they were not intended to stifle religion. That ruling, cited in Monday's California decision, allowed Oregon to deny unemployment benefits to two people who were fired for using peyote in a religious ritual at an American Indian church.

Monday's case is North Coast Women's Care Medical Group vs. Superior Court, S142892. The ruling is available at links.sfgate.com/ZEOB

I don't understand why the doctors didn't refer her elsewhere.]]>
Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, August 19, 2008


(08-18) 12:53 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- California doctors who have religious objections to gays and lesbians must nevertheless treat them the same as any other patient or find a colleague in the office who will do so, the state Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday.

The justices rejected a San Diego County fertility clinic's attempt to use its physicians' religious beliefs as a justification for their refusal to provide artificial insemination for a lesbian couple. The ruling, based on a state law prohibiting businesses from discriminating against customers because of their sexual orientation, comes three months after the court struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage.

"This isn't just a win for me personally and for other lesbian women," said the plaintiff, Guadalupe Benitez. "Anyone could be the next target if doctors are allowed to pick and choose their patients based on religious views about other groups of people."

The ruling is the first in the nation to address doctors' religious objections to treating gay or lesbian patients and should make health care more accessible, said Benitez's lawyer, Jennifer Pizer, of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.

Lawyers for the clinic and two of its doctors said they were considering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. One supporter of the physicians called the ruling a strike against religious freedom.

"This court is allowing two lesbians to force these individuals to choose between being doctors in the state of California or being able to practice their faith," said attorney Brad Dacus of the conservative Pacific Justice Institute, which filed arguments backing the doctors.

Benitez, now 36, sued North Coast Women's Care in Vista (San Diego County) and two of its doctors, saying they told her in 2000 that their Christian beliefs prohibited them from performing intrauterine insemination for a lesbian. The doctors later said they would have refused the treatment for any unmarried couple.

They referred Benitez to another clinic for the insemination, which cost her thousands of dollars because it wasn't covered by her health plan, her lawyer said. She did not become pregnant then, but since has borne three children and is raising them with her partner of 18 years.

The lawsuit has been on hold while courts decided whether the doctors could defend denying treatment to lesbians by invoking their religious beliefs.

A state appeals court ruled in the doctors' favor in 2005. But the state's high court said Monday that California's Unruh Civil Rights Act - which prohibits discrimination against business customers because of their customers' sexual orientation as well as race, sex, religion and other categories - applies to all businesses, regardless of their religious views.

The law "furthers California's compelling interest in ensuring full and equal access to medical treatment irrespective of sexual orientation," said Justice Joyce Kennard.

In language that would apply equally to abortions, Kennard said doctors who have religious objections to a particular procedure or treatment can refuse to perform it for any patient, but can't selectively reject gays and lesbians. She said they also have the option of referring a patient to someone else at the clinic who will perform the procedure, an option that wasn't available in this case.

Kennard cited the court's 2004 ruling requiring Catholic Charities to abide by a state law that compels company-sponsored health plans for employees to offer contraception for women. She also rejected the doctors' free-speech claim, saying they remain free to criticize the anti-discrimination law as long as they comply with it.

Kenneth Pedroza, lawyer for the doctors and the clinic, noted that the ruling leaves the physicians free to argue to the jury that they had religious objections to providing the infertility treatment to unmarried couples. The Unruh Act now bans discrimination based on marital status, but the rights of unmarried couples were not clearly established when Benitez visited the clinic.

"Our doctors aren't going to be silenced," Pedroza said.

In considering a U.S. Supreme Court appeal, Pedroza said the high court may be ready to reconsider its 1990 ruling that upheld states' authority to enforce laws that restrict religious practices even though they were not intended to stifle religion. That ruling, cited in Monday's California decision, allowed Oregon to deny unemployment benefits to two people who were fired for using peyote in a religious ritual at an American Indian church.

Monday's case is North Coast Women's Care Medical Group vs. Superior Court, S142892. The ruling is available at links.sfgate.com/ZEOB

I don't understand why the doctors didn't refer her elsewhere.]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=737 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:33:54 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=737 By KIM MORGAN Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Aug. 18, 2008, 5:05PM
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/health/5951434.html

San Francisco author Kimberly Ford tells it like it is in her new book, Hump: True Tales of Sex After Kids. Part memoir, part anecdotal with the input of six couples, 20 women and 10 men, the book urges women to reconnect with their lustier side soon after baby is born. Ford chatted with about not letting your sex life die after family life begins.

Q: Why did you title it Hump?

A: My husband was the one who came up with Hump. He's an English major and likes language, and he likes the double-entendre there, in the sense of the slang term for sex, but also that you have to get over a hump once you have kids to get back to having sex.

Q: Your book is not for the shy. It's very open, honest and blunt. Who are you targeting?

A: There are people who will read this because they are interested, others may be a little hesitant or maybe put off and think, wow, this is certainly not the way I live my sex life or my married life. And that's fine. ... I think there's a lot of practical information in the book.

Q: The first issue you address is women's anxiety. What's your main advice on that?

A: There's a hurdle initially, but once you're into it, you realize there are a lot more benefits than just pleasing your husband, which is sort of how I think it feels in the beginning. ... My sense is that it needs to be on the woman's terms. But I also think that if women can recognize the dividends having sex will pay, it's really worthwhile.

Q: What are the dividends?

A: Sex is a way that within 15 minutes you can feel really connected to one another in a very private and intimate way. For women, there's stress reduction. Statistics say women should have an orgasm three to five times a week for optimal health.

Q: The message I got from the book is, just do it already. Is that right?

A: It's like my friend in the book who said it's like going for a jog; that it doesn't sound like a very good idea. And then once you get into it, you're like "Hey, this is not so bad." Once you are really into it, it's actually pretty good. And afterwards, you're always glad you did it.

Q: How did you learn all this?

A: We have three kids (ages 6, 8 and 10). I had really wanted kids badly. I thought I wanted four, then I had this first baby and it turned out to be a lot more difficult transition than I was anticipating. I felt so unmoored, so lost, so without identity, that sex was one way for me to feel like I was still a woman. ... The transition to parenthood, for most parents is described by them as a major trauma. It's very difficult on marriages. I found sex with my husband was a way to assuage some of those tensions.

For information, visit http://www.humpthebook.com.]]> By KIM MORGAN Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle
Aug. 18, 2008, 5:05PM
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/health/5951434.html

San Francisco author Kimberly Ford tells it like it is in her new book, Hump: True Tales of Sex After Kids. Part memoir, part anecdotal with the input of six couples, 20 women and 10 men, the book urges women to reconnect with their lustier side soon after baby is born. Ford chatted with about not letting your sex life die after family life begins.

Q: Why did you title it Hump?

A: My husband was the one who came up with Hump. He's an English major and likes language, and he likes the double-entendre there, in the sense of the slang term for sex, but also that you have to get over a hump once you have kids to get back to having sex.

Q: Your book is not for the shy. It's very open, honest and blunt. Who are you targeting?

A: There are people who will read this because they are interested, others may be a little hesitant or maybe put off and think, wow, this is certainly not the way I live my sex life or my married life. And that's fine. ... I think there's a lot of practical information in the book.

Q: The first issue you address is women's anxiety. What's your main advice on that?

A: There's a hurdle initially, but once you're into it, you realize there are a lot more benefits than just pleasing your husband, which is sort of how I think it feels in the beginning. ... My sense is that it needs to be on the woman's terms. But I also think that if women can recognize the dividends having sex will pay, it's really worthwhile.

Q: What are the dividends?

A: Sex is a way that within 15 minutes you can feel really connected to one another in a very private and intimate way. For women, there's stress reduction. Statistics say women should have an orgasm three to five times a week for optimal health.

Q: The message I got from the book is, just do it already. Is that right?

A: It's like my friend in the book who said it's like going for a jog; that it doesn't sound like a very good idea. And then once you get into it, you're like "Hey, this is not so bad." Once you are really into it, it's actually pretty good. And afterwards, you're always glad you did it.

Q: How did you learn all this?

A: We have three kids (ages 6, 8 and 10). I had really wanted kids badly. I thought I wanted four, then I had this first baby and it turned out to be a lot more difficult transition than I was anticipating. I felt so unmoored, so lost, so without identity, that sex was one way for me to feel like I was still a woman. ... The transition to parenthood, for most parents is described by them as a major trauma. It's very difficult on marriages. I found sex with my husband was a way to assuage some of those tensions.

For information, visit http://www.humpthebook.com.]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=736 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:31:53 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=736
Stay-at-home moms staying home even more
Gas prices, uneasy economy pressure one-income families to cut costs
The Associated Press
updated 1:46 p.m. CT, Mon., Aug. 11, 2008

NEW YORK - “I’m having ’em, so I wanna raise ’em.” That’s the philosophy that led Jenna Kagan to stop working when her daughter was born nine years ago. Two sons soon followed, and their mother remains firm in her belief that staying home with them is best.

But these days, the term “stay-at-home-mom” has taken on a new meaning. Economic stresses, particularly sky-high gas prices, have kept many of these mothers and their families closer to home base than they’d like, a development some find isolating and deeply frustrating.

“It used to be the term ’stay-at-home mother’ was an oxymoron, because you had to get out of the house for your sanity!” says Jen Singer, creator of MommaSaid.net, a resource for stay-at-home mothers like herself. “To the mall, the playground, playdates, to Target, just to go somewhere.”

Now, with gas topping $4 a gallon, everyone’s thinking twice, she says. “If you’re a stay-at-home mother, you’d better have a darned good reason to go somewhere. You wonder, where can I stop by on my way home from another errand?”

So, like many, Kagan, who lives in Maple Valley, Wash., has streamlined all her weekly errands into one marathon day. That includes occupational and speech therapy for one of her sons, doctor’s appointments, and of course shopping.

Her children stay at home more, too — they’re home-schooled, and short trips they used to take as part of that experience have been curtailed as well. “We just don’t have as much money as we used to,” Kagan explains. Weekends? The family now goes to parks more than museums, and instead of going to the movies, they rent.

Even cooking, an activity Kagan loves, has been affected. “I was famous for running here and there to get ingredients,” she says. “If I was missing something I’d run out and get it. I don’t do that anymore. I sit down and plan meals two weeks ahead, then buy everything at once.”

Kagan and her husband, Dan, try to make a game of their tightening budget, seeing just how much they can save, “so that it’s not too depressing,” she says. One bright spot: Dan’s in a profession that’s doing well these days. He’s a credit and collections analyst. “Collectors are really busy right now,” his wife notes ruefully.

Doesn't make sense to go back to work
As for Kagan, who was once a preschool teacher, returning to the work force doesn’t seem to her a practical option. She knows day care would pretty much wipe out a preschool teacher’s salary. And besides: “I’ve always wanted to be a stay-at-home mom,” she says. “I’d rather do the job myself.”

Some stay-at-home mothers, though — there are 5.6 million with kids under 15, according to 2007 census figures — would be eager to return to work, if they thought the right job was out there. But many don’t. Recent labor statistics indicate women in the labor force have been adversely affected by the poor economy, and that the growth in their work force participation, steady for several decades, has slowed in recent years.

That, in turn, has raised the emotionally charged question of whether women have really been “opting out” to care for their children, as some economists thought, or whether it’s more that they’ve been affected by the hard times.

It can be hard to know which, says Suzanne Bianchi, a sociologist specializing in gender issues at the University of Maryland. “It’s easier to decide to opt out,” says Bianchi, “if your supposition is that the prospects aren’t good anyway.”

Singer, of MommaSaid.net, is annoyed by the assumption she feels some economists make that stay-at-home mothers want to work outside the home, but can’t. “I know tons and tons of mothers who choose to stay home whatever the economic difficulties,” she says, counting herself among them. “We are NOT staying home with our children by default.”

Hope that spouse's job is stable
Adding to the day-to-day stress, says Singer, is the fear that their husbands, the sole breadwinners, might lose their jobs. “Stay-at-home moms are very good at being frugal,” she says. “Often they’re the ones in charge of household finances. But when you’re worried that the one paycheck won’t come, it’s that much more frightening.”

One change that Singer, who lives in Kinnelon, N.J., has made in her own life is shopping for things like back-to-school supplies online, rather than in stores. But online shopping is a solitary activity, in a life that for some women is getting increasingly more solitary. Daisy Wilson, a mother of two in Splendora, Texas, calls it claustrophobia. “I really miss the adult interaction,” she says.

For Wilson, 30, who left her job as an office assistant at Wal-Mart seven years ago, the prospect of returning to paid work is tempting. “There are times when I think, if I were back at work, I could afford this or that,” she says. “But I don’t think it would pan out in the end.”

Wilson decided to stay home for both emotional and practical reasons. “There was a little bit of guilt,” she said, because she had worked during the first six years of her son’s life. But it also made economic sense. “They were charging outrageous fees for daycare,” she says. “It was too much for us.”


Wilson’s husband works in the oil fields. His hours are unpredictable, and she needs to be home to pick up both kids, take them to activities, feed and otherwise care for them. “I mostly entertain the kids at home — it’s cheaper,” she says. She would have liked to send her 4-year-old daughter, Winter, to preschool this year for the socialization skills, but can’t justify the expense.

As for her own leisure time, she laughs. “I read in bed, clip coupons,” she says. Going out with her husband alone is rare: “We had a date night for a while once a week but it petered out.”

Dinners out, ‘date nights’ are history
Alexis Allman can’t even remember the last time she went out with her husband. “Maybe it was my birthday in May last year — not this year,” says the mother of three from Marysville, Calif., north of Sacramento. “We did nothing this year.”

Allman left her job as an account coordinator with Hewlett-Packard, which she enjoyed, just over two years ago because “it was too expensive to work,” what with the hour’s drive each way and the cost of daycare for two kids (she now has three). Now, it would make even less sense. “To find a job that pays something decent, I would still have to drive an hour each way at $4.30 a gallon,” she says.

Allman, too, packs all her errands into one day. “I go to five places in one day with three kids — it’s horrible,” she says. The family also needs a bigger car to fit everyone — but that would take too much gas.

Meals out are history, even at McDonald’s, where a meal costs at least $20 for four. “How can we justify eating out when we could go to a store and buy enough for a couple day’s worth of meals?” Allman asks. An exception was her son’s recent fourth birthday, celebrated at Applebees. Other than that, it’s been two years.

“There’s just no time to regroup, none left for ourselves,” Allman notes. That means no date nights, either. But she’s hopeful that may change.

“I’m trying to work out a baby-sitting swap arrangement with friends,” she says. “If it works, we’ll go and see the new ’Batman’ movie. Maybe.”]]>
Stay-at-home moms staying home even more
Gas prices, uneasy economy pressure one-income families to cut costs
The Associated Press
updated 1:46 p.m. CT, Mon., Aug. 11, 2008

NEW YORK - “I’m having ’em, so I wanna raise ’em.” That’s the philosophy that led Jenna Kagan to stop working when her daughter was born nine years ago. Two sons soon followed, and their mother remains firm in her belief that staying home with them is best.

But these days, the term “stay-at-home-mom” has taken on a new meaning. Economic stresses, particularly sky-high gas prices, have kept many of these mothers and their families closer to home base than they’d like, a development some find isolating and deeply frustrating.

“It used to be the term ’stay-at-home mother’ was an oxymoron, because you had to get out of the house for your sanity!” says Jen Singer, creator of MommaSaid.net, a resource for stay-at-home mothers like herself. “To the mall, the playground, playdates, to Target, just to go somewhere.”

Now, with gas topping $4 a gallon, everyone’s thinking twice, she says. “If you’re a stay-at-home mother, you’d better have a darned good reason to go somewhere. You wonder, where can I stop by on my way home from another errand?”

So, like many, Kagan, who lives in Maple Valley, Wash., has streamlined all her weekly errands into one marathon day. That includes occupational and speech therapy for one of her sons, doctor’s appointments, and of course shopping.

Her children stay at home more, too — they’re home-schooled, and short trips they used to take as part of that experience have been curtailed as well. “We just don’t have as much money as we used to,” Kagan explains. Weekends? The family now goes to parks more than museums, and instead of going to the movies, they rent.

Even cooking, an activity Kagan loves, has been affected. “I was famous for running here and there to get ingredients,” she says. “If I was missing something I’d run out and get it. I don’t do that anymore. I sit down and plan meals two weeks ahead, then buy everything at once.”

Kagan and her husband, Dan, try to make a game of their tightening budget, seeing just how much they can save, “so that it’s not too depressing,” she says. One bright spot: Dan’s in a profession that’s doing well these days. He’s a credit and collections analyst. “Collectors are really busy right now,” his wife notes ruefully.

Doesn't make sense to go back to work
As for Kagan, who was once a preschool teacher, returning to the work force doesn’t seem to her a practical option. She knows day care would pretty much wipe out a preschool teacher’s salary. And besides: “I’ve always wanted to be a stay-at-home mom,” she says. “I’d rather do the job myself.”

Some stay-at-home mothers, though — there are 5.6 million with kids under 15, according to 2007 census figures — would be eager to return to work, if they thought the right job was out there. But many don’t. Recent labor statistics indicate women in the labor force have been adversely affected by the poor economy, and that the growth in their work force participation, steady for several decades, has slowed in recent years.

That, in turn, has raised the emotionally charged question of whether women have really been “opting out” to care for their children, as some economists thought, or whether it’s more that they’ve been affected by the hard times.

It can be hard to know which, says Suzanne Bianchi, a sociologist specializing in gender issues at the University of Maryland. “It’s easier to decide to opt out,” says Bianchi, “if your supposition is that the prospects aren’t good anyway.”

Singer, of MommaSaid.net, is annoyed by the assumption she feels some economists make that stay-at-home mothers want to work outside the home, but can’t. “I know tons and tons of mothers who choose to stay home whatever the economic difficulties,” she says, counting herself among them. “We are NOT staying home with our children by default.”

Hope that spouse's job is stable
Adding to the day-to-day stress, says Singer, is the fear that their husbands, the sole breadwinners, might lose their jobs. “Stay-at-home moms are very good at being frugal,” she says. “Often they’re the ones in charge of household finances. But when you’re worried that the one paycheck won’t come, it’s that much more frightening.”

One change that Singer, who lives in Kinnelon, N.J., has made in her own life is shopping for things like back-to-school supplies online, rather than in stores. But online shopping is a solitary activity, in a life that for some women is getting increasingly more solitary. Daisy Wilson, a mother of two in Splendora, Texas, calls it claustrophobia. “I really miss the adult interaction,” she says.

For Wilson, 30, who left her job as an office assistant at Wal-Mart seven years ago, the prospect of returning to paid work is tempting. “There are times when I think, if I were back at work, I could afford this or that,” she says. “But I don’t think it would pan out in the end.”

Wilson decided to stay home for both emotional and practical reasons. “There was a little bit of guilt,” she said, because she had worked during the first six years of her son’s life. But it also made economic sense. “They were charging outrageous fees for daycare,” she says. “It was too much for us.”


Wilson’s husband works in the oil fields. His hours are unpredictable, and she needs to be home to pick up both kids, take them to activities, feed and otherwise care for them. “I mostly entertain the kids at home — it’s cheaper,” she says. She would have liked to send her 4-year-old daughter, Winter, to preschool this year for the socialization skills, but can’t justify the expense.

As for her own leisure time, she laughs. “I read in bed, clip coupons,” she says. Going out with her husband alone is rare: “We had a date night for a while once a week but it petered out.”

Dinners out, ‘date nights’ are history
Alexis Allman can’t even remember the last time she went out with her husband. “Maybe it was my birthday in May last year — not this year,” says the mother of three from Marysville, Calif., north of Sacramento. “We did nothing this year.”

Allman left her job as an account coordinator with Hewlett-Packard, which she enjoyed, just over two years ago because “it was too expensive to work,” what with the hour’s drive each way and the cost of daycare for two kids (she now has three). Now, it would make even less sense. “To find a job that pays something decent, I would still have to drive an hour each way at $4.30 a gallon,” she says.

Allman, too, packs all her errands into one day. “I go to five places in one day with three kids — it’s horrible,” she says. The family also needs a bigger car to fit everyone — but that would take too much gas.

Meals out are history, even at McDonald’s, where a meal costs at least $20 for four. “How can we justify eating out when we could go to a store and buy enough for a couple day’s worth of meals?” Allman asks. An exception was her son’s recent fourth birthday, celebrated at Applebees. Other than that, it’s been two years.

“There’s just no time to regroup, none left for ourselves,” Allman notes. That means no date nights, either. But she’s hopeful that may change.

“I’m trying to work out a baby-sitting swap arrangement with friends,” she says. “If it works, we’ll go and see the new ’Batman’ movie. Maybe.”]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=735 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:33:47 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=735 our niece Gina is in the hospital as I speak.
She is the one preggers with Twins that are not due till the first week in OCT!
So, this is WAY TOO SOON for her to be having contractions.
And so she was rushed in to a very good pre-natel unit at Fairview General Hospital.

Her Dr. said from this point on she has to have total bed rest.
BUT, She is not out of the woods right now.
The baby's to be, are on some sort of lung monitor.
How they can do it while still inside the mother I have no idea. But anyway, the lungs of both girls are way too small to be born right now.
So all we can do is pray that Gina can recover from this. An STAY in bed till her due date.

Always something ain't it!
I don't wish any ill will for my niece or great nieces to be.
But, I just can't help thinking that all of this could have been avoided by the simple use of a one single "rubber" :banghead:

Edit: YIPPEEE For Bittercat :hug: I am so happy your mother is back to work
That is very good news indeed :)

Edit again: I originally had this post in the thread " are you the Praying Kind"
But I moved it here as I have more info to add.
We saw Gina yesterday.
She is feeling fine.
Her Big problem is....she does Not feel any contractions.
So she has no idea when she goes into labor.
So TG she was smart enough to see her Dr weekly to be monitored.
But now she is in total bed rest and cannot leave the hopsital till the twins are born.
She is 28 weeks pregnant.
They need her to get to at least 32 weeks before they will think about taking the babies.
They would rather have her at 36 weeks pregnant. But 32 is the min. Anyway there seems to be a problem with one of the cords?
Something about the cord
"presenting itself" Which means it is in the way of the baby and her water? So the cord is a big problem right now. Which is why they do not want Gina MOVING! at all. She is allowed to go to the bathroom but that is it!
So TG the hospital she is at is one of the best in the USA
It is #3 in pre-natal care across the country. So Gina is in good hands. And we even got to see her DR. He seems to know what he is doing, so all we can do is pray she will be fine.

Oh yea, they named the girls already too.
I may be slaughtering the names but they will are
Mackenzie & Addison.
YUCK to both. But that is their girls so I have no say in it. And both of them will have the middle name of Wrae. I know Wrae ( Gina's Mother) must be tickled pink about that news
Anyway, Mac seems to be the stronger baby and is getting more fluids, but they are worried that little Addison may not make it.
So it is all touch and go from here.

ITMT, as I said before, Gina has to stay in the hospital till the babies are born. That sucks big time for Gina who is normally a very active 26 yr old woman. So for her to be stuck in bed is killing her
So in order to make her feel better,
So you know where we will be spending the rest of our Sundays at from here on. LOL
Bob loves spoiling that girl,
And when we were visiting her Sunday we brought her some goodies.
Gina loved the Chinese food we brought her. Plus her get well Balloon and card.:balloons:
And Uncle Bob promised her we would bring her a Fatburger next week.
So there is nothing wrong with Gina's appetite. :)
Its just all a matter of monitoring the babies to see what is going on.
Its only a matter of time now!]]> our niece Gina is in the hospital as I speak.
She is the one preggers with Twins that are not due till the first week in OCT!
So, this is WAY TOO SOON for her to be having contractions.
And so she was rushed in to a very good pre-natel unit at Fairview General Hospital.

Her Dr. said from this point on she has to have total bed rest.
BUT, She is not out of the woods right now.
The baby's to be, are on some sort of lung monitor.
How they can do it while still inside the mother I have no idea. But anyway, the lungs of both girls are way too small to be born right now.
So all we can do is pray that Gina can recover from this. An STAY in bed till her due date.

Always something ain't it!
I don't wish any ill will for my niece or great nieces to be.
But, I just can't help thinking that all of this could have been avoided by the simple use of a one single "rubber" :banghead:

Edit: YIPPEEE For Bittercat :hug: I am so happy your mother is back to work
That is very good news indeed :)

Edit again: I originally had this post in the thread " are you the Praying Kind"
But I moved it here as I have more info to add.
We saw Gina yesterday.
She is feeling fine.
Her Big problem is....she does Not feel any contractions.
So she has no idea when she goes into labor.
So TG she was smart enough to see her Dr weekly to be monitored.
But now she is in total bed rest and cannot leave the hopsital till the twins are born.
She is 28 weeks pregnant.
They need her to get to at least 32 weeks before they will think about taking the babies.
They would rather have her at 36 weeks pregnant. But 32 is the min. Anyway there seems to be a problem with one of the cords?
Something about the cord
"presenting itself" Which means it is in the way of the baby and her water? So the cord is a big problem right now. Which is why they do not want Gina MOVING! at all. She is allowed to go to the bathroom but that is it!
So TG the hospital she is at is one of the best in the USA
It is #3 in pre-natal care across the country. So Gina is in good hands. And we even got to see her DR. He seems to know what he is doing, so all we can do is pray she will be fine.

Oh yea, they named the girls already too.
I may be slaughtering the names but they will are
Mackenzie & Addison.
YUCK to both. But that is their girls so I have no say in it. And both of them will have the middle name of Wrae. I know Wrae ( Gina's Mother) must be tickled pink about that news
Anyway, Mac seems to be the stronger baby and is getting more fluids, but they are worried that little Addison may not make it.
So it is all touch and go from here.

ITMT, as I said before, Gina has to stay in the hospital till the babies are born. That sucks big time for Gina who is normally a very active 26 yr old woman. So for her to be stuck in bed is killing her
So in order to make her feel better,
So you know where we will be spending the rest of our Sundays at from here on. LOL
Bob loves spoiling that girl,
And when we were visiting her Sunday we brought her some goodies.
Gina loved the Chinese food we brought her. Plus her get well Balloon and card.:balloons:
And Uncle Bob promised her we would bring her a Fatburger next week.
So there is nothing wrong with Gina's appetite. :)
Its just all a matter of monitoring the babies to see what is going on.
Its only a matter of time now!]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=734 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:29:15 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=734 She lived a long and happy healthy life.
But, she was very sickly this past month or so, and now she is gone.
I don't have all the details. I just found out yesterday from my Niece Gina who is in the hospital.
I think my SIL is too broken up to call her brother and inform us personally.
I guess that is to be expected.:(
I feel very sorry for SIL She loved Snooper very much.
And so did we. She will be missed. :rip: Snooper
Enclosed is a Pix I took of Snooper on SIL's bed last year in March.
This was the very last good Pix I got of her.
I can only hope Snooper found Kitty heaven and is totally pain free at last.]]> She lived a long and happy healthy life.
But, she was very sickly this past month or so, and now she is gone.
I don't have all the details. I just found out yesterday from my Niece Gina who is in the hospital.
I think my SIL is too broken up to call her brother and inform us personally.
I guess that is to be expected.:(
I feel very sorry for SIL She loved Snooper very much.
And so did we. She will be missed. :rip: Snooper
Enclosed is a Pix I took of Snooper on SIL's bed last year in March.
This was the very last good Pix I got of her.
I can only hope Snooper found Kitty heaven and is totally pain free at last.]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=733 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:04:59 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=733 The Alabama preacher said to his congregation, someone in this congregation has
spread a rumor that I belong to the Klu Klux Klan.

This is a horrible lie and one that a Christian community cannot tolerate.

I am embarrassed and do not intend to accept this. Now, I want the party who did this
to stand and ask forgiveness from God and this Christian family!

No one moved.

The preacher continued, 'Do you have the nerve to face me and admit this is a falsehood?
Remember, you will be forgiven and in your heart you will feel glory. Now stand and confess your
transgression.

Again all was quiet.

Then slowly, a drop-dead gorgeous Blond with a body that would stop traffic rose from
the third pew. Her head was bowed and her voice quivered as she spoke, 'Reverend, there has been a
terrible misunderstanding. I never said you were a member of the Klu Klux Klan. I simply told a couple
of my friends that you were a wizard under the sheets!'

The preacher fell to his knees, his wife fainted and the congregation roared!]]> The Alabama preacher said to his congregation, someone in this congregation has
spread a rumor that I belong to the Klu Klux Klan.

This is a horrible lie and one that a Christian community cannot tolerate.

I am embarrassed and do not intend to accept this. Now, I want the party who did this
to stand and ask forgiveness from God and this Christian family!

No one moved.

The preacher continued, 'Do you have the nerve to face me and admit this is a falsehood?
Remember, you will be forgiven and in your heart you will feel glory. Now stand and confess your
transgression.

Again all was quiet.

Then slowly, a drop-dead gorgeous Blond with a body that would stop traffic rose from
the third pew. Her head was bowed and her voice quivered as she spoke, 'Reverend, there has been a
terrible misunderstanding. I never said you were a member of the Klu Klux Klan. I simply told a couple
of my friends that you were a wizard under the sheets!'

The preacher fell to his knees, his wife fainted and the congregation roared!]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=732 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:44:14 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=732
So it started of small and weird, but it's grown, it's on her ear, the outer part. It's hard and white now, after spending a few days looking like a weird pimple with some hard dark spot in the middle. It's red around the edge now and has this embedded look. It's grown and gotten harder in the past week so I figured it can no longer be ignored.

Please think good thoughts for her surgery on the 29th. I'm sure she'll be fine but how can I not worry....]]>
So it started of small and weird, but it's grown, it's on her ear, the outer part. It's hard and white now, after spending a few days looking like a weird pimple with some hard dark spot in the middle. It's red around the edge now and has this embedded look. It's grown and gotten harder in the past week so I figured it can no longer be ignored.

Please think good thoughts for her surgery on the 29th. I'm sure she'll be fine but how can I not worry....]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=731 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 08:52:57 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=731
Hope it's a good one! :D]]>
Hope it's a good one! :D]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=730 Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:33:02 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=730

August 17, 2008
Dottie Collins, 84, Star Pitcher of Women’s Baseball League, Dies
By RICHARD GOLDSTEIN

Dottie Collins, who was a star pitcher in women’s professional baseball in the 1940s and later played a major role in preserving the history of the women’s game, died Tuesday in Fort Wayne, Ind. She was 84.

The cause was a stroke, said her son-in-law, Michael Tyler.

Pitching for six seasons in the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League, created in 1943 to provide home front entertainment while many major leaguers were off to war, Collins dazzled opposing batters.

She pitched underhand, sidearm and overhand; she threw curveballs, fastballs and changeups; and in the summer of 1948, she pitched until she was four months pregnant. She won more than 20 games in each of her first four seasons. She threw 17 shutouts and had a league-leading 293 strikeouts in 1945 for the Fort Wayne Daisies, when the women’s game resembled fast-pitch softball.

But Collins’s greatest contribution to women’s baseball may have come when its ball clubs had long been forgotten.

The Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, N.Y., had been considering an exhibition on women and baseball during the mid-1980s, but, as Ted Spencer, its chief curator, recalled in an interview, it had little material to display until Collins approached him.

“When I connected with Dottie, the ball started to roll,” Spencer said. “If it wasn’t for her, I don’t know where it would have gone.”

In 1987, Collins helped form an association of former players in the All-American league. She drew on her contacts to provide the Hall of Fame with memorabilia from the league, spurring creation of its Women in Baseball exhibit in 1988. Now an enlarged, permanent collection, the exhibit inspired the 1992 Hollywood movie “A League of Their Own,” a reprise of women’s pro baseball during World War II.

Dottie Collins was born Dorothy Wiltse in Inglewood, Calif. Her father, Daniel, a welder for an oil company, taught her to pitch. She played women’s softball in Southern California, then joined the All-American league in 1944 with the Minneapolis Millerettes.

The Millerettes relocated to Fort Wayne, as the Daisies, in 1945, and Collins became a pitching mainstay for them. She had a career record of 117-76 and an earned run average of 1.83.

Some four decades after she retired, Collins reflected on major league ballplayers and said she was none too impressed in light of her feats.

“I pitched and won both games of a doubleheader once pitching underhand,” she told Susan E. Johnson in “When Women Played Hardball.”

“I think I could have pitched a doubleheader overhand, too,” she said. “I don’t think it would be that hard. Nowadays, the men can’t do it, but hell, they can’t do nothin’.”

The All-American league went out of business after the 1954 season, and the images of the young women in their one-piece tuniclike dresses, skirt above the knees, playing before enthusiastic crowds in cities like Fort Wayne and South Bend, Ind.; Rockford, Ill.; and Kenosha and Racine, Wis., faded.

Collins and her husband, Harvey, whom she married in 1946, raised a family in Fort Wayne, and like the other ballplayers of her day, she lost touch with former teammates. But the association that Collins helped found brought those women together again. Collins became its treasurer and an editor of its newsletter, and she was also a spokeswoman for the alumnae as interest in the women grew, an outgrowth of the Cooperstown tribute and the Penny Marshall movie, which starred Geena Davis, Madonna, Tom Hanks and Rosie O’Donnell.

Collins is survived by her daughter, Patricia Tyler of Fort Wayne; two grandchildren; and six great-grandchildren. Her husband died in 2000.

June Peppas, a rookie with the 1948 Daisies, remembered how Collins “kind of played mother” to her and fellow rookies, teaching them how to conduct themselves as professional athletes, and how she provided emotional support for former teammates over the years.

“She had a lot of compassion for everybody,” Peppas said from her home in Florida. “She did a lot of letter-writing to support people who had problems. She was a good shoulder.”

When the Hall of Fame exhibit opened, many of the All-American league’s former players were on hand, accompanied by children who had never known of their mothers’ baseball exploits. Collins said she found the moment immensely gratifying.

“The movie is second place so far as we are concerned,” she told The Las Vegas Review-Journal in 1992. “Being accepted by Cooperstown was the greatest thing that happened to any of us.”]]>

August 17, 2008
Dottie Collins, 84, Star Pitcher of Women’s Baseball League, Dies
By RICHARD GOLDSTEIN

Dottie Collins, who was a star pitcher in women’s professional baseball in the 1940s and later played a major role in preserving the history of the women’s game, died Tuesday in Fort Wayne, Ind. She was 84.

The cause was a stroke, said her son-in-law, Michael Tyler.

Pitching for six seasons in the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League, created in 1943 to provide home front entertainment while many major leaguers were off to war, Collins dazzled opposing batters.

She pitched underhand, sidearm and overhand; she threw curveballs, fastballs and changeups; and in the summer of 1948, she pitched until she was four months pregnant. She won more than 20 games in each of her first four seasons. She threw 17 shutouts and had a league-leading 293 strikeouts in 1945 for the Fort Wayne Daisies, when the women’s game resembled fast-pitch softball.

But Collins’s greatest contribution to women’s baseball may have come when its ball clubs had long been forgotten.

The Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, N.Y., had been considering an exhibition on women and baseball during the mid-1980s, but, as Ted Spencer, its chief curator, recalled in an interview, it had little material to display until Collins approached him.

“When I connected with Dottie, the ball started to roll,” Spencer said. “If it wasn’t for her, I don’t know where it would have gone.”

In 1987, Collins helped form an association of former players in the All-American league. She drew on her contacts to provide the Hall of Fame with memorabilia from the league, spurring creation of its Women in Baseball exhibit in 1988. Now an enlarged, permanent collection, the exhibit inspired the 1992 Hollywood movie “A League of Their Own,” a reprise of women’s pro baseball during World War II.

Dottie Collins was born Dorothy Wiltse in Inglewood, Calif. Her father, Daniel, a welder for an oil company, taught her to pitch. She played women’s softball in Southern California, then joined the All-American league in 1944 with the Minneapolis Millerettes.

The Millerettes relocated to Fort Wayne, as the Daisies, in 1945, and Collins became a pitching mainstay for them. She had a career record of 117-76 and an earned run average of 1.83.

Some four decades after she retired, Collins reflected on major league ballplayers and said she was none too impressed in light of her feats.

“I pitched and won both games of a doubleheader once pitching underhand,” she told Susan E. Johnson in “When Women Played Hardball.”

“I think I could have pitched a doubleheader overhand, too,” she said. “I don’t think it would be that hard. Nowadays, the men can’t do it, but hell, they can’t do nothin’.”

The All-American league went out of business after the 1954 season, and the images of the young women in their one-piece tuniclike dresses, skirt above the knees, playing before enthusiastic crowds in cities like Fort Wayne and South Bend, Ind.; Rockford, Ill.; and Kenosha and Racine, Wis., faded.

Collins and her husband, Harvey, whom she married in 1946, raised a family in Fort Wayne, and like the other ballplayers of her day, she lost touch with former teammates. But the association that Collins helped found brought those women together again. Collins became its treasurer and an editor of its newsletter, and she was also a spokeswoman for the alumnae as interest in the women grew, an outgrowth of the Cooperstown tribute and the Penny Marshall movie, which starred Geena Davis, Madonna, Tom Hanks and Rosie O’Donnell.

Collins is survived by her daughter, Patricia Tyler of Fort Wayne; two grandchildren; and six great-grandchildren. Her husband died in 2000.

June Peppas, a rookie with the 1948 Daisies, remembered how Collins “kind of played mother” to her and fellow rookies, teaching them how to conduct themselves as professional athletes, and how she provided emotional support for former teammates over the years.

“She had a lot of compassion for everybody,” Peppas said from her home in Florida. “She did a lot of letter-writing to support people who had problems. She was a good shoulder.”

When the Hall of Fame exhibit opened, many of the All-American league’s former players were on hand, accompanied by children who had never known of their mothers’ baseball exploits. Collins said she found the moment immensely gratifying.

“The movie is second place so far as we are concerned,” she told The Las Vegas Review-Journal in 1992. “Being accepted by Cooperstown was the greatest thing that happened to any of us.”]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=729 Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:47:44 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=729
So i guess i should introduce myself. My name is Joe, im 30, live in California(bay area, near san fran and oakland) and have known my whole life i never wanted to have kids. Not until recently have I really started looking online to see if i could find someone who thought the same as me. I was married for almost 7 years, and was together for 3 years prior to that. After about 10 years, my now ex decided she wanted children, and so in the end we divorced. I have been on a lot of dates, but as things progress, invariably the subject of the future comes up, and the "i want kids" line the ends all hope, rofl.

Well, i could write on and on, but i just wanted to say hi, introduce myself, and look forward to talking with fellow CFers and hopefully make a lot of new friends.

-Joe]]>
So i guess i should introduce myself. My name is Joe, im 30, live in California(bay area, near san fran and oakland) and have known my whole life i never wanted to have kids. Not until recently have I really started looking online to see if i could find someone who thought the same as me. I was married for almost 7 years, and was together for 3 years prior to that. After about 10 years, my now ex decided she wanted children, and so in the end we divorced. I have been on a lot of dates, but as things progress, invariably the subject of the future comes up, and the "i want kids" line the ends all hope, rofl.

Well, i could write on and on, but i just wanted to say hi, introduce myself, and look forward to talking with fellow CFers and hopefully make a lot of new friends.

-Joe]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=728 Sun, 17 Aug 2008 17:33:37 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=728
1 24oz salt scrub - Grapefruit
1 12oz body lotion pump - Grapefruit

Both items brand new - Scrub is sealed.

Link for the scrub:
http://www.vitaminshoppe.com/store/en/br...id=B2-1007

Link for the lotion:
http://www.vitaminshoppe.com/store/en/br...id=B2-1011

I'd take $22.00 for both items. I'll have to get an estimate on shipping. I don't have a problem shipping to Canada. PM me if interested.]]>
1 24oz salt scrub - Grapefruit
1 12oz body lotion pump - Grapefruit

Both items brand new - Scrub is sealed.

Link for the scrub:
http://www.vitaminshoppe.com/store/en/br...id=B2-1007

Link for the lotion:
http://www.vitaminshoppe.com/store/en/br...id=B2-1011

I'd take $22.00 for both items. I'll have to get an estimate on shipping. I don't have a problem shipping to Canada. PM me if interested.]]> http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=727 Sun, 17 Aug 2008 16:43:57 -0700 http://www.wekidyounot.org/wkyn/showthread.php?tid=727
She can laugh about [how frazzled she was in the test for Desperate Housewives, because she had just left two screaming toddlers] today, but it wasn't just her preoccupied dishevelment that made her perfect for Lynette; it was her feelings about the challenges of parenting. "They said, 'Tell us about motherhood,' and I said, 'This is what is up with me right now...'" Then she shared an anecdote about being reduced to tears by a group of women when they asked her, "Don't you just love being a mother?" and she gave this honest answer: "No. It's really hard, and I'm losing my mind."

"The women pulled back from me like this" -- Huffman contorts her long face with disgust and horror -- "as if I'd said, 'I eat babies.' I felt such shame and remorse and humiliation. And I guess that's exactly what they wanted for Lynette."

Since then, Huffman has adopted a truth-will-set-you-free stance on parenthood. When Lesley Stahl famously asked her on 60 Minutes in 2006 if motherhood was the best experience of her life, the actress fired back stiffly, "No, and I resent the question, because I think it puts women in an untenable position." Huffman credits Stahl for keeping the exchange in the piece, and she elaborates today on what she meant. "There's only one right answer to that question," she explains, "and if you don't answer it, then you're not a good mother. There's this thin band of acceptable reaction and behavior." She polishes off the last of her lunch, arugula salad and pizza. "People ask me, 'How do you balance being a working mom?' And I go, 'I really don't balance it. It's a constant struggle, and I haven't figured out how to do it with grace and no guilt.'"]]>
She can laugh about [how frazzled she was in the test for Desperate Housewives, because she had just left two screaming toddlers] today, but it wasn't just her preoccupied dishevelment that made her perfect for Lynette; it was her feelings about the challenges of parenting. "They said, 'Tell us about motherhood,' and I said, 'This is what is up with me right now...'" Then she shared an anecdote about being reduced to tears by a group of women when they asked her, "Don't you just love being a mother?" and she gave this honest answer: "No. It's really hard, and I'm losing my mind."

"The women pulled back from me like this" -- Huffman contorts her long face with disgust and horror -- "as if I'd said, 'I eat babies.' I felt such shame and remorse and humiliation. And I guess that's exactly what they wanted for Lynette."

Since then, Huffman has adopted a truth-will-set-you-free stance on parenthood. When Lesley Stahl famously asked her on 60 Minutes in 2006 if motherhood was the best experience of her life, the actress fired back stiffly, "No, and I resent the question, because I think it puts women in an untenable position." Huffman credits Stahl for keeping the exchange in the piece, and she elaborates today on what she meant. "There's only one right answer to that question," she explains, "and if you don't answer it, then you're not a good mother. There's this thin band of acceptable reaction and behavior." She polishes off the last of her lunch, arugula salad and pizza. "People ask me, 'How do you balance being a working mom?' And I go, 'I really don't balance it. It's a constant struggle, and I haven't figured out how to do it with grace and no guilt.'"]]>