Work conversation
Topic: funny stuff
Trudi: "My car needs a bath..."

Jason: "So does mine...can our cars bathe together?"

Trudi: "Yes but my car is a girl so she needs to go first..."

We all chuckle and ask why.

Trudi: "She needs to go in first cause she might need some private time alone first."

After they play-fought about whose car should go first, Trudi replied with, "remember my car is a little younger than yours so be gentle..."

Lawsuit Over Surprise Pregnancy
Topic: people who need help
I for one think the woman has issues, needs help, and the man should not be forced to pay child support due to her actions. Whether or not he gets punitive damages is another thing...

***************************************************

Court: Man Can Sue Over Surprise Pregnancy

Feb 24, 12:55 PM (ET)

CHICAGO (AP) - An appeals court said a man can press a claim for emotional distress after learning a former lover had used his sperm to have a baby. But he can't claim theft, the ruling said, because the sperm were hers to keep.

The ruling Wednesday by the Illinois Appellate Court sends Dr. Richard O. Phillips' distress case back to trial court.

Phillips accuses Dr. Sharon Irons of a "calculated, profound personal betrayal" after their affair six years ago, saying she secretly kept semen after they had oral sex, then used it to get pregnant.

He said he didn't find out about the child for nearly two years, when Irons filed a paternity lawsuit. DNA tests confirmed Phillips was the father, the court papers state.

Phillips was ordered to pay about $800 a month in child support, said Irons' attorney, Enrico Mirabelli.

Phillips sued Irons, claiming he has had trouble sleeping and eating and has been haunted by "feelings of being trapped in a nightmare," court papers state.

Irons responded that her alleged actions weren't "truly extreme and outrageous" and that Phillips' pain wasn't bad enough to merit a lawsuit. The circuit court agreed and dismissed Phillips' lawsuit in 2003.

But the higher court ruled that, if Phillips' story is true, Irons "deceitfully engaged in sexual acts, which no reasonable person would expect could result in pregnancy, to use plaintiff's sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner yielding extreme consequences."

The judges backed the lower court decision to dismiss the fraud and theft claims, agreeing with Irons that she didn't steal the sperm.

"She asserts that when plaintiff 'delivered' his sperm, it was a gift - an absolute and irrevocable transfer of title to property from a donor to a donee," the decision said. "There was no agreement that the original deposit would be returned upon request."

Phillips is representing himself in the case. He could not be reached for comment Thursday.

"There's a 5-year-old child here," Mirabelli said. "Imagine how a child feels when your father says he feels emotionally damaged by your birth."

4 year old painter...
Mood:  irritated
Topic: people who need help
Let me ask you this: when you give a pencil/pen/crayon/paintbrush etc to a 2 year old...what do you assume they'll "draw"...something that resembles real life images/objects, or squiggly lines and odd shapes?

Most would answer that they would be mostly squiggly lines and odd shapes. Those who might even vote in favor of "real life images/objects" would most likely agree, at least, that the objects would not be very life-like. And if they were, than the 2 year old (we should all be able to agree) is a DAMN good artist.

Anyway, back to my point. Most children aren't painters; most lack the skill to be a real painter. Yet those children who do draw either professionally or for the fun of it (except those few true talents) could only succeed in one category of art: abstract art. Enter...well...whatever the name of the 4 year old's name was on "60 Minutes." She is a successful abstract artist. Some call her a "prodigy." Others prefer "genius."

Side note: you may wonder why I asked about a 2 year old to begin with. Answer: the 4 year old started painting when she was 2.

Further side note: She has drawn 50 abstract paintings, sold her first for $250, her highest selling one was $25,000 and so far (in just two years' time) she has sold $300,000+ worth of paintings.

Now, in case you didn't know, I think abstract art is the most ridiculous thing in the world. I mean ANYONE could paint what she does (and far too many people could paint much BETTER than her). I don't say these things to put her down. I mean I have better things to do than point to a 4 year old and say "I know someone better than you." My point is, not only do I think that abstract art is ridiculous (and a waste of money) but I think it's ridiculous that people should even be discussing whether a 4 year old literally just making a mess on a canvas is a "genius" or a "fake."

Obviously these people on the show disagree with me about abstract art. They think that there is such a thing as "good" and "bad" abstract art. And many people compared this little girl to Pablo Picasso (no doubt the most popular abstract artist) and a few others (who were obviously less popular).

Then there was the psychologist they interviewed. This is what irritated me the most. First they showed the psychologist the paintings. "Beautiful" and "amazing" were the words I remember her using. She said that this 4 yr old was like no other because children tend to try to draw things they know/see (i.e. houses, trees, flowers, etc) rather than just squiggly lines.

I agree with her on that to a point. Very young children start with squiggly lines but eventually, I'd guess between ages 3 and 5 they start to attempt to draw things they see. Obviously most don't have the talent to professionally draw a perfect flower or animal...many could probably do better than me though. So I can see where she is coming from there. What she didn't realize, I think, is that this 4 year old's dad is also a painter. Combine that with the fact that she was 2 when her first abstract painting sold, I think it only makes sense that her parents would encourage her to do more of the same.

However, right after saying what the psychologist did, they showed her video of the 4 yr old actually painting and *suddenly* the psychologist exclaims how she's not a "prodigy" and that the 4 yr old doesn't paint like abstract artists do. The 4 yr old "wouldn't focus" she said...whereas other abstract artists (she claims) would be focused on just their work and their work alone.

She is a freakin' 4 year old! Is anyone surprised that it takes her days or months to finish a painting; her quickest painting she ever did (black canvas with white paint slopped on it) took hours? It would take you or I 20 minutes at most. Took her hours. Why? She's 4! And, not surprisingly, she has the attention span of a 4 year old. She starts painting, gets bored, and moves onto something else. Give me a break!

What to drink...what to drink...
Topic: pictures

My niece Kylie looking for something to drink on the way home from cali...

Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy
These are all websites I've found that have the "Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy" that were made famous on Saturday Night Live some years ago...

http://www.cco.net/~jpete/deepthou.htm

http://farstrider.net/DeepThoughts/Handey.htm

http://www.geocities.com/Wellesley/4220/deepthoughts.html

http://www.erikandanna.com/Humor/DeepThoughts/

Demotivation
Mood:  happy
Topic: funny stuff
Well we've all seen and heard those motivational posters telling us to strive to be our best, work hard, persevere, etc...

Well hope you weren't looking forward to me sending any...

I now present to you some "demotivational" pictures. Hope you like 'em :-)

http://demotivation.5u.com/index.html

(the page has over 70 images so it may take a while to load...be patient...it's worth it...)

365 Stupidest Things Ever Said - February 16, 2005
Mood:  caffeinated
Topic: funny stuff
*The following is the Feb 16th listing for the "365 Stupidest Things Ever Said." Don't bother trying to make sense of most of it...cause you probably won't be able to... *

"Temporarily each of you, four players, represent a side and the very same man picks up the dice and throws once so as to see who is going to represent the temporary east and so on. If the number of points are 3, 7,11 the man opposite the East, the West, if 2,6,10 the man on the right or the South, if 4,8,12 the man on the left, the North, and if 5, or 9 the East himself starts drawing the topmost Position Indicator, the second, third, and fourth by the south, west and north in their respective order and turn (counter clockwise). In turning over the Indicator each one of you will find where you are to be seated. By this simple process, the allotment of seats is determined."

- instructions on seating players included in a mah-jongg game from China

Work conversation...
Topic: funny stuff
Work conversation...

Trudi: "Has anyone tried that new cherry Pepto-Bismol?"

All of us: "No..."

Robin: "Have you Trudi?"

Trudi: "No, but I will have to soon..."

Prejudices...
Topic: thought provoking
I was talking with a member on the phone when something interesting hit me (mentally not physically...)

She gave me her name and asked a question and while she was talking I just happened to pull up her account. I answered her questions and when she got off the phone I noticed that she had over $7,000 in her account. I remembered back to hearing/reading about cases done where pyschologists have studied how people act differently based on preconceived judgements. For instance, if you bring a "new kid" to school and tell the teacher that the kid is not the brightest kid, the teacher usually treats them differently than the other kids. If you use the same child with another teacher and tell her he's a genius, then she tends to treat him that way.

I then wondered if I treated customers at work differently depending on how much money they had. My first thought was "no I tend to treat them all the same."

But I'm not so sure that's really true. Although I treat everyone with respect who calls, there are some who deserve more than others. For instance, my boss's husband calls up or someone who has quite a bit of money and you HAVE to treat them with extra respect. To not do so might very well cost me a job.

Someone who calls with $5 in their account and/or no political ties whatsoever to anyone I work with is different. I've had far too many people with little to no money try to act like they're the shit and that I should bend over backwards to make them happy. Frankly I don't care if they take their $5 (and most importantly all the grief and problems they cause us) to another institution. In fact, I'll even print out driving directions if they need it.

It's not to say I treat them like crap, even if they do so to me. I keep a smile the whole time, don't raise my voice, and don't return any swear words. But at the same time, I'm not going to worry nearly as much about how they might perceive me as to someone who is, let's just say, more important financially.

Hey, let's face it: like it or not, money does a lot of talking at financial institutions. If you have it you can get away with a lot more than if you don't. So please, if any of you out there have $5 in your account, don't expect the world from your financial institution...unless you just want to be made fun of...

Tombstone Technology and Cost-Benefit Analysis
Mood:  lazy
Topic: thought provoking
I was watching OPB (Oregon Public Broadcasting) last night and saw a very interesting show on airline crashes and the people who investigate them. They brought up something called "tombstone technology."

It's the name given to technological advances that are the direct result of deadly accidents. The airline industry is basically run by this technology. Whenever an accident happens, investigators determine the cause of the accident and suggest means in which to prevent it from happening again.

Not all the time, however, are the corrections made. See, major corporations run on what is known as "cost-benefit analysis." Basically, they calculate the costs to prevent the problem (i.e. $1,000 to put in a particular computer chip to monitor something new) and compare them with the benefits (i.e. 100 lives being saved). Only if the benefits outweigh the costs would the company change things. How can you calculate the true value/benefit of a human life though, you ask?

Well, the airline industry does it by how much it would pay out per death. The OPB show said that it's usually $2-$2.5 million per person.

One example I can remember was reading about Ford and their Pinto model car. In the late 80s, early 90s (I can't remember exactly when) they determined that the Pinto's gas tanks were not properly shielded from rear collisions. Several people sued Ford because their cars exploded after being rear ended. Ford calculated the costs of placing a $7 "shield" in each existing Pinto or just paying out the lawsuits: the lawsuits were calculated at being cheaper. So instead of saving lives they simply went the cheaper way of paying hush-money.

Gotta love Corporations always worrying about maximizing profits huh?