Ubiquitous Santa Post

As I prepared for work at 7AM, I switched on the radio and tuned to Z100.  Here’s my thought process on that.  Since I’ll be at work for about 10 hours (commute included), I should really allow myself a brain vacation before heading out.  Z100’s morning show does just that – it’s my conversations with friends mirrored on the radio for millions to tune into.

They were discussing Santa Claus.  I don’t quite remember when I stopped believing in Santa Claus, but I know I wasn’t afraid of him.  I wasn’t really afraid of many things as a young boy.  One of the DJ’s daughter is apparently terrified of him – so as a good skit, they send her father into their house at about 7:30 AM to terrify her for the benefit of millions of callous New Yorkers.  That poor little girl wailed as some of the other hosts laughed and others protested.

It really made me think – why is this character endearing?  Let’s dissect the situation.   I mean – besides that fact that he lives with elves, climbs down trees, and stalks all the children of the world…. there’s more to him that’s really creepy.

Santa Claus:

• Always wears red pajamas everywhere… Also, who uses suspenders anymore? Get with it Santa.
• Has a wife who is frequently depicted as a hussy
• Gets paid in cookies and other sweets and drinks milk (at that age you really should lay off the milk)
• Has literally pushed all kinds of products (including cigarettes and carbonated poison that can clean a penny in a matter of hours with no scrubbing)
• Makes children sit on his lap
• knows everyone’s name, but at the mall, they haven’t come up with a creative way of getting that name out. (What do you want for Christmas Little Boy whose name I know but do not wish to say because in reality I am not real?)
• Uses the word naughty when referring to children… (I know this one isn’t terrible, but c’mon – that word will most likely be completely negative (like the word smut) in about 50 years.)
• Begs for money and rings a little bell 
• Literally screams “ho, ho, ho” (Is he laughing?! WTF is that?  What causes him to “ho, ho, ho” all the time – esp before he says Merry Christmas)
• Didn’t accept Rudolph with his red nose before he found a purpose for him (Elitist bastard)
• Banishes misfit toys for being unsuitable (What lesson does that teach the kids?)
• Has a red nose frequently – even indoors (I’m sure that coke he’s doing isn’t extra fine – that’s all)

I’m sure when Coca-Cola made him into a US Sensation, they had no intention of making him this creepy.  Let’s hope the Coca Cola Polar Bears remain cute and endearing for years to come. 

JJRC

Woe to the future…

Lunch is pretty much my favorite part of the work day.  Not only do we get delicious food (or at the very least edible food), but we also get to speak to each other.  We get to know each other.  We were having a lunch discussion regarding our childhood experiences.  We discussed glo-worms, cartoons we would watch, games we would play, and then Natasha mentioned something rather odd.

N:  Has anyone seen the new My Little Pony type horse dolls? 

JJRC: Why no Natasha, we don’t quite know what you’re talking about.  What does it look like?

N: Prepare yourselves for this.  So, it’s sort of a horse.  It has a long flowing mane (so far pretty normal), but it’s wearing this crazy make-up (umm…), and it’s wearing some kind of high heel shoes (ah…?).  Here’s the worst part, this creature that looks like a horse has cleavage (WHAT!?)

When I was little kid and my sister was crazy for My Little Ponies, these things didn’t come equipped with breasts.  The only things feminine about them was their flowing hair and the color of their hide.  The stars and sparkles probably didn’t hurt.  I guess I should have been so shocked this centaur type woman/horse creature exists. The Bratz Babies are pretty much the most disturbing things I’ve ever seen.  As a society, we’re slowly training an army of young girls to become over-sexed sluts.

See video for an example of the Bratz Babies:

Yikes… I guess 21 is the new 50 – being a over sexualized baby is in.  Considering they can’t bathe themselves – they certainly know the most provocative way to dry themselves.  As the the theme song progresses, I became more and more disturbed.  After they danced around naked – they needed a computer to tell them what outfit was the sexiest… Once the computer is done teaching these little babies loose morals, the parents come out of nowhere.  Who needs parents when you’re hot! They are put into the car with their purses.  Here they call their friends because 1- these little freaks are privileged 2 – they have a lot to talk about.  I’m sure they discuss fantasticaly interesting things – like how often they crap themselves and what lip-gloss is the most “poppin’.”

They only reason this is on the air is because parents who don’t care let their kids watch this.  My parents would probably not have it.  They took issue with He-Man’s little pink vest and manly bob haircut, but that only had homoerotic undertones.  There is nothing subtle about the Bratz Babies.  I weep for the future.  

JJRC

Steve and Barry’s University Sportswear

I wrote my first post about Steve and Barry’s last week.  It was a 2343 word long grievance summary.  It discussed all the things I thought were wrong with the company (its lack employee recognition, its long hours, and its terrible location), but that’s not how I wanted to write about the company.  I set it live for a grand total of 24 hours (on and off) and the readership spiked.  Some of the readers were from the S&B (if it’s corporate or store, I do not know).  So, I guess this is take two.

This was the name of the company when I joined in the fall of 2006.  It was a long name with a huge blue and yellow logo.  The first day was nightmarish.  The first month was more of the same.  I got wrecked at the Holiday Party and made a fool of myself.  I managed to get myself sent to Columbus, OH where I learned the hard work of manually loading trucks.  I began work with our India office and was sent to train them.  I wrote manuals and did communications work.  I had more responsibility than any 22 year old should have.  By my 23^rd birthday, I came to the realization that I might not advance anymore and that the field I was in was not for me.  By the time I left, the logo was sleek and stylish – they no longer specialized in t-shirts and had expanded into the world of true fashion.

For the experiences, I am actually grateful.  My resume looks much nicer now than it did before I started.  I wrote this note to my co-workers before I left (I edited it slightly – there were some embarrassing typos).

Hey guys,

I just wanted to let everyone know that I am leaving Steve and Barry’s on Friday, August 17, 2007.  I’m starting work with a nonprofit organization. Sadly, this new place is business casual so no shorts or flip flops.  Meaning, I’m going to have to go on a shopping spree before I’m no longer a S&B employee.   But all joking aside, this has been the most unique work environments I have ever joined.  The energy and talent here are tremendous, and with the right guidance, this company can change the world of retail…

…it has been a great pleasure working with all of you.  I should make it to a couple of more happy hours – can’t let them forget my favorite beer – so it won‘t be good bye. It will be “See you at Lennon’s.”

JJRC

I like the foreshadowing present.  I wrote that line about proper management to be subtle in my display of discontent with our corporate hierarchy.  It seems like it has validated itself.  The decline of Steve and Barry’s has been something I believed would happen from the when I saw the rapid store expansions, the continuous miscommunications, and the adversarial nature of the New York Office’s (NYO) relationship with stores and the India Office.  There was no cohesion across the entire company. 

As a new hire and recent graduate, I didn’t know what to expect from working.  The first lesson was to be tough.  I was told be harsher with our department’s partners, with the stores and with our India counterparts.  We were corporate and we knew better.  This was the message pounded into my brain, and by the end, I began to agree with that thought.  On my last day, I yelled at a Regional Manager for disrespecting one of our new co-workers.  Though I believe that it was justly deserved, that man could have easily been twice my age.  He was the Regional Manager in California, and he got punked by a 23 year old “professional.”

I read the blogs, and I hear things about the idiots at the NYO.  Those “Ivy League babies” at the NYO.  I read about the “rich who have mommy and daddy pay for their schooling.”  It is an unfair portrait painted of the corporate staff.  Yes, the recruiting department (under the guidance of Steve Shore) recruited aggressively from Ivy League schools.  Shore himself attended Tulane which made me think his obsession with the Ivy League was odd.   Many people at the company were not elitist – we were trying to do our jobs right.  We had superiors who had superiors who had superiors who answered to Steve, Barry, Gary and a slew of older men and women.  I believe most of us followed orders and achieved successes in our posts as it was designed.  We didn’t break out of our molds.  We fit into them nicely – because we had to succeed in this “corporate” world.

It has gotten the company nowhere.  A few men and women set out to guide a company to success, and they have failed.  The corporate staff made of alums from the best universities has failed.  Store managers and directors and other members of the field staff have failed – at no fault of their own.  They were misdirected – they were mislead – they were deceived. 

The fault does not fall on the NYO or the stores.  It does not fall on the lack of money and the economy. It falls on the lack of experience and the relentless demand to conform to the “new” model.  It was a system of patching up a sinking boat. Why reinvent the wheel?  Why devise a completely new system when retail stores that have been successful in the past and have been profitable.  Even smaller chains like Pamida in the mid-west have been successful.  There are the Conway stores in Herald Square that have been success for as long as I can remember.  The clothing is even comparable to S&B in price – and at times cheaper.  They established a loyal base and have maintained their standing as a retailer that will deliver to their customers at their 3 or 4 locations around Manhattan.  I don’t know if Steve and Barry’s ever had that to a great extent.

The lack of experience is the downfall of this company, and the lack of communication is the creation of the backlashes I see on the blogs.  The discontent at the store level is not surprising.  With the NYO and India forcing them to conform – I would also be bitter and angry – especially if I heard nothing from corporate staff regarding the bankruptcy proceeding for more than two weeks.  It’s not the staff’s fault – because they know as little as the stores.  It’s the lack of communication between the directors and everyone else.

Steve and Barry’s was not profitable in 2007 when the economy was better – now in 2008 they are forced to downsize more than they did in December of 2007 – two weeks before Christmas.  There was no holiday party this past year – nor did staff receive a 5 lb. bar of chocolate from Hershey’s.

I wish all my former co-workers still at S&B the best.  I met some of the best people I know at the NYO, in India, and on the field level – I had good relationships with some of the stores – poorer relationships with others. I wish all the store managers the best – and I am sorry if you read this, and it was me that caused you grief on any occasion.  I didn’t know what I was doing – I lacked experienced, and I apparently I lacked the idea of “the human other.”

JJRC

God?

God has been the inspiration of many things.  (S)He has caused wars, inspired books and faith, has been at the center of so many of the world’s powerful religions and have created a moral code of which we believe in today.  Of course, God did not directly cause war – that would be a silly statement to work.  Through the faithful, God has been the cause of War.  When Pope Urban II declared war to reclaim the Holy Lands (Jerusalem), God was the cause.  God’s people were experiencing persecution in the area – and as a faithful and dutiful Pope, Urban II decided he needed to create the greatest army the world had ever seen to take over the area.

Of course, the Muslims in the area were under the belief that God wanted them to reclaim their Holy Lands – God had taken Mohammad in Jerusalem – and of course the Holy Cities of Mecca and Medina.  These do not belong in the possession of the disrespectful Christians. Somehow a war with God on both sides doesn’t make sense – but hey – who am I to say anything?  These events happened almost 1000 years ago – I wasn’t even a thought in my great great great great great great great great great great great great grandfather’s brain (I typed out all those “great”s – is it enough to get me back to 1080 BCE? Let’s say it is).

Today, there we are much more liberal in our speech of God – some more liberal than others.  I almost got lynched in Indiana when I suggested that God be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.  I guess freedom of speech is trumped by God in the Pledge (the Pledge was created in the Cold War Era – to differentiate ourselves from the godless communist forces in the world – seriously – also any act of espionage by anyone who has said the pledge is treasonous – go fig!).  But today, the remnants of God remain in our mainstream society.  Ideas such as the “Sanctity” of things is common place.  Here are some things I would change if this was my America – due to my understanding of the Bill of Rights and my ability to separate it from Religion and God.  

On Abortion:

Politically, I am pro-choice.  Personally, I am pro-life.  No one should be able to say what a person can do with their body, but I believe a fetus is a person at conception and should not be killed.  My answer to this is education on sex.  Yes, we should break the taboo and talk about it with teenagers –  they’re humping anyway! Now, someone might say this is only going to encourage kids to have sex if we talk about it… it might, but at the very least they are having sex safely and are very aware of the consequences.  Currently, there isn’t a real program to teach about sex.  Here’s how I learned about sex – in 7th grade we watched one of those birthing videos… that was the only time we had heard about sex.  

Puberty was an even larger mystery.  What was happening to me?! I had no idea – and no one was talking about it.  None of my friends said a word – though they were going through the same thing (Changing voice, odd body hair, perspiration that caused odors).  I didn’t know anything – man, God bless the teenage section at the library.  If it weren’t for that section – I would still probably think I was mutating into an ape.  In this instance – knowledge is power.

On Gay Marriage:

I do not believe homosexuality should be sanctioned by any church that currently opposes it. On the same note, the state does not answer to a god – it answers to its people.  So, since it is 2008, we should consider letting people happily live their lives.  If a man wants to marry another man, that’s their business.  As long as no man on man love happens blatantly on the street (I hate PDA in general) – let it happen.  The state under no obligation has to oblige to the sanctity of anything.  Homosexuality is obviously a natural occurrence – even the Greeks were all about same-sex couples.  

On Sodomy:

Sodomy was illegal?! I wasn’t aware of that until the Supreme Court had lifted the ban.  If that’s the case, i know a couple of people who could have been fine/jailed (whatever the sentence is) for sodomy – men and women alike.  From the definition I saw, sodomy was termed as inserting a penis into any human body part that was not a vagina (mouth, ear, nose, anus, belly button), If it’s not a vagina – it’s sodomy!  Is a hand in there? I guess that’s up for discussion.  Hey, when a blow-job is illegal… one’s gotta think – what’s the world coming to?

I mean there are things I understand as being illegal – like bestiality…. that’s just disgusting…. How about sex with the dead – that is no way to honor anyone’s memory…  Worse – having sex with a close family member.  All these things I understand as being unnatural and being outlawed – but when people decide to shove something in something else (As long as it’s not potentially life threatening), it should be ok within reason.  For example – oral sex? Nothing wrong with that.  Oral sex with a cow…. if you don’t know what’s wrong with that – then you really should be jailed.

On Evolution:

Unless we plan on teaching every religion’s creation story – creationism has no place in schools – would you really want your kids learning this: http://www.venganza.org/ ?

Being touched by that noodly appendage can’t be good…. I believe in Evolution – and creationism is a matter of faith – not fact. Even the Catholic Church came out with Intelligent Design which basically accepts Evolution- get with it, everybody!

*****

Now, I don’t plan on engaging in any of the acts mentioned above, but some people would.  I know a person affected by each of those laws or lack there of.  Good people – most of which I’d call my friends and some people I work with and respect.  This is the country of opportunity and freedom.  It is a country of any religion and any person should be free.  These issues may not be “natural” and morally acceptable, but on the basis of an individual – it’s a matter of preference.  Religion says it’s unnatural – but if it happens in our society on a consistent basis – then the state has an obligation to it’s people (even the gay ones!) not the loud bible thumpers pushing a God agenda…

JJRC

Sorry for the length… The Fountainhead Revisited

Hello, a couple of months ago (on January 4th), I wrote a post on how much I disliked the fountainhead… someone responded that I was wrong on a couple of points and that I should reconsider… to Walter from Chicago, IL.  Please enjoy.

I appreciate when people respond to anything I write.  I have never met with anyone who said they loved this book as much as you.  There was one girl who wouldn’t shut up about it during my freshman year, but she proved to an idiot who only enjoyed it for the controversy.  You, on the other hand, provide some depth in your response.  I will offer you a rebuttal now.

1 – I did not say that Roark and Keating were equally as talented in the field of Architecture.  That is incorrect, as you know.   Sadly, Roark is Keating’s only friend (in Keating’s mind).  Keating can open up to him and will tell him anything – things he would never tell his mother.  At the beginning of the book, immediately following graduation, Keating sits on the stoop of his house with Roark and tells him of how he wished to be a painter as a child.  This is a mirror of Roark – who decided as a child he wanted to become an architect.  Roark has no family and has been on his own for years.  Keating’s mother instructed him to be an architect because there is no money in painting.

If you remember towards the very end of the book when Keating and Roark discuss the housing projects, Keating arrives with some pieces of canvas where he has painted something.  Rand never tells us what was on the canvas, but Roark looks at him and says, “It is too late.”  He means that Keating cannot recreate himself into the painter he wished to be as a child.  He has chosen his path, and he must walk the line to the very end.  He then feels pity for Keating and is disgusted by the feeling.

I do not know much about Rand’s philosophy, but it appears that Keating was taking a step in the right direction.  He had decided he did not want to be a free loader, and he wanted to become the man he was to be, but Roark tells him no.  Who is Roark to tell anyone they are to stop?  It is against everything Roark believes.  I believe if Roark had evolved into something other than an architect, he would not be held back by anyone’s words – he encouraged the sculptor (whose name escapes me) to return to sculpting because it was his calling – perhaps I read too much into the painter thing, but this is how I interpreted it.

2 – Thank you for agreeing with the Toohey thing.

3 – Dominique Francon is an interesting character. The only reason I call her a whore is because she will willingly give herself to men who do not deserve her as punishment.  She will play the role of the perfect wife to effectively punish herself.  To give herself to Roark would be death because she would stop pretending and start being the perfect wife – submissive and adoring – no longer the individual she must be to keep Roark. Meanwhile, she cannot be alone. 

She divorces Keating, only to marry Wyndham.  Wyndham is the worst kind of second hander in accordance to Roark.  He is the highest offender due to his thirst for power over other men.  I will never understand why Francon would sleep with these men, and somehow internal reflection isn’t even something that she can handle well.  She needs external forces to help her to achieve her worthy state for Roark.  It seems contradictory to the essence of Roark and the perfection of man, but Rand has an interesting take on sex and gender relationships.  The woman and the man in all her books end up together, and the woman is a submissive creature in both.  The female is something that requires saving and guidance.  The Females are flawed and learns slower than the men in her books.

4 – I can’t really speak to the fourth piece.  This is my belief on Roark.  He is an elitist and an egoist in the worst sense.  Be the change you wish to be in the world – I hate that quote, but it is applicable.  Here would be a great time to implement strategies that could change the world. Roark can be considered another Christ figure.  The perfect figured of Christ perhaps – Roark is Rand’s answer to all the Toohey’s – and a reflection of what men can become (Keating being the opposite – One of Toohey’s protégés). Only Roark does not lead men – he waits for them to come to their own – without guidance.  He judges men and can be fooled (for example, he was fooled by Toohey and the old rich guy at the Temple).  It is selfish and very unnecessary – and it all runs by Roark’s standards and no one else’s.  Somehow he is the only correct person in the book – and those that differ in opinion are wrong and pervert the world…

I don’t believe I need to take yet another look at this book.  I’ve read it twice.  The first time in high school for cash, the second as a young man starting off in the world.  Neither time was I touched by it.   Both times I saw flaws with its ideas. I outlined some of those flaws here.  As you can see, I’m capable of more detailed analysis.  What was written for the blog was really a quick and dirty version.  I would have left it at that if not provoked.  Perhaps, you should take a second look at the book.  If you come to the same conclusions, than you and I fundamentally disagree and must go our separate way.  I am a believer of altruism – but I am no doormat.  I think there is a balance that can be struck, and Rand only speaks of extremes that do not really exist in real life.

Toohey’s niece is Rand’s definition of an altruist, but in what light was she painted?  She is ruined by her altruism – she stopped being a person completely.  She was cold and sterile – she frowned upon anyone who lived without her help and worked hard at making his or her lives hell.  This book is not something I can stand behind.  It is not something I can say I love, because I believe in the value of mankind, but I also understand and see the value of human interactions and connections. To remove that social networks makes us no better than apes – or Howard Roark.

JJRC