Archive for May, 2009

yet more to the point

Saturday, May 30th, 2009

This week I read a comment on a thread that challenged the use of the phrases “gay marriage” and “same-sex marriage,” arguing that instead the debate should be framed around the concept of marriage equality. I couldn’t agree more, and from now on that is how I will approach the subject.

Qualifying a marriage as same-sex or opposite-sex implies that there is a difference between the two. The ideologies that make cultural hegemony possible are described with the three P’s: persistent, pervasive, and pernicious. It is therefore difficult to maintain the objective distance that’s required to properly criticize the social mores that obtain in cultural hegemony. Allowing marriage to be differentiated by gender propagates the notion that same-sex couples are to be viewed and treated differently than opposite-sex couples.

I absolutely detest Proposition 8. However, its passage has both challenged and focused my view on the subject of marriage equality. I won’t go so far as to praise Prop 8, but at the very least it has brought better understanding of the ideologies that allow heterosexual cultural hegemony to persist. As the GI Joe cartoons used to say, “knowing is half the battle.”

more to the point

Wednesday, May 27th, 2009

In my university studies, I learned the concept of cultural hegemony. You can read the wiki in the link, but for the purposes of this post I’ll sum up two major points:

  • Cultural hegemony is the dominance of one class or culture over another within a diverse society
  • Dominance is sustained through the uncritical belief in a set of moral values or ideologies that serve the dominant group’s interests

I’ve been thinking about my previous post regarding Keith Olbermann’s response to Michael Steele, and what I failed to realize is that the whole debate is flawed by the acceptance of social moores that sustain heterosexual hegemony.

The question that no one, including me, bothered to ask, is “What allows us to morally justify the denial of benefits to a minority group?”

The answer is not pretty. There is no moral justification unless we view people in same-sex relationships as somehow less than human, and therefore less deserving of the benefits enjoyed by the heterosexual ruling class.

Michael Steele was closer to asking that question than was Keith Olbermann, albeit very obtusely. Mr. Steele’s economic justification not only reveals his bigotry, it reveals the social doctrine that allows sexual hegemony to persist. At least he gives us a starting point to challenge the doctrine.

Keith Olbermann’s flowery portrait of the overall positive effects of same-sex marriage on the economy, on the other hand, reveals absolutely no insight into why we’re having this debate. In that sense, his argument is even more morally reprehensible than Michael Steele’s. The fact that Keith Olbermann engages the economic argument belies his basic acceptance of the doctrines that sustain heterosexual cultural dominance.

missing the point

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

In this video, Keith Olbermann attempts to rebuke Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele’s argument that gay marriage will cost small business owners by driving up the cost of health care coverage for employees who are gay and want to include their spouse in their coverage:

Keith Olbermann makes some great points about the overall positive effects that gay marriage can have on the economy, including increased spending and tax revenue from businesses that cater to the wedding industry. But he fails to counter Michael Steele’s original point, and worse yet, he fails to address the real underlying issue of discrimination.

While the wedding industry will gain, it is still true that business owners will spend more money on health care to cover spouses of gay employees.

What is troubling with the health care argument is that as long as gay marriage is not recognized, business is exploiting its workers based on sexuality. Do business owners actively seek to hire gay employees because they know that their health care benefits will cost less? If so, then they are discriminating against me because of my status as a heterosexual married man. And worse, they are actively exploiting their workforce by forcing homosexual employees to bear the cost of healthcare while their heterosexual colleagues receive coverage through their benefits package.

Let’s look at this another way. One exercise I’ve heard others use to expose bigotry is to replace the term same-sex marriage with biracial marriage, which as we all know was outlawed in many places until only fairly recently (and is still the subject of ire for many backwards-thinking people). What if Michael Steele said that allowing biracial marriage would cost business owners more money because of increased health care costs? It’s a ridiculous argument, and is no less ridiculous when applied to same-sex marriage.

Bottom line: employers should not care to whom their employees are married. The quality of benefits packages are already at the discretion of employers, and if they offer health care benefits then they can’t be allowed to discriminate against employees based on whom they’re married to.

what to do, what to do…

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

Over the last few months I’ve been melting into a sort of crisis of conviction. When I first got back into cycling a few summers ago, I wanted to reconnect with an activity that I had always enjoyed and in the process jump start my aging metabolism. As a teenager I used to cruise around a large network of fire trails up near my house but I had no interest in the sport.

It wasn’t until mid-life began to loom ahead of me and the sports media caught on to a young whipper-snapper named Lance Armstrong that I began to take an interest in the sport of road racing. Floyd Landis’ heroic effort in the 2006 Tour de France inspired me to take up training for real, but at this point I didn’t know what I was training for.

Then, while climbing up the Torrey Pines hill, I saw “San Diego Century Riders” scribbled in chalk in the bike lane. I had no idea what a century was, but knew I had to find out.

The idea of 100 miles in a single day was surely daunting but I knew that I had it in me. And then one day, I did it. Since then, I’ve participated in several organized rides and I’ve really enjoyed them, especially the SAG support. But while organized century rides are inherently challenging, they have almost become routine.

Last weekend’s event made me face a part of my personality that isn’t compatible with organized events: I ride alone. I didn’t much care for peloton riding during the Bulldog bike race or the Alpine Challenge, and while riding in a paceline is preferable to a peloton, I don’t have much heart for that either. I don’t want to worry about crossing wheels or etiquette; I prefer solitude.

Besides, any paceline is only as strong as its weakest link. I don’t want to weigh anyone down and conversely I don’t want to be weighed down by anyone else.

During all this training, I was driven to prove to myself that I’m competitive, and I think I’ve done that. I bet I can compete with the top 10% of cyclists out there. But I’m not getting any younger and I don’t have the conviction, discipline, or incentive to truly compete at that level. In other words, I have no heart for organized road racing.

But I do have heart for something else, and I feel it runs much deeper than the testosterone-charged thrill of dropping other cyclists on the hills. I was in a pretty messed up mental state on last weekend’s ride and I think that deep down I use the physical exertion of endurance cycling in an attempt to exorcise the negative energy of my life.

Those who know me know that I’m not what you’d typically call a happy person, nor am I particularly religious in the traditional sense. I periodically cycle through some pretty intensely negative emotion: anger, fear, hate… you know, all that stuff that leads to the dark side. I don’t know if I’m running away from or running toward something but I feel that pushing my physical limits is a sort of crucible for me: I don’t feel that spiritual growth can occur without breaking down the physical body. This is a pretty gross analogy but this is much the same as the mythology surrounding Christ’s crucifixion.

So I find myself wondering what to do. I think I’m done with organized events, but I need to set some goals or I will continue to feel lost. Maybe I need to take up randonneuring. Maybe I need to start planning my own self-supported long-distance rides. My first century was completely unsupported, and maybe it’s time to return to those roots. There are a lot of mountains to be climbed.

cheese is equal to cheese

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

After a little deliberation about yesterday’s post, I have come to the conclusion that I owe Stan Bush an apology.

The original version of “The Touch” was a very cheesy arena rock song that my 13-year-old self gobbled up like a big ol’ plate of arena rock cheese.

The remake into Sam’s Theme is a very cheesy emo/rap/rock song that I’m sure, if I were 13 years old, I would gobble up like a big ol’ plate of emo/rap/rock cheese.

So actually, what Stan Bush has done is quite brilliant. He has demonstrated an ability to write catchy songs that are current with popular culture.

Mr. Bush, I am sorry. And thank you very much for creating such wonderful memories of my teen years.

all that is wrong with the world

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

Michael Bay must be stopped.

While Transformers: The Movie had its flaws, it had a rockin’ 80s soundtrack, and I played the hell out of it when I was a kid. Witness this gem:


“The Touch” by Stan Bush

Now look what they’ve gone and done: The Touch: Sam’s Theme

This Youtube comment pretty much sums everything:

KogashiwaKai (11 hours ago)

No…..just no

The original makes you go “FUCK YEAH GO OPTIMUS KICK SOME DECPTACON ASS”

this makes me want to cut myself, hang myself off a brige and blow up said bridge with explosives so I plummet to the water below

event report: san diego century 2009 – 1st place?

Sunday, May 17th, 2009

Yesterday I rode the San Diego Century. Another well-organized event, with well-equipped SAG stops at good intervals, staffed by very friendly folks.

The packet pickup was slated to begin at 6:00 and the official start time was at the riders’ discretion between 6:00 and 8:00, and as I arrived at around 5:40 I saw that people were already heading out. Volunteers were already manning the packet pickup tables (thanks guys!) so I quickly got my packet and fumbled around with the bib #, trying to find a place on my bike where it wouldn’t get in the way of my knees. I finally decided I was happy with everything and queued up in a small group of about 10 riders at the light. My cycle computer read 6:09.

The light turned green and I was immediately annoyed by everyone around me. I was behind maybe two others and they were all bumbling around trying to get their feet clipped into their pedals; meanwhile I was clipped in and rearing to go. I bolted past them all and began a two-hour long tear through the hills of Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe.

I have to admit to being in a completely psychotic state of mind. In the morning I had woken up an hour before my alarm went off. I had just dreamed that I had completed the century in under 4 hours and my son was asking me why I was so arrogant. I was unsettled by that dream and couldn’t get back to sleep, and when I went outside to pack my car I saw that the cold night air had caused a 1-inch crack in the windshield to expand to 6 inches. Apparently my car doesn’t like bike events, because the initial crack was caused by a rock hitting the windshield not a quarter mile away home from this year’s Alpine Challenge. This, combined with a general feeling of annoyance at other cyclists, traffic signals, and motorists, gave me a sort of tunnel vision toward a singular goal: to get the hell away from everyone.

I passed people like crazy going up all the hills. I passed two guys going downhill only to be stopped at a light where I needed to make a right turn, but a car was going left in front of me. I could either sustain my speed, blow the stop light, and hope the car wouldn’t go wide, or slow and wait for the car to go. My commuting experience told me to defer to the car, but the two guys I had just passed were now barreling behind me, yelling “RIGHT, RIGHT!” I turned and yelled back, “I KNOW” as I started my right turn, and they replied “I just don’t want a pileup.”

That just pissed me off. I know I broke whatever messed up unspoken cyclist code that says you’ve got to blow through stoplights, but frankly I’ve seen and escaped a lot of crap on the road and I’d like to think I’ve learned a thing or two. And one thing I’ve learned is that safety is far more valuable than convenience.

This exchange, and my embarrassment over it, put more fire into my legs. I dropped those two guys and went to work on a few others in front of me. As I reeled in two more, I looked behind me to see if any cars were coming before I overtook them only to find a barnacle stuck on my wheel. Well, as long as he didn’t try anything stupid I’d let him draft, but I was sure not going to let him pull. This was my century.

I waited for a safe opportunity to overtake the two guys but they took back their position during the next flat section. I got on their wheel, plotting my revenge, and I saw that they were both fighting each other, not so much trading pulls as trading positions. I drafted for a couple of minutes to recover, then at the next hill I took off and didn’t see them again.

I began to wonder if I wasn’t killing myself too hard, but I didn’t care. If I bonked going into Ramona, so be it. I wanted to come home knowing that I hadn’t given up any opportunity to push as hard as I could.

There’s a SAG stop just before the hill into Ramona, and I made sure to top off my water bottles since the memory of running out of water in last year’s brutal heat was in my mind. The folks at the SAG stop said I was the first one there, though I saw one cyclist that I had recently passed blow by while I was refilling. I hastily made my way out and I was soon headed up the “purple monster” to Ramona. The hill up Scripps Poway Parkway to highway 67 is fairly challenging, but today the heat wasn’t much of an issue and there were two cyclists farther ahead who spurred my legs to pass them before the 67.

Left on highway 67, and more climbing before the descent into Ramona. I didn’t see any other cyclists at this point, and most importantly I did not see any in the opposite direction. I began to think that I was first into Ramona.

I stopped at the Ramona SAG stop and the workers confirmed that I was the first cyclist through. They were antsy to get more customers. I quickly ate a little, topped off my water, and hopped onto my bike for the last leg back to Encinitas. As I pulled out, the cyclist who I had seen go through the last SAG stop pulled in.

I hightailed it out of Ramona, back over the 67, and back over Scripps Poway Parkway. I saw huge groups of cyclists in the opposite direction and thought that the Ramona SAG station would soon be overwhelmed. The heat was beginning to settle in as the marine layer had by now burned off, but as soon as I began the descent into Poway, I could feel cool air and almost smell the salt in the air. This was nothing like last year, when there was no marine layer at all and the temperature was in the high 90s all the way through Poway and hotter in Ramona.

By this time, my energy was beginning to ebb and flow. But the miles were ticking away quickly, and as I watched them click through 70, 80 miles I still felt pretty good. There are a couple of nasty little vindictive hills toward the end of the course in Rancho Penasquitos but I made short work of them and was soon at the coast.

No century would be complete without my going a little off course, and I did so by making a premature right turn off highway 101 onto Lomas Santa Fe. The intersection looked familiar from last year, but as soon as I made the right turn, I knew something was off. I made an immediate right turn, then turned back around, then got back on Lomas Santa Fe again and went all the way up the hill before realizing that Lomas Santa Fe was way too early. I headed back down and looked at my cycle computer, which now registered 100 miles in 5 hours, 15 minutes.

I got back to highway 101 and back on track. I sailed into Mira Costa college to finish in 5:30:49 (excluding stops). My cycle computer’s clock read 11:55, so about 5 hours, 46 minutes total. They have commemorative mugs at the stop for the three different courses, and as I picked mine up the guy at the table said I was the first one.

So… first place? Oh yeah, it’s a ride, not a race!

SAN DIEGO CENTURY 2009
Miles: 104.1
Riding Time: 5 hours, 30 minutes, 49 seconds
Total Time: 5 hours, 46 minutes
Average Speed: 18.9 mph
Max Speed: 44 mph

witl cop… pliy

Thursday, May 14th, 2009

Last night the boy was up to his usual tricks to postpone bedtime. He motioned toward the laptop computer (the “little computer”) and we told him no. He then proceeded to do something quite remarkable: he wrote on his wipe board.

Witl
Cop

I looked at my wife in astonishment and we corrected his spelling: Little Computer.
Then he began to write again:

Pliy

And we corrected again: Please.

We won’t make a habit of this, but we had to cave in this time because he had asked so nicely.

in which i take things a little too seriously

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009

On my commute home yesterday, a couple of punks drove next to me and announced through a bullhorn, “Streets are for cars. Sidewalks are for bikes.”

I resisted the urge to give them the one-fingered salute, a public statement of my opinion of their collective IQ.

At the next stop light, I rode up next to them. Two boys, maybe early 20s at most. The passenger stared stony-eyed ahead, doubtless embarrassed or just plain stupid. I said “You know, it’s illegal for me to ride on the sidewalk.”

The driver looked over and said, “It’s okay man, we’re just messin’ with you.”

“Sweet,” I said, and gave them a thumbs-up, a slightly more subtle indication of my opinion of their collective IQ. The light turned green, and that was that. Hooray for motorists messing with cyclists. As if we don’t have enough crap to deal with in traffic. At least they could have tried to be original. Maybe something like “Faster! The clowns are coming!” You know, something we can all laugh about.

I get that they’re young and stupid, that their empathy chips are not yet fully wired. I was once that age and found myself in cars where my doofus friends made similar comments at the lowly riff-raff on the streets.

But if you decide to mess with me, I’m going to mess right back. And I’m going to advocate like hell for my right to use the road.

In my younger days I would always let my rage do the talking and I’m embarrassed to admit how many times I’ve flipped people off. But nowadays I’m learning that the best tack is to introduce myself, to let people know I’m a person just like them. And then, as politely as possible, inform the offender of my legal right to the road. At least, in a perfect world, that’s how it should work.

I can’t help but feel saddened by the attitude that bikes don’t belong on the street. And I don’t see this attitude improving; in fact, I perceive the opposite.

Look at our elementary schools today. When I went to school, the bicycle was heavily in use. Hell, we didn’t even wear helmets back then. Nowadays, parents are so frightened for their children’s safety that the majority of children are bused or driven to school. And so we enforce the lesson that bikes don’t belong on the road.

Take a look at this article: Bicyclists need to stay on sidewalk. I believe it is written somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the underlying sentiment is that bikes don’t belong on the road:

…considering you are where you should not be, I might hit you.

The fact is that legally, bicycles do have a right to use the road, and that in general it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk, and for good reason. Unfortunately, the legality of the issue does not coincide with many motorists’ attitudes about bicycles.

I know I shouldn’t take the actions of a couple of kids too seriously. But their messin’ indicates a deeper problem with motorists’ attitudes toward cyclists. And it drives home more than ever how important it is for cyclists to assert their rights to the road as well as bear responsibility to follow traffic laws.

upcoming event: san diego century

Monday, May 11th, 2009

This weekend I will participate in the San Diego Century. I’m excited to see how well I’ll improve over last year with my road bike. After the Alpine Challenge, I feel really confident about this ride (not a race, despite what the URL leads you to believe). However, there were a lot of things working for me at the Alpine Challenge: cool weather, very little wind, and good health. Let’s hope I can keep my hubris in check; while I’ve survived a fair number of centuries, as Captain Solo said, “Great, kid. Don’t get cocky.”