Clothes Make People Change Their Form of Address

Share

Last night was my first lecture of the semester, which meant I donned my suit. Since I work in a chemistry lab, it means I have to change clothes, and I encounter people who know that's not what I wore to work originally. This particular time, it generated some unexpected responses and reinforced that the way you dress changes the way people address you. As visual creatures, we depend, sometimes too much and too quickly, on what information our eyes convey. Even if it is true, it's often not the whole truth or is misinterpreted as something it isn't based on our prior experience and personal bias. One of the most annoying things about working in academia is to watch young women fall over themselves fawning over men who look good on the outside but are rotten or empty at their core. I see lots of pretty women on campus; most of them do not see me, and some that do look on me with disdain because I look like, well, I probably look homeless if you don't know I'm a chemist. It was an interesting day.

Another professor assumed I was headed to religious services that evening. Since she is a member of my Faith, she recognized that we usually gussy up for special services and assumed that I only dress to the nines when I'm headed to God's house. I was completely caught off guard, because I will also wear my suit to concerts, lecture, and job interviews, and my previous dean used to assume I was headed to another interview instead. Although my parents sometimes bewail the way I dress and groom myself, in truth I am among the better dressed in the department. Since I spend five days per week in a chemistry lab and one day a week hiking on the mountain, I don't often dress up for work. You run the risk of damage to your clothes in these activities, and i told my class later that night not to wear anything to lab they would hate to ruin. We are so accustomed to lackadaisical dress in academia that a man in a suit is rare and remarkable. The pointy-headed intellectuals all too often dress like French Impressionists rather than Pasteur and Plank, and so they don't really stick out much from the student body except for their age.

On the way home after class, I stopped to pick up a few groceries, and a man in the store told me that he'd vote for me. Now, this particular Smiths is the one where I shop when I think I'm fat, ugly, poor, or undesireable, but I have seen well dressed people there before. Usually I think it's couples on dates, and given that we're only 10 weeks from the election of 2016, I guess it makes sense that he assumed I must be a candidate. I don't really live in a white collar part of town; people who live here work in those fields, but the businesses in the area are not exactly upper crust. The way I dress and comport myself inspires confidence and trust. If you dress smart, you must be smart, and we had a substantive albeit brief exchange, I thanked him for his support and continued to select my victuals.

On my way to class, some young people in a large, expensive truck pulled up beside me and told me that they'd pray for me. I sometimes forget how ugly my Saturn is, and I guess they assumed I was going to a job interview and meant they would pray and hope that I'd get the job! I almost always dress the best I can for job interviews, so it wasn't anything different for me, but imagine the contrasting image of a well-dressed, well-groomed, well-comported man emerging from a 1995 Saturn with peeling clear coat and scratches on the fenders. I must make quite a sight! Then again, I spend enough time around young people to know that they assume that if you own and wear expensive things that you must be desirable, if for no other reason besides you must be rich, right? The clothes make the man, right? I mean, there was this attractive woman near my age with a much older, fatter man, and I can only assume she was with him because he drove an expensive truck. We are so accustomed to people owning expensive things in determining their worth that we assume those without them are poor. I appreciate the sentiment of these people, and I welcome their prayers, but I wasn't really in need of them for the reason they assumed.

I don't usually give a very good first impression. I dress, do, and speak what is practical. I mean, people who actually get to know me realize I'm pretty damn awesome, and my friends are not my friends for what I wear or own. However, I dress in my suit because it commands respect and shows respect. I would never go to church in swimwear or attend a funeral in jogging attire or play racquetball in a labcoat, and I don't own clothing that is offensive or provocative unless you are offended by the color, material, or country of origin. I don't care about those things when I buy it as much as I care about fit and price, and obviously I took good enough care of this suit that I bragged to my class that I've owned and worn it for 17 years. In our modern throw away society, that also commands respect and changes the form of address. I think some of my students found it admirable; the plastic among them probably found it cheap and tawdry, but that just means i learned more about them than they intended to reveal. If you change how you treat people because of how they look, what they wear, or where they live, that tells me things about you. It tells me you haven't really learned to look upon the heart.

Desert Gardening 101: Introduction

Share

Earlier this summer, I promised to produce, publish, and post videos on backyard desert gardening for the benefit of students in my classes, neighbors, and anyone who happens across this blog. Today, please enjoy the first of these videos, which I finally managed one day after hiking Mt. Charleston when I felt well enough to actually go out back and film something.

Trees CAUSE Smog

Share

On the way back Monday from my family reunion, I listened to All Things Considered on NPR. I realized something that I already knew but that registered only when this program and its contributors pointed it out to me. During graduate school I researched volatile components released from fruit crops because those play a role in scent and taste. Despite that, during all these years teaching, it never dawned on me while burning snack foods in lab that the components of plants are flammable because they are organic, and that trees actually facilitate smog.

Everything pollutes. Everything creates carbon dioxide. It is a common misconception that plants make energy from the sun. They make SUGAR, and then they burn sugar, just like we do, for energy, releasing carbon dioxide. Of course we don't usually notice this because they consume much more carbon dioxide than they release, but I remember a chlorophyll flourescence assay we did which correlates the carbon fixing ability of a plant to its health. When plants are weak, they fix less because they have to burn more in order to survive or take in less in order to keep from dehydrating, but they always take in more than they release, so nobody notices that. Consequently, if carbon dioxide is a pollutant, then EVERY LIVING THING on earth is killing the planet. Plants and fungi and bacteria are not more virtuous; they are just not creating things or erecting edifices that produce more organic waste than the organisms themselves can manage. We pollute more than anything else because entropy must always increase or in other words the price of progress is pollution. Don't believe me, think about the industrial revolution...

Plants make more organic compounds than humans ever could. During my studies, I focused exclusively on polyphenolics and diterpenoids because those materials are volatile, which means they evaporate into gas quickly, making them the compounds we are most likely to sense when smelling or tasting things. However, the number of volatiles we characterized from Vitis vinifera amounted to fewer than fifty, leaving at least 300 other compounds collected which were present in at least 1ppm concentration. As I listened to the treatise on the reason why the Great Smokey Mountains are smokey, it dawned on me that plants actually accentuate the smog accumulations. Volatiles are released by plants in response to stimuli from their environment, much like when you release pheromones when you find someone attractive or sweat when it's hot, or toot when you eat food that disagrees with your digestive track. Plants use these chemicals to communicate with and influence their environment. They drive away predators, restrict water loss, attract pollinators, and notify other plants of danger. Consequently, plants release hydrocarbons all the time, they're just not politically controversial, so nobody notices because people think "organic" means "makes you healthy".

Organic chemicals are essential to living things everywhere. Most of the famous ones like gasoline, acetone, and turpentine make the water unsafe to drink. Some of the lesser obvious which should be famous like lipids, proteins, and carbohydrates are essential to life, interact with water, and react with it to form other compounds in your body. When you walk out into the forest to collect a Christmas tree and smell the pine forests, you are actually picking up volatile organic chemicals. They are not evil, and they do not have an agenda. Like I tell students- fat is not evil. In fact, when you look at someone and find them attractive, what you essentially mean is that you find the way their fat is arranged to be preferable to that of other people because what you see is fat. The outside of every cell is phospholipids, lipids, are fat, and what you see when you look at someone is the outside or a whole lot of fat. Carbohydrates are not evil. DNA, tree bark, cotton socks, carrots, peaches, ad infinitum are all impossible to make without sugar. The trouble is that plants release volatile chemicals which become gases that then interact with the environment. When there is smog, they attract other "pollutants" because chemistry teaches us that similar things collect together, which means that organic chemicals that are volatile will accumulate, leading to smog and toxic clouds. When there is fog or acid raid or other things, it's because the water has attracted so much to polar organic compounds that it forms droplets and makes rain or fog or dew.

Far too many wizards of smart think that plants don't pollute and that humans are the only problems. The same people know that pine trees constitute a huge problem in wildfires because they explode when burnt. The organic compounds burst out when the tree hits a certain temperature, and because they are made of carbon they are FLAMMABLE. THis is how fires jump fire lines and spread, like the Blue Ridge fire burning out near Baker, CA. Trees and plants are not virtuous any more than humans are villainous. Nothing operates in a vacuum, and some of the things we assume are one way actually constitute an amalgamation of far more influences than we realize. When I mentioned this to my friend from Baltimore, he told me that made sense because you can smell the forests, and he knows enough about chemistry to know that those things are probably polyphenolics and diterpenoids- things you smell and taste. The things I learned in graduate school primarily focused on our senses, but they do other things besides bind your tongue and nose. They bind water, they bind other organic compounds and create clouds that some people consider pollution, and they bind our firemen who are trying to render compounds inflammable that quite frankly always will be.

Please enjoy this picture of a burning Taki, whatever those are...

Hillary Clinton: Long on Talk

Share

Political advertisements proclaim that Hillary Clinton has an answer for everything. Most of them are retreads, and the rest are vapid. Her economic plan sounds a lot like the one her husband touted in 1992. She dismisses challenges, laughs off criticism, and comes across in every way as an idealogue except to the people who believe her to be the political savior of the hour. Besides lying about Benghazi, private emails, and her husband's decadence in the Oval Office, she also lies about her generosity. Like I pointed out to my Sunday School class this past week, she is one of those deceived by Screwtape whose benevolence towards those she has never met is largely imaginary while her hatred for those she knows is wholly real. She doesn't really care about you, but she has persuaded a large portion of the electorate that she does.

Confusingly, Hillary Clinton talks about jobs as if Obama didn't create as many as she claims. She claims to have a plan to create tons of jobs, especially ones that will pay well, which she proposes to achieve via taxes, regulations and punishment. Assuming that she has a plan, how does any of that incentivize people to hire? Businesses hire people because they need more people because they're doing more business. If that's true, why hasn't she implemented this master plan? She's been in public office my entire life. If that's true, why didn't she share it with Barack Obama? He's been in office as POTUS for almost eight years, and if she has a great plan, why haven't we already implemented it? If she loses the election, will she refuse to share those "brilliant ideas" with Trump? Is she holding us for ransom to elect her or she won't help us? I don't think she knows how to create a job. She has never proved she can create a job outside of government, and she barely held any jobs outside of government, so I think this is all hat and no cattle.

She claims to care about the poor. However, she never bothers to define what poor actually means. They are quick to define rich- which means $250,000 for a family of four, which is hardly a "millionaire" especially compared to her. She "only" earned $10 million last year. She's super rich, but all too often those who demand we do more charity are the least giving among us. What has she done to help the poor? When did she last give anything away or feed the homeless or take in a refugee? No, she insists that OTHER PEOPLE do that while she takes the credit. How diabolical of her! Instead of helping others, the last eight years, she collected money and put it in her pocket. The Boston Globe called on Wednesday that "if she wins she should dissolve her foundation"; she should dissolve it now because it's a criminal enterprise established so that she can get credit for giving money to her favorite charity- herself. The Clinton Foundation doesn't help the poor; it helps her friends. Besides, she doesn't know what poor means; she complained about leaving the White House and being bankrupt; well, she still considers herself poor after she and Bill received $250 MILLION in speaking and book fees since leaving office. Poor Hillary.

Like most liberals, Hillary Clinton lives by the adage do as I say and not as I do and refuses to put her own money where her mouth is. Despite all this money, she has barely given anything to charity (because the Clinton Foundation isn't really a charity no matter what its tax status). She says that we need to build bridges not walls. Her compound has a wall; why not a moat? At least then you could build a bridge. Just make sure to make it a drawbridge or place a portcullis so you can keep out the "little people". When I posted something about that Monday to the internet, within 30 minutes, I received hateful, disdainful, demeaning replies and communiques from 50 or more of her lower lackeys. I didn't direct my comments to these people; in fact, I've never heard of any of them before. However, I received hate mail from people who flew out to defend her. I'm sorry, but if she's so feeble that she has to depend on these people to defend her, how can she govern this great nation? I'm sorry, but if they think that pointing out the mote in another person fixes the beam that is in their own they are mistaken. Who has she hired? Who has she helped? Oh, she makes claims, but she never names names and gives specifics. Like most liberals, she just throws it out there, and if it goes unopposed it must be true. That's what pathological liars do. They take credit and give blame instead of taking blame and giving credit, but I digress.

As selfish as the day is long, Hillary Clinton has been working very hard to help Hillary Clinton. Like most politicians, she is her own favorite constituent, beneficent and beneficiary. She talks about "shared sacrifice" and then she has the gall to say, after earning $250 million, that she's going after "rich" people. Nobody seems interested in the media in asking her to prove anything she says. Now, they won't look at evidence that counters them, which is a sure sign of a demagogue, and she's never required to provide any evidence to support what she claims. People just take her word. If she had answers, why wait until you are 70? If you care about the poor, what have you done to help the people around you? If it's true, there should be evidence to back it up, but like most blowhards, she's long on talk and short on action. Hillary Clinton claims she has all the answers, and she's had 70 years to prove it. Don't believe the hype. If it were true, why wait? She could have enjoyed the fruits all these years. Liberalism is lies.

Welfare, Workfare, and Workers

Share

As the campaign 2016 moves into full swing, we hear the same claptrap about workers, jobs, and economic prosperity that we always do but that seems elusive no matter whom we elect. About a week ago, I posted something critical of an utterance from Hillary CLinton and received in about an hour about 40 personal attacks from people I didn't know existed and at whom the comments were not directed. That kind of vehement outburst tells you that you've hit your mark, when people you do not know loathe you enough to roast you in print and libel your character based on 140 characters of something you wrote. These are people who do not like the rules and who think that the pirate's code ought to apply because if things were truly equal, they'd reap what they sowed and be absolutely miserable. While they judge you for your weaknesses, they lionize other people who hate you in this parliament jester's foist that distracts you from truth and tugs at your heartstrings. It demands that you be charitable to strangers and enemies while those who require that of you treat you like dirt. It's duplicitous; it's diabolical; it's Democrat dogma.

Far too many young people live for the moment without planning for the future, requiring the world to take care of them when they did nothing to take care of themselves. We all know the story of the grasshopper and the ant, where the grasshopper walks around caring only about right now and talking about how the world owes him a living while the ant stocks away food for the inevitable winter. When the grasshopper runs out and comes to death's door, the ant helps him. The trouble is that the grasshoppers today expect to be rescued and then complain when we don't. On the way home from the grocery Friday night, I passed a trio of black teenagers. As I passed, one of them asked me for a dollar, and when I said nothing shouted, "Hey, I asked you for a dollar". He seems to feel he has a right to what I earn. I have money, he wants money, and so I ought to give him my money. Well, I doubt very much that if the roles were reversed I would be treated with more than scorn and disdain. The welfare state discourages industry and teaches people that they have a right to things simply because they exist and that I by extension have a right to give away what I get because others exist. It is a new form of slavery that indemnifies the industrious to slake the sloth of the indigent and miscreant and then vilifies me if I refuse to give what his lack of industry has not earned.

As an effort to counter this, previous presidents instituted workfare which compensated people for effort at least. Without tying the effort to the rewards, it at least demanded that people do something in order to receive welfare benefits besides making it safely out of the womb or stumbling drunkenly over the border. It's the same program employed at Welfare Square in Salt Lake City, where a homeless man from Reno once told me he was asked to relace shoes before they gave him dinner. Under a workfare arrangement, they don't worry about whether the work pays for the benefits because the point is to require something of them rather than showing up in order to receive benefits. It teaches people to work; it teaches them that "there's no such thing as a free lunch" no matter what the politicians prattle, and asks them to trade something of themselves for something else that they value. That's how life actually ought to work.

However, most of the lion's share of life falls squarely on those who take care of business. As everyone suspects, there are a lot of people in my college who do as little work as humanly possible. Most are the last to arrive and the first to leave, and there do not seem to be any repercussions. Into this dystopia comes our hero- Paul. I first met Paul at the campus gym last summer when he picked up the ID card I dropped and handed it to me. Since his name is easy for me to remember and his face easy to recognize, and since we work in adjacent buildings on campus, I see him and speak with him frequently during the week. Most of our encounters are brief, but they are unique in that he always gives me a high five when we pass in the hallway. Early on, I respected him because when the rest of IT went home early or were AWOL, I could find Paul, and even if he couldn't help me, he was at least there to pass it on personally to his superiors when they arrived the next day. You see, Paul is actually a student worker, and consequently he lacks permission and knowledge to do certain things, but he's an asset because when I need help he's at least willing to try. Paul impressed me with his work ethic. Not only does Paul work in the computer lab, but he also started a few weeks ago on the late night custodial shift. Contrary to most young people, this young man takes on a ton of work. Unlike his contemporaries who want to sit on their duff, smoke pot and still get an A from the professor, Paul is out there working off his keester trying to be self sufficient. He instills me with hope in the rising generation that they don't all expect everything to be handed to them or come easy. Paul is working hard for his money not demanding that other people who work hard give him stuff because he is there.

Ronald Reagan excoriated those who think that the fat man got that way by taking from the thin man. It's not that simple. People receive paychecks who do very little work, and some of the hardest workers on the planet barely eke out an existence. However, when you demand that other people plow and sow and reap so that you can glut yourself from the fruit of their labors, that's essentially slavery. You do not have a right to things you did not earn, even if someone gives it to you. That's charity. You do not have a right to demand charity from me when you decry and disdain the moral code and religious dogma to which I decide to adhere. If your only commandment is that it's only a crime if you get caught, then there are no rules, and nothing protects you from having YOUR fruits taken unless you're in charge. That's not civilized behavior; it's the law of the jungle- bring back food or be food yourself. It's also the philosophy of hell, to take a man's soul and give him NOTHING in return, to devour others to sustain yourself, and it's positively diabolical, and yet people have been convinced that it's noble, virtuous, and praiseworthy to require those of us who work hard to sacrifice for those who would riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth if the tables turned. It's nuts.

Stages of Grief: Acceptance

Share

Over the past several years, many painful experiences happened to me. Consequently, I tried to wrestle with the stages of grief with respect to many different agitations concurrently. As soon as I made some iota of progress, a new privation built upon the next, and now, I think I'm finally abreast of my grief enough to be in the final stage of acceptance. I feel very funny. Nothing has really changed, and the conclusions I reached resemble those of earlier stages. Contrary to those other posts, I feel differently now, and I know that I have accepted it as well as I can. Maybe people find acceptance difficult to achieve because you must finally give up the illusion of control and admit that it's out of your hands. Maybe people struggle because they don't like how it is and desire to feel like their efforts ought to bear the fruit concomitant with those efforts. Maybe we're just so selfish that we only really care about the outcome that matters to us. Maybe we keep ourselves from progress because we refuse to man up and own things as they really are. I know it's painful, but so much healing seems to start with a cut, and in acceptance we find the power to cut ourselves loose from the past.

I'm not saying I am happy with how it turned out, simply admitting that there was nothing I could do to change it that I was willing to do. Other people may pay whatever price, but I'm not willing to mess with agency or manipulate people in the name of "love". I had an amazing WOW woman.  I still wish it would work out. I know that's not up to me. I'm open to the possibility, and if she's supposed to be important in my life she'll return. For now, I'm letting it go and letting her go because I really do love her. I have learned to love her with an eye single to God's glory- to hope the best for her regardless of whether I benefit from it. This Sunday, I looked back through my old journals for things to share with my Sunday School class and found that I first penned thoughts I shared here in that volume in 2011. I got to read where for the first time I wrote, "There is no virtue in using the Adversary's methods to achieve the Father's plan", and that "virtuous ends only come from virtuous means". Apparently, I've had these beliefs for a long time, and if nothing else, these experiences taught me that I truly believe that.

I've accepted it even though it's not what I like because that's the way it is. One hallmark of adulthood consists in recognizing things as they really are and recognizing ourselves in reference to those things. Yes, it takes two to destroy something, but it also takes two to nurture it, and so, as I know well from my failed marriage, as soon as someone else quits caring for a relationship there is only so much you can do. It doesn't mean you failed; it doesn't mean you quit; it doesn't mean that you don't care. You care enough about yourself to stop throwing good money after bad, cut your losses, and focus your efforts, energy, and ambitions into things you can influence. If it's important, it will come back around, not because you did anything, but because it is right that it should be so. As Michael Buble popularized, "wherever you are, whenever it's right, you'll come out of nowhere and into my life". Maybe it's someone you already know; maybe it's someone you'll be excited you get to know.

I'm doing this because I hope that whatever's best for everyone will happen. Naturally, this outcome isn't the one for which I hoped, on which I planed, and towards which I worked. Keeping to that outcome, regardless of the information, regardless of the prospects, and regardless of other venues for your attention, smacks of selfishness. It is also very naive to assume that what you desire is necessarily for the best. Since when do any of us really know what's really best for us? We might have an inkling, but as long as our information is inaccurate or at least incomplete we can't possibly know enough to with certitude always do the best thing at every crossroad. I still hope good for myself. I also hope that what's best for everyone else will happen, even if I'm not involved or even aware of how their stories progress.

I still feel powerless, frustrated, and disappointed, but I feel less agitated than before. I know that my past and future selves desire me to be happy, and I know that we can't really hope for other people to be happy while we are miserable. A man who desires to uplift others must be in a higher place. As much as I hate cliches, this is now the truth from which I must build a future. The other options for which I hoped are closed, at least for now, from my view, but if they are supposed to be part of my future, they will come around again. We like to try to force things- knives, relationships, bowel movements, and our dreams, but we forget that many of the brightest parts of our lives happened without our expecting them, inviting them, or forcing them. We were open to the possibilities and acted on the opportunities when they arose. I accept that I did the very best I could with what I had. As much as that phrase sticks in my craw, it is true. I'm a great guy, living a great life, and eventually no matter how hard the universe may seem to try, it cannot force us to forgo the things we earn, that we deserve, and the things to which we truly attain. Unlike Mr. Marley of Dickens' fame, I refuse to be bound down by the chains I forged in life. The Author of Perpetual Hope prepared a green pasture for me too, and He will lead me there if I continue to follow His lead. I thought I was on that path. Maybe I never left it. As I read in my journal, a friend told me in 2011, "You remind me that there is never any searching for God; there is just looking up and realizing that He is there". If I were not acceptable in His eyes, I know I would know. So, I have reached acceptance, and He has good gifts to give me when it is right that they should be mine.

Dumping My Cell Phone

Share

I spent four days in Montana visiting Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks completely isolated from the world because T-mobile doesn't support my 2G RAZR in that state. When I returned, I took to twitter to complain and was invited to speak to customer service with the impression that they intended to make it right. However, when I got on with their representative, she was as warm and friendly as the Russians at Kursk. Consequently, I will not be upgrading my phone or changing carriers, but I will be dispensing with a cell phone period. I got along without a cell phone for years; in truth I only got one because my ex wife wanted to be able to keep tabs on me, and I'll be alright without one, not to mention nearly $700 richer EVERY SINGLE YEAR. What you are about to read is my conversation without censorship with the representative. I do this to illuminate the attitude of technology companies, to indemnify T-mobile, and to provide facts to a candid world.

When in the course of cellular communication it becomes necessary for one customer to divest themselves from a provider and dissolve the commercial bonds that have bound them to one another, a decent respect for the sentiments of the human race and their ability to rightly discern the true implications of their choices requires that said customer should declare the causes that impel them to that separation.

Unless I was within 1 mile of the Federal building in Bozeman MT, I had ZERO coverage and service in Montana 21-24 July 2016. As soon as we landed at BZN, I was completely without service in the state, but someone I know with an antiquated phone but who has Verizon had coverage. Explanation? Accommodation? Remuneration? 52m 50 minutes ago

T-Mobile Help Hey Douglas thanks for reaching out! Being without signal is always scary, but let's see if we can get to the bottom of this. It looks like Bozeman, MT is somewhere that doesn't have any T-Mobile towers, but we do have a roaming agreement for the general area. Depending on what frequencies your phone picks up and what frequencies they offer in that area, there can be spots without service. Do you know where else you were in Montana when you weren't getting any signal? *LorneP 42m 41 minutes ago

Douglas I drove from Bozeman to Glacier through Helena and back, then I drove down to Yellowstone and back, and I NEVER had signal except within 1 mile of the Federal Building in downtown Bozeman. Your roaming agreement is worth squat. 41m 40 minutes ago

T-Mobile Help Helena is an area that we certainly should have coverage in, not just a roaming agreement. However, looking at the phone number we have on file, that looks like a Motorola flip phone, was that the one you were using in that area? *LorneP 38m 36 minutes ago

Douglas Yes, that's the one. Why should the model make a difference if you "definitely have coverage"? 37m 35 minutes ago

T-Mobile Help Well, that's a good question. That phone is only capable of picking up 2g. We're always expanding our network, but most of the tower upgrades that are going up are putting out LTE or 4G, including those in Helena. While we do have coverage in those areas, it's not compatible with the phone you're on right now. *LorneP 34m 33 minutes ago

Douglas I understand that, but you continue to charge me full price every month. Why doesn't new technology still support old technology? I get better coverage in the wilderness in Nevada. As for not being compatible...my 1995 manual Saturn still works just fine on the road, my 2001 ibook still works fine on the internet, and my 1979 body still works fine at the gym. If you're trying to drive me to a new phone via "planned obsolescence" I call hogwash since, as aforementioned, someone on a "flip phone" that I know in Bozeman has coverage with Verizon and no problems. This sounds like a "it's your fault you don't have coverage because you're outdated" argument. 32m 30 minutes ago

T-Mobile Help Well, while we're upgrading everywhere, we're not going to be able to cover every area in the US, and every frequency isn't going to be available everywhere. *LorneP 28m 26 minutes ago

Douglas You realize that your argument's premise is the same as the plot to the 2005 movie "Robots" that "outmodes are garbage and that the way to be a real man is a shiny new upgrade"? Your nonchalance is going to cost you my business, not force me to upgrade my phone. I don't need a smartphone. Other people need me to have a cell phone because they don't know how to keep commitments or plan ahead, and smart phones enable that behavior. I got along in Montana, not because of you, but because I know how to read a map, follow directions, and talk to real people. You haven't even made a feeble attempt to make this right, which was the impression given by the invitation to communicate about my problems in Montana. Why should I stay with T-mobile?

Well, I am trying to be upfront and honest with you. We can't provide every frequency to every part of the country. And if you have a phone that's working well for you where you live, there is no reason to upgrade or to look into other phones. And we do support 2g in a vast majority of our areas. But, there will be areas out there where 2g doesn't exist. There are areas in the US where we have no coverage whatsoever, and although our network is always expanding, the US is a very big place, no carrier will be able to cover every inch. *LorneP 20h 19 hours ago

Douglas So basically, you don't value me as a customer to even give me a token gesture of goodwill to keep my business. Amazing. Over ten years as a loyal T-mobile customer and this is the thanks I get. You haven't even argued that I should stay. I guess you guys make so much money you just don't give a flying pinwheel. Good to know. 32m


T-Mobile Help There is no doubt that we value you as a customer and would hate to see you leave! I can understand wanting to stay with a device that has worked for you for so long. We are working on expanding our network all the time, and the focus is on the newer technologies. I only suggest upgrading so that you can take full advantage of the what the network has to offer. Regardless of whether you upgrade, the plan still has a lot to offer with things such as no overages and T-Mobile Tuesday. *AdrenaB

I understand that you feel that your company values me as a customer. The previous representative denotes that I have no expectation of service because I have an old phone but that you have every expectation of payment for services I cannot get. The impression is that the onus is on me. Talk is cheap. Back it up with some evidence. Instead, Lorne made me feel like I'm the problem. That's pretty piss-poor customer service. She didn't even really try to empathize and she certainly didn't make an offer to make it right. Upgrading isn't going to save me money; it will increase the amount of money I pay. I know you're focusing on new technology, I really do. New does not mean superior. By that logic, T-mobile should fire people who "have worked there too long" because they are "outdated" and "new employees are by definition superior". Pretzel logic doesn't appeal to me. 3h 3 hours ago


T-Mobile Help When I took over the conversation, I reviewed your previous interaction with Lorne. I do sincerely apologize that she made you feel like you are the problem. I have already passed on this experience for review since it is not the kind that we want to have for you. I am very glad that I did have the opportunity to take over and work with you. The 2g is a very solid service, which is why we still have it on the network. If you don't mind me using your analogy, because it really is a good one, we are not firing the old employees, but we are expanding by hiring new ones that are trained in the new technologies and systems that are in demand. You are more than welcome to stay with your current phone, but you will not be able to take full advantage of any network with it. For an entry level smart phone, it would be less than $6/month to finance. I know that you are not looking to increase your bill, but I would like to put this out there so that you can find more value in your service here. *AdrenaB 2h 2 hours ago


Douglas Walton I appreciate the change in tone that accompanies your communiques. Your messages are however still simply informative and not persuasive. The issue is not whether I can afford to upgrade but whether I desire to. The issue is one of expectations. You require me to pay my bill on time every month or your cut off service, and I expect that when I pay my bill on time each month I will have service when I need it. That is quite simply no longer the case. You seem reticent to offer any kind of olive branch to assuage my concerns besides the clarion call "upgrade or languish", and I am pretty sure I can expect nothing from T-mobile besides the nonchalance of a company with so many customers that it can abide the loss of one. Thank you for passing on my prior conversation and for attempting to upsell me on a new product. You still haven't persuaded me that by T-mobile logic older employees shouldn't have their support suspended, because it sounds like that's company policy when it comes to devices. I still don't feel appreciated or valued, but thanks for trying.

In the end, Adrena offered me a token bone in which I was not interested and we left off speaking, and I made a decision.

I had three major problems with the conversation, besides the fact that they were cold and unfriendly. First off, I found the conversation patronizing and pedestrian. They talked down to me as if I wasn't aware of how cell phones work, what the networks provide, etc., assuming that if I dont' have a smart phone I must be too stupid to use one. Likely they have some script or training that they follow, but I felt condescended to as if they were better, smarter, and superior because they use technology I eschew. Secondly, their arguments were informative but not persuasive. They made no real effort to convince me to stay with T-mobile or give me any incentive to stay. I was looking for some token I valued like $5 off my bill for my inconvenience or a free flip phone that's 4g, but they didn't offer me anything until the end, and then they offered me things I didn't value at all. I'm not a fool, but they lost a customer. Businesses need to understand that we can survive without them in many cases but all too often they cannot survive without us. Finally, the arguments were predicated on the notion that I need a cell phone and that technology MUST move inexorably forward. I do not personally agree with that conclusion that new technology is better. I hate upgrading windows at work and Firefox wherever I am, because the interfaces might be user friendly to the authors but they are infuriatingly unfriendly to me. Actually cell phones engender poor manners, as people will use them as a crutch in order to excuse themselves for tardiness and absence. KNowing that they can change plans on the fly, most people I know make plans they don't intend to actually keep only to bow out last minute when I'm already waiting in the parking lot. Like I told her, I don't need a cell phone. Other people need me to have a cell phone because they don't know how to make plans or keep commitments. As you can see, nobody ever made the argument that I should stay or made a token gesture to incentivize me to stay. Lorne attempted to blackmail me essentially into staying with "change or you'll eventually lose coverage". I'm going to call their bluff and dump my cell phone. At the end of this billing cycle, I will no longer have a cell phone. I survived until 2002 without one; I'll survive now. Like I said, I don't need one; other people have bad habits that mean they need me to have one. The impression the representative gave me was that they just don't care enough to do anything, because my bill is so insignificant among the total they receive that it's not worth their effort to keep me.

Willing to Do More Than I

Share

In order to find me deficient by the metrics measured by men, you must consider the means taken by men in order to advance their lifestyles, and in that case you're comparing apples to oranges. Their mantra and dogma are incompatible with what I believe. Many people achieve more and have more than I because they are willing to do more than I am. Sometimes this is virtuous, because they are willing to work harder or longer or in a more disciplined manner in order to arrive somewhere where I'm unwilling to go. However, all too often, these are people who are willing to do whatever it takes because the means justify the ends. My ancestors in Nordic lands had a saying that "power is for those willing to stoop low enough to take it", and some of the things these people achieve they gained through illegal, unethical, or immoral means. You can't tell that, and you can't tell that I'm doing the right things unless you know me because it doesn't show. There are depths to which I will not stoop, lengths to which I will not resort, and things I will not attempt, not because I don't value the outcome but because how we win matters just as much as how we lose.

Men differ in the risks they willingly take. Although I live in Las Vegas, I don't gamble because I know the house always wins. However, that doesn't stop random chance from rewarding others. A woman I know recently reported going in, placing $100 on 00 on roulette, and winning $3500 despite 35:1 odds. I'm not a winner even when I have a 50/50 chance, but some people are willing to take risks. Politicians are adroid at this, because the money they risk is YOURS, but I digress. It amazes me what risk people are willing to tolerate. One former student told me that she was under duress because she had just kicked out her boyfriend who was also her son's father, but that she was happy she hadn't married him. Wait, what? This was precisely zero hedge against the risks of a failed relationship because now they have a child together, and she's robbing him of access to his father. Unprotected sex, sex outside of marriage, and all the inherent risks of promiscuity seem no profilactic against the risks of fornication and adultery, even though we probably all know someone whose life was damaged or diminished by divorce. Elsewhere in the workplace, some people embellish their resume, only to face the risk they get fired later when the lie is discovered. However, they feel it's better to ask forgiveness than permission and take the risk because the job comes with experience that they can use to legitimately get a similar job later, albeit earned under false pretenses. The college's legal counsel was someone who didn't have a law degree, and the city of Henderson hired a man who wasn't a resident to be city manager. However, the only people who face scrutiny are people like me, who have to prove their hours, whereabouts, etc. I have coworkers who probably don't work a single full day of the year, coworkers who violate other laws, but the prevailing attitude seems to be that it's only a crime if you get caught. We make all sorts of associations that are not worth the risk. I have cut off friends doing illegal or immoral things so as to not seem like I endorse or join them. However, more than a few friends have candidly admitted that they chose their mates despite the risks and got lucky that the people they chose were also great. My racquetball partner's wife told me a few weeks ago that she took a risk on a man with no job, no education, and no home, and it worked out for her, but that it could have gone a different way. Well, I've taken risks on women and none of those things have ever worked for me, and in my experience I learned that if it sounds too good to be true or seems like it might hurt me that I should shy away. Meanwhile others try to woo, and where they cannot outearn me, they work on their looks and turn to supplements, protein powders, and narcotics in order to achieve a physique. Some people are just willing to spend five hours per day at the gym in order to maintain their looks. I am not willing to work that hard to achieve a visual ideal, assuming it would work for me.

Men differ in the privations they willingly tolerate. My eldest female cousin thinks I would make a good doctor and tried to encourage me to attend medical school. Flattered though I might be, I am not willing to submit myself to the rigors of medical school and then the demands of a medical career in order to care for people who do not like me and do not appreciate what I do. I am not motivated by the money, and I do not find the intangible returns of medicine sufficient impetus to sacrifice. I laud those who do. I also laud firemen who risk their lives and subject themselves to chemical exposure; I like knowing what chemicals I handle and how to treat myself when exposed. For a long time, I resisted the encouragement to date women with kids, and when I did, I found that I was right so to do. I am not willing to come second place behind a woman's 10 year old son or let her ex husband dictate the terms of my life. It's not really my family; I become more of an accessory when I date her, and my time revolves around people I don't know or like who are probably doing this just for power over their ex. One girl insisted that unless I join her gym I obviously didn't care about her at all, and I'm not willing to be treated like that, to be manipulated like that, and to be subject to the reducto ad absurdium that people who are immature use in order to reassure themselves that they are loved. I know it's hard. I've been single for a long while. Years back, I had a student who refused to break up with his girlfriend even though she marginalized him because he didn't want the hassle of finding a new one. I totally get that, but I'm not willing to stay with someone like that just to not be alone. Nobody is better than the wrong person. My ex wife started using intimacy late in our marriage as a means to manipulate me into doing what she demanded because I "owed her". She would insist that I didn't love her at all unless I did whatever she demanded. That's a childish attitude, and I'm not going to put up with it again. More than a few people I know will do whatever it takes to please people they love even though those people do not love them back in truth.

Men turn out differently according to the lines they willingly cross. I'm not a perfect man, but I strive to be better than the rest of the kitten caboodle. I know myself and my standards, and I keep them because they keep me. However, many other people believe in expediency- that if it feels good or may help you then you should do it. You only live once, so live it up instead of you only live once so live well. Many people get ahead of me because they are willing to break the law. There's this secretary in social science who always passes me on the way home, and where once I thought maybe she just got lucky, I found out it's because she goes 60mph in a 45mph zone. I lost a course this fall to another professor, not because the chair hates me, but because he's friends with the other guy outside work. I have lost out "competing" for women to men who earn more and are willing to spend whatever it takes. Once you start paying bribes, how do you stop? If the woman picks a guy based on his willingness to buy things for her, she's not courting him; she's leasing herself to him with an option to buy. Far too many men around me take advantage of opportunities and people thinking that nobody gets hurt or that nobody besides them gets hurt. They tell themselves that the rich deserve it or can afford it. They think it's preferable to live with someone before marriage, to "find out if you're sexually compatible first", and to not "sign a stupid piece of paper to prove our love". They pass the buck to others for work and then file harassment claims against their coworkers to save their own skins. Stealing is easy, but earning money takes hard work. Blaming others is easy, but changing takes hard work. It's easier to complain than it is to fix it, and somehow there's always enough time to do it over but never enough time to do it right the first time. It's easier to hire "diversity" than good people, to hire more people than the right people, and to promote problems than to promote the people who take care of business. I get called chicken, coward, Puritan, and prude, accused of being too good for them, too arrogant, too "righteous" (as if) and then too butt-hurt when I call them to carpet. Somehow, I'm always the problem for being unwilling to go to those places, but it's because I know some places you can't come back from. How do you recover from HIV? From cancer? How do you become "unpregnant" or get off cigarettes? How do you purge a record, criminal or on Facebook, of mistakes you made or that people CLAIM you made? The accusations from my coworker are still on my employment record even though I was exonerated. I stay as far away from the edge as possible, knowing that sometimes you still slip and fall, and they follow other people because we watch villains collude in GOBNets and reward each other for their villainy. They criticize me for an inability to perfectly live a standard they won't even attempt. They are willing to do whatever it takes unless it asks them to be good people, all the while telling themselves that they are virtuous.

There is only one way for me to get the kind of life I desire, and so there are things I am unwilling to do even if they MIGHT get me to that end. When I bend my rules, I am miserable, and so I keep to them, knowing that we're supposed to reap what we sow. Since I don't have connections, I've had to compete for jobs on merit. Since I don't have a ripped physique, I've had to compete for women based on the quality of my company. Since I don't strive expressly for money and am not interested in plastic personae, I don't look competitive. Other people are willing to cross lines, tolerate conditions and take risks that I'm not willing to take, and then we reward the lucky among them. In truth I am not that lucky, and in truth, I have to live with myself. I don't think some of these people HAVE a conscience, because they seem to be willing to do whatever whenever without regard for how it looks. Far too many people are promoted for luck, because they hit the genetic lottery or were in the right place at the right time and said the right thing. There are things I am willing to do. They are different from yours. Please don't require me to accept you as you are and then demand that I become what you find acceptable "for fellowship". When Lord North comes to Sir Thomas More to persuade him to sign the edict permitting Henry VIII to divorce his wife "for fellowship", More says, "When we die and you are sent to heaven for abiding your principles but I am sent to hell for abandoning mine, will you come with me for fellowship?" I am what I am. I do not change to please the jury. I am honestly disappointed by and frustrated with many episodes of my life because other people move forward, move upward, and move onward while I stall in the mud. They get everything it seems while I barely squeak by. However, I was given advice from my organic chemistry professor to "Content yourself with an honest C over an A gained by fraud." They have their fraud. Eventually it will catch up with them. God is not fooled. The choices you make are visible in the behavior of cells, and the God of the Universe can read your actions and motivations without having to watch you make them.