When The Condom Breaks, The Cradle Will Fall...

Newsflash: I am an epidemiologist. One of the important dimensions of epidemiology is using indicators correctly. I stress to my students that it's important to consider when to use a relative measure vs. an absolute measure.

For example, there were 6 cases of cholera in the USA in 1999 (MMWR, 1999). Every case of cholera makes public health officials very nervous, because it may signal a potential outbreak. But 6 cases constitute a prevalence rate that is vanishingly small.

In 1998, there were 5 new cases of cholera. The additional case in 1999 meant an increase of 20%! A 20% incidence increase in any disease sets off public health alarm bells. But, really, there were only 6 cases in total. No biggy.

The relative measure was a 20% increase. The absolute measure was a single new case. Depending on which statistic you look at, you get a whole different picture of the cholera burden of the USA.

Now, my public health colleagues are going to have a fit over what I'm going to talk about next...

A recent study concluded that 30% of women who date online have had sex on the first date with gentlemen they've met online. (Zod bless those fine, upstanding women). Moreover, the study found that 77% of these women had had unprotected sex in those encounters. Of course, public health officials are outraged. The STI specialist quoted in the linked articled said,

"When you have unprotected sex with people you are meeting online, you are playing russian roullette [sic] with your health. It's not a matter of 'if' you'll get a sexually transmitted disease, but rather 'when' and 'how many'."

Well, I'm here to report that, epidemiologically, this is a bit of hyperbole.

There is no question that STDs/STIs are bad. There is no question that globally, and among some sub-populations, they exist in epidemic proportions. There is no question that one should always err on the side of protection, and wear a condom to protect oneself from pregnancy, STIs and overall ooginess.

However, that is no reason to conflate the risks suggested by the actual numbers! Let's break it down..

In Canada, chlamydia is overwhelmingly the most common STI. The most recent reliable stats we have are from 2004. In that year, there were a total of nearly 63,000 cases detected. Chlamydia is a reportable disease, which means that the government is notified of every detected case; almost none fall through the cracks. Undiagnosed cases are, of course, unknowable, but are often tracked down if the infected person spreads it to others. In other words, 63,000 is probably a fairly accurate estimate of the chlamydia burden of Canada. (Compare this to about 9000 cases of gonorrhea and maybe 1000 cases of syphilis... very roughly.)

The Canadian STI surveillance report states that STIs are on the rise. Public health officials are worried about this trend. I've heard some use the word "epidemic". In terms of chlamydia, there was a 70% rise from 1997 to 2004, from 113.9 to 197.1 per 100,000 population. The current prevalence is164 cases per 100,000 population, or about 0.16% of the total population, assuming a conservatively estimated base population of 35 million.

A 70% rise is a staggering number that necessarily warrants concern. But the prevalence is still only 0.16%. That means that probabilistically, you'd have to have unprotected sex with 625 random people before you were guaranteed to be exposed to someone with chlamydia.

Now let's break it down further. Let's say you're one of these single on-line women, aged 35, currently disease free. The age-specific chlamydia burden among Canadian men aged 25+ is 9374 cases. Using an adult male population of about 20 million, that gives us a prevalence estimate of 0.05%. Thus, one of these single women would then have to have unprotected sex with 2000 random men in order to guarantee being exposed to chlamydia.

So far I've been talking about the chances of being exposed to an STI. What about actually contracting one? Well, the transmission rate of chlamydia is between 30% and 40%. In other words, only 30-40% of sexual encounters with an infected person will result in the disease being transmitted. This means that our hypothetical woman, in a worst case scenario, would have to have unprotected sex with 5000 random Canadian men before being guaranteed to contract chlamydia. And, of course, the number is even more outrageous for the less common STIs.

Given these numbers, I think our STI specialist above was being a tad hyperbolic when he said such women were guaranteed to become infected. Don't you agree? To him I say, "Get a freakin' grip, buddy."

The truth is, thousands of people around the country are having unprotected sex all the time, and nothing bad is going to happen to most of them. This is not a reason to advocate unprotected sex-- not at all. Do not mistake what I am saying! I am not condoning unprotected sex. Even a 0.16% risk is too much to always take lightly, in my opinion, when you can reduce it to near zero by using very basic controls, like a condom.

Rather, it is never justifiable to exaggerate risk, even if the intentions are pure. I would rather a society that treats its adults like adults and presents the numerical risks reasonably and accurately, instead of one whose public health officials shout out unfounded absolutes, which quickly devolve into medical propaganda.

As I was writing this blog post, I was surprised to find others exploring the same topic. This press release, for example, laments Canadian clinicians' poor understanding of the true risks associated with unprotected sex and STIs.

I fully expect a public health practitioner to write to me now and tell me what a horrible person am. Here it comes...


...UPDATE

Due to the sensitive nature of this post, I thought it best to clarify some things, in response to what was brought up in the comments:

• It is entirely possible that women who have unprotected sex with men they meet online share common behavioural characteristics that put them in a higher risk group for reasons beyond their "promiscuity". (I don't like using such judgment-filled terms, but whatever.) In other words, it's possible that they're not sleeping with random Canadian men, but with men who have a higher probability than the average of having an STD; club-goers, for instance, or atypically "promiscuous" men; or single men in general, who have a higher chance of infection than do married men. These women's risk is therefore possibly orders of magnitude higher than I've indicated. But the numbers I've presented are based on known data; arguments about a higher risk "promiscuous" population are speculative.
• I have identified chlamydia as the #1 STD/STI in Canada. This is true, according to the Canadian STI surveillance system. But HPV may have much higher incidence and prevalence.
• While, according to my analyses above, the risk of contracting an STD is small, the fact remains that there's a very small --but non-zero-- chance of contracting HIV, which can kill you. One can argue that a risk of death is never trivial.
• The issue boils down to this: knowing how low the actual risk is may end up promoting the risky behaviour. But I'd rather my public health system give me the facts and not rely on fuzzy data and shock tactics to scare me into safe behaviour.

Chung Kuo

Have we all recovered from yesterday's post? Good. Let us never speak of it again. Let's move on...

First up, Anjali sends us this full-length documentary on the history of Indian indentureship. For the uninitiated, the story of Indian indentureship constitutes the greatest spread of people in the 19th century. It's a tale untold in Western schools, yet provides the historical basis for the family histories of many Canadian, British and American immigrants. I, as a son of Guyana, am the product of this diaspora, which in essence was a kind of slavery. It behooves us to remember this tale, to remember this particular face of imperialism, for we shall see it again as new empires rise. In memory of those people, here's a slideshow of early Indo-Caribbean people:



In other news, one of my photographs from this past February's trip to the Guyanese rainforest has been used in an online article/blog post. Problem is, it's in Dutch. Or German. Or Afrikaans. Or some such language I do not understand. So I have no idea what they are saying. Read it here.

Today's SF Book of the Day is the Chung Kuo series by David Wingrove. Now, this is an uneven series, and I am hesitant to recommend it without reservation. It's a (somewhat) well planned 8-volume epic tale that is part action story, part political thriller, part speculative science fiction, and part revisionist history. See, it takes place in the near future, when the Chinese rule the world, and have remade global society in the image of the Confucian ideal, except that that ideal is a severely classist society of tyrranical extremes. Most curious about this new world is that world population is so great that the continents have each been transformed into sprawling cities. That's right, Europe is a City. America is a City. Asia is a City. And so on. Your station in life is reflected in how high up (physically) you live in the City. The bottom of the bottom live beneath the City in darkness, upon the clay of the Earth, lightless and lawless.


It's a fascinating series of books, made more so by its complicated characters. Its protagonists are rarely heroes, and its heroes are never stainless, nor its villains without virtues. With each turn of the page, the unfolding of the story of Chung Kuo (Mandarin for "Middle Earth"... I think) is completely unpredictable.

So why am I hesitant to give it an unqualified recommendation? Because when it came to the 8th and final book, it's like David Wingrove was kidnapped by aliens and replaced with a retarded child who could barely spell. The final book is that bad. Unbelievably, turd-gurglingly bad. Thus, if you are going to read the grand epic of Chung Kuo, do yourself a favour and stop after the 7th book. Here's a great review of the 8th book.

And here are the book titles in sequence:

• The Middle Kingdom (1989)
• The Broken Wheel (1990)
• The White Mountain (1992)
• The Stone Within (1993)
• Beneath the Tree of Heaven (1994)
• White Moon, Red Dragon (1994)
• Days of Bitter Strength (1997)
• The Marriage of the Living Dark (1999)

Do NOT Watch This Video

Why the cute puppy, you ask? To cleanse your pallet, as it were. See, everyone and his twin cousin has been sending me to a certain internet site featuring a certain video with two certain women engaging in certain unbelievably repulsive acts. And yes, I will link to that video presently.

But I want to warn you first. See, I've seen a lot of disgusting things. Heck, I work in medical research. I've had my hands wrist-deep in various dead things. I've eaten a tuna sandwich with one hand while lifting a liver out of a torso with the other. I've eaten snake, rat, dog, various insects and any number of rotting things masquerading as village delicacies.

With the advent of the internet, I've managed to see physical acts heretofore only described in parlours of drunkenness, and then only in the context of urban myth. Sadly, like many of you, I've even witnessed actual murder on video, in the form of terrorists decapitating their victims.

But this.... this, my friends, has taken on a life of its own. A new bar has been set for disgustingness. I pray to Zod that no one raises that bar! Now, before I show you what all the fuss is about, let's look at some of the reactions. This is my favourite reaction shot:



Overexposed comedian-turned-UFC-commentator Joe Rogan also has a reaction shot. You can view that here. Joe mentions another extremely disgusting video. He's referring to the BME Pain Olympics. Do not click on that link, I beg of you.

Cousin Ajay sends us one of the better reaction shots, featuring Kermit the Frog. Here it is:



And now, my droogies, the time has come to show you what all the fuss is about. I warn you again, do not click on this link. You do not want to see this video. This is not a ploy. I am begging you not to do it. If for some reason you still choose to, make sure you rush back here and look at the pretty puppy again to remind yourself that baby Jesus still loves you. Here it is. I give you 2 Girls, 1 Cup.

Douchebags, John Howard and the Petro-Dollar

From EK Hornbeck, dig this video of the great, iconic science fiction writer Harlan Ellison ranting about getting paid. Every professional writer should see it:



Speaking of writers, congratulations to Deonandia reader Mary Ellen for having successfully completed the National Novel Writing Month challenge. She officially passed the 50,610 word mark.

Congratulations, as well, to the people of Australia for having finally tossed that posturing windbag John Howard to the dung heap of history. My only disappointment is that, at the time of writing this blog post, it seems that Howard managed to cling to his own seat. As the Howard era ends, the Bush era is fading, Blair having been deposed, and Steven Harper's stars waning, it seems the Western world might be slipping back into a state of something resembling sanity. No wait, I forgot about France.

Speaking of douchebags (well I was, sorta), Cousin Ajay sends us this fascinating scholarly study of Hot Chicks with Douchebags.

And speaking of Cousin Ajay --who also lives in Australia --see the odd symmetry here?-- he also sends us this report and this report on mega-rapper Jay-Z now ostentatiously flashing Euros instead of US dollars. Can there be any other obvious sign of the decline of US hegemony in the world?

In the months after 9/11, I wrote in this blog that "the event would see either the solidification (i.e., unmasking) of the true American world empire, or it would signal the final obliteration of that extant empire." (Oct 21, 2002). Is there any greater sign of the latter than the devaluing of the US currency against most global standards?

And in March of 2003, I wrote:

"Why would the Bush administration seek to indefinitely occupy a shattered nation at terrible financial cost? Arguments of disarmament and counter-terrorism aside, a permanent dominating presence in Iraq confers upon its conquerors three great strategic advantages. First, US interests would obviously benefit from controlling Iraq's oil reserves, estimated to be the second largest in the world. (This will have the added benefit of positioning the dollar as the preferred petro-currency over the rapidly rising Euro.)"

It seems the tactic failed: the dollar is slipping as the preferred global petro-currency, which means US domestic inflation will soon be out of control. The new US President (um, Mr Gore?) is going to inherit an economic nightmare. And Canada would do well to follow the Trudeau edict of diversifying our economic interests away from such total dependence on the US market.

Rebuild of Evangelion

Long time readers of this site know of my obsession with a certain Japanese cultural phenomenon: the anime epic called Evangelion. It is to anime what Tiger Woods is to the game of golf. Evangelion, in terms of visuals, story, theme and depth is head and shoulders above pretty much any other offering in the history of animation, Japanese or otherwise. In fact, since viewing the full original series and three resulting movies, all other anime products seem worthless to me. (This is not entirely true, as the films of Hayao Miyazaki exist in a universe of their own, and cannot be compared to other anime products.) To be more accurate, within the stereotypical anime subclass of "giant robot" TV shows, Evangelion is superlative and sublime art.

Evangelion has permeated much of modern Asian popular culture. Its characters are instantly recognizable and heavily fetishized. The mysterious, emotionally-stunted (and under-aged!) character of Rei Ayanami is perhaps the most sexually fetishized character in anime history. Here's one of several hundred fan-made posters of her... and one of the less lascivious ones:


I have previously reported on the slowly evolving live-action Evangelion project, which promises to be a disappointing, watered-down, Americanized version of a uniquely Japanese phenomenon.

But now comes news that the ultimate re-telling of the Evangelion epic has come to pass. See, the original series ran out of money before its two final shows were produced. As a result, the grande finale --viewed religiously by millions of Japanese and subsequently millions of foreigners-- was a bizarre episode featuring a 13 year old boy sitting in a chair, being psychoanalyzed. Evangelion overall was unique for scenes lasting many minutes, featuring nothing more than silent characters riding in an elevator: Japanese minimalism at its most extreme. The extent to which this minimalism is an artistic expression, and not just a cost-saving measure, remains unknown.

Now that Evangelion has garnered worldwide attention, its quixotic creator Hieaki Anno has garnered the funds to re-tell the story the way he had originally intended, re-using much of the original footage, but making the epic a little less obscure and inaccessible for the uninitiated. Anno calls this new project, the Rebuild of Evangelion.

The Rebuild is essentially 4 movies:
1- Evangelion: 1.0 You Are (Not) Alone
2- Evangelion: 2.0
3- Evangelion: 3.0
4- Evangelion: Final

The first movie is already out in Japan, and it's uncertain whether it will ever come to North American theatres. But reviews are universally outstanding, and the pre-teen fanboy inside of me is all giddy at the prospects of seeing this film, which I suspect to be a genuine anime masterpiece.

Check out this trailer for the rebuild. I don't know if it's genuine or fan-made. But in either case, it's got my attention:

How Elmo Ruined The World

Ever wonder why kids today are such wimps? By kids, I mean anyone under 25. (Yeah, I'm lookin' at YOU, young people.... so smug with your hard bodies, good health, resilient metabolisms, unfettered optimism, clear skin, limitless potential and concealed scalps. Grrrr.) It's because Sesame Street ain't what it used to be. Read this, fellow 40-year olds, and weep. Back in my day, Big Bird could open a beer bottle with his anus --that's how tough he was. And that's how tough he expected us to be, as well! Hmm, no wonder I need so much therapy...

Check out what the folks at Fark.com think of this. Then press play on the video below and see how Bert and Ernie used to behave back when Big Bird was opening beer bottles hands-free:



Meanwhile, I'm not sure if this counts as a Daily Perv Link (TM), but what the fark. On a related note, The Other Ray sends us this inspiring bit of news. He also sends a list of fascinating things we didn't know, about living in space.

But remember my recent post about Superman? Well, my favourite YouTube independent filmmaker is at it again. ItsJustSomeRandomGuy has produced a 7-part superhero epic, starring action figures and voiced by the dude and his dudette, that is far superior to most of the superhero movies being produced these days. In fact, as one commenter noted, the Supeman action figure is a better actor than Brandon Routh. If you're a superhero fan, I implore you to watch this fellow's unbelievably good productions. If you want to avoid the preambles (which are also quite good) and jump right into the story, here's a list of links in order:

part 1
part 2
part 3
part 4
part 5
part 6a
part 6b
part 7a
part 7b

eDisharmony

I am a very busy single man and I use dating websites. I say it proudly, even though there are some people out there who judge this behaviour poorly. To such people I say, go back to your limited, adventure-free and bitter lives; I have no use for you or your irrational fears and prejudices. Online dating has been very good to me over the years: I have had many excellent intimate relationships, both short-term and long-term, and have met even more wonderful lifelong friends as a result of the medium's reach.

These days my least favourite dating website is eHarmony. It's touted as among the most serious of sites, and manages to sustain this reputation through a high monthly fee and an annoying "guided communication" process that only allows potential suitors to communicate via pre-set questionnaires. I find this process particularly annoying since one cannot express one's personality through questionnaires. I put up with it because I like being able to access only suitors who are serious about finding someone, and not jerks (jerkettes?) looking to feed their egos.

eHarmony has come under legal fire of late because it does not service same-sex relationships. But that's a separate issue not germane to this blog post.

Anyway, I was recently "matched" with a 30-year old doctor in Toronto named P*****t. I immediately suspected that this was an old friend whom I had actually met on another dating site a couple of years ago. So I emailed her to say, "Hey, it looks like eHarmony just matched us!"

She responded, "Of course eharmony matched us - we're both fabulous, dahling!"

Then I received the expected questionnaire from P*****t on eHarmony. I answered the questions jokingly, knowing that my old friend would appreciate the humour.

Well, I'm sure you can guess what happened next. It was not the same P*****t. Really now, how many 30-year old doctors named P*****t live in Toronto? This new P*****t was apparently insulted by my responses and immediately closed all contact with me --which I find to be a fairly humourless response.

Why am I writing about this here, in this public space? First, I think it's a funny story, and I'm all about the funny story. Second, if this second P*****t is reading this (not entirely impossible), I think she deserves to know that I thought she was someone else! And third, I wish to complain about sites like eHarmony who take all the fun out of dating.

Half the meaning of suitor interaction should be about miscommunication and struggling to figure out how the other person communicates, how their sense of humour works. eHarmony doesn't even have a process by which I can write back and apologize! A dating site should bring people together and let them communicate freely and without restriction, simulating as closely as possible the organic process of stumbling to commonality.

Doesn't really matter, of course. Someone who is offended by my innocuous questionnaire responses will be irrevocably scarred by meeting the true me in person. Not many mortals can withstand full exposure to the 24/7 smart-ass machine that is Lord Wat.

By now, I'm sure you're curious about what I actually wrote to her. She had sent me five questions with 4 multiple choice responses I could choose from. I opted to write in a fifth response:

1.	What style of dress do you prefer? A) I like to get dressed up B) I like to dress casual C) I dress for the occasion D) I wear whatever is clean E) potato sack, with boxes for shoes :-)
2.	Would you rather date someone who is: A) very busy, with a sometimes chaotic schedule, who books time with you in advance B) busy, with a structured schedule, you know what days the person will be available for fun C) slightly busy, who works during the day and is available most nights D) not busy and has lots of free time E) completely disdainful of me and my needs :-)
3.	Do you consider yourself an ambitious person? A) By any definition, I am very ambitious. B) I have clear goals and sometimes consider myself ambitious. C) I am pursuing some life goals, but am not a very ambitious person. D) I consider myself quite content as is. E) I am ambitious about achieving a life without ambition
4.	How often do you find yourself laughing? A) I crack myself up! B) I try to laugh all the time and get serious only when it's needed. C) Most of my time is spent being serious but I like an occasional good laugh. D) I'm generally a pretty serious person. E) laughter is for the weak
5.	If I had a bad day, what is the first thing you would do for me? A) Cook you dinner B) Rub your shoulders C) Talk with you about your day D) Take you out on the town E) fly you to Vegas and stake you $500 on a poker match

I will say this: life is never boring. At least it doesn't need to be.

A Whole Lot O' Somethin'

We begin with the following event, featuring my good buddies-- the multi-talented sitarist/guitarist Adam Duncan, and the seriously gorgeous paediatrician/dancer Radha Jetty. Dec 9th, people:

Next up, here's a pic of resident Deonandia villain Darth Vadum with global villain, Christopher Hitchens:

D-Mack sends us this story of the inevitable asshole with an iPhone. Maybe it's time for them to licence the use of smartphones.

Today's Word of the Day (TM) comes courtesy of E.K. Hornbeck. It is.... numpty. Okay, it's not a real word, but whatever.

"The Other Ray" sends us this, so we can all remember how fun science was when were kids.

Neil K. alerts us to this trend: the Israeli army is actively recruiting in Canada. I don't have any feeling about this one way or another. But I do wonder what the outcry would be if the Iranian army were doing the same.

And lastly, "The Other Ray" also sends us the following images to remind us of how small we really are:

It's Official

It's official. I will never again watch a first run movie in the theatre,
unless it's been out for at least a month. I just saw the new "animated"
Beowulf, a magnificent rendering of Neil Gaiman's take of the oldest story
in the English language. It was well told, with good pacing, a clever plot
and a delicate directorial touch.

But the experience was ruined -once again- by the army of suburban idiots
who, as always, are incapable of rendering sufficient respect for their
precious cultural and linguistic heritage.

Cell phones went off three times. One time, a fellow actually had a WHOLE
CONVERSATION on the phone! Throughout were the low (not whispering) voices
of barely literate boyfriends explaining fairly obvious plot points to
their supremely stupid girlfriends. And during every moment of cinematic
silence -of which there are many in this interpretation- some stupid
adolescent shouts out with an unfunny joke.

Do yourselves a favour: rent it when it comes out on dvd.

I think there's a market here for a theatre to make some money if it
advertises special screening rooms with strictly policed behavioural codes.

The big movie companies complain that piracy is reducing their profits. I
blame usher-free theatres, which reduce the impetus for anyone over 17 to
actually pay to see a movie.

Men Who Look Like Old Lesbians

Oh, it's the title that brought you to today's blog post, was it? Damn pervs. You're soiling the good name of Deonandia!

Sorry, droogs, don't have a lot of time today for a real blog post. So instead you get something passing for entertainment. Quite literally, here is a website dedicated to men who look like old lesbians. Click on it. You know you want to.

And if I may suggest an addition to the roll, has anyone taken a close enough look at a certain Mr Drew Carey? Feel free to suggest other candidates. (And for the record, Lord Wat does not look like an old lesbian; he looks like a delicate young girl.... with massive manly biceps!) Here's Drew:

Offended by today's topic? Oh get over yourself.

A Whole Lot Of Nothin'

Ottawa E.R.s have the hottest doctoresses. That's all I'm going to say on that topic.

Today's Daily Perv Link (TM) part one is courtesy of Brad Parker who sends us an update on that dude who had sex with a bicycle. Why this is illegal is a mystery to me. Unless the bike pressed charges, that is.

Part two of today's DPL(TM) isn't really pervy, just kinda weird. Cousin Ajay sends us this sordid tale of a reformed dog-killing asshole having actually married a dog in penance.

Meanwhile, Mischa alerts us to the latest developments in Goreville. Seems the President-that-was -and -could-have-been has joined a venture capital firm, which to me is the biggest waste of his considerable heft and influence. Does this mean he's not running in 2008? Um, no! In for a penny, in for a pound. I'm not giving up on Big Monotone Al just yet.

Brother Bhash sends us this tale of the CIA refusing to release documents about te JFK assassination. He sees it as proof of his wacky conspiracy theories. I see it as yet more evidence of the decay of the American legal and governance system, so long the model for the world. If government agencies can now simply refuse to comply with the edicts of Congress, with apparently no consequences, then the law no longer has any meaning; America --and, hot on its heels, other supposedly liberal democracies-- is sliding into fiefdom.

The US Presidential campaign continues to slip into stupidity. D-Mack sends us this story about how people are all a-fluff over how big of a tipper Hilary may or may not be. And Barack Obama is having to defend his failure to freakin' put his hand over his heart during the national anthem. Jesus Christ. As the waittress in the first story said,

“You people are really nuts,” she told a reporter during a phone interview. “There’s kids dying in the war, the price of oil right now — there’s better things in this world to be thinking about than who served Hillary Clinton at Maid-Rite and who got a tip and who didn’t get a tip.”

Happy belated Diwali (and, as Brother Bhash adds, "De Beaver") to everyone. Seems my Aunt was featured in a New York news story about Diwali in Queens. Here's the link and her pic (she's the skinnier one):

Going Native

This may be surprising, but my favourite TV network is APTN -the Aboriginal People's Television Network. For those of you outside of Canada, APTN is exactly what it sounds like: a TV station whose mandate is to air programming with a strong aboriginal content.

What about it do I like so much? Well, it's a tad amateurish and low budget, no question. But the fact remains that, given APTN's mandate, its content is unlike every other TV station out there. They include in their definition of "aboriginal" the native peoples of New Zealand, Australia, and indeed of any land conquered and colonized by European powers. Yes, I know that there's an argument that white folks are the "native peoples" of Europe, blah blah blah. But grow up already. This is a network intended to showcase and promote the artistic activities of native peoples who have been marginalized and minimalized by invading races. Surely we can agree that their viewpoints are unique and underrepresented?

Therein lies the power of APTN. I revel in its programming from around the world. I get to see the fantastic Maori cartoon, Bro'Town, the New Zealand crime drama Street Legal (not to be confused with the Toronto version, in which I was an occasional extra --playing "ethnic leader #3"), and Australia's Remote Area Nurse.

Sure, there's plenty of silliness on the network, like having to watch endless episodes of the 1990s' lamest show, Northern Exposure, or any number of Tommy Lee Jones or Val Kilmer movies. (See, both have some native blood, so their work is fair game.) But it's counterbalanced by being able to see such excellent rare fare as the Rick Schroder film, Black Cloud.

If you are in Canada, give APTN a try.

For My Hebrew and Shebrew Friends...

Proof that being Hassidic can also be cool, bad-ass and Torah-iffic:

Superdude

Here in the opening weeks of my 5th decade, I find myself regressing to a laddish state. I expend hours every week --many, many hours-- re-digesting and re-discovering the tales of my youth, told in new and exciting ways. I'm talking about comic books, of course, and I make no apologies for this new obsession. There is something socially important about comics books generally, and superhero comic book stories in particular.

The genre approaches maturity now that those producing it are the same age as those consuming it. For the first time, the generation of creators responsible for mounting these products is one that grew up immersed in its miasma; they make no apologies for their love, and are marketing their products to those of similar mind, i.e. middle aged geeky men --like me.

There are two major comic book companies in the West: DC and Marvel. DC is responsible for the iconic figures of Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, the Green Lantern, etc. Marvel, meanwhile, came later, and is responsible for Spiderman, the X-Men, the Avengers, Ironman, Hulk and so forth. There's a qualitative and important difference between the products of the two companies. DC is kitchy, Marvel gritty. When I was younger, I prefered Marvel; but as an adult, I gravitate towards that DC product. But there's no reason one cannot love both brands. That guy on Youtube, whom I keep plugging, put it best in one of his excellent videos: "People aspire to be Superman, but they relate to Spiderman."

I've been unabashedly fascinated with Batman for some time now. The idea of a mere mortal man transforming himself into a seemingly superhuman being by the force of his will alone, yet remaining beneath the mask a hurting man of flesh and blood, is a compelling one. His precarious balance between the fascistic terror of vigilantism and the libertarian ethic of independent do-goodery is also quite fascinating.

But it's Superman who presents the most fascinating analysis, from a social standpoint. It has been pointed out by many that Superman stands alone among superheroes. Pretty much every major storyline in the DC universe in some way relates to the life of Superman. He has long since been usurped as the most powerful hero in that panoply. (The Green Lantern and the Martian Manhunter, among others, are quantitatively more powerful). But Superman remains first among the so-called metahumans, not so much for his power, but for his refusal to slip from the role of inspiration, and his refusal to be tempted by fascistic power --a theme oft explored in the comics.

As has been expounded in other writings, Superman is unique among classic heroes because he is not his secret identity. Peter Parker pretends to be Spiderman. Bruce Wayne pretends to be Batman. But, in reversal, Superman pretends to be Clark Kent, always holding himself back, always striving to be more mortal, to deny his godhood. As he said in an episode of Justice League, "I live in a world of cardboard."

There is a last aspect to Superman that I would like to make clear. In past generations, societies were held together with mythologies told at the grandparent's knee. Ancient Greeks were warmed by tales of Hercules and other heroes, the Hindus by the adventures of Rama, Krishna and the Pandava brothers. In the modern West, the tales of Christianity have provided social cohesion. But in our modern, secular world, we are devoid of common mythologies, and of common tales told round the fire.

I submit that our new mythology is that of the comic books. In a given week, I can read a Superman comic, watch the Superman animated TV show, watch Justice League, featuring Superman, watch Smallville (about the life of young Superman), or watch the new TV show, Legion of Superheroes, about Superman's adventures in the 31st century. Our culture was soothed by five live action Superman movies in the modern era (and a few more back in the old days). A new Justice League movie is expected in 2010. The next Superman movie comes out in two years. This past month, I watched two full-length Superman animated movies: Brainiac Attacks and Superman: Doomsday, about the now iconic death and rebirth of the man of steel.

Superman is our new Hercules, Thor and Krishna. In some ways, he's our new Jesus. He is a godling sent to Earth by a powerful father (who sent "his only begotten son") to save, teach, lead and redeem us undeserving mortals. He died to protect us, yet rose from the grave, stronger than ever. He resists the temptation to rule us, and thus demonstrates superior morality in the face of our mortal pettiness.

Comic books are no longer just shallow entertainment for young boys. They have grown to replace the role of mythology in our culture. Their importance, particularly that of the iconic Superman, has been underestimated.

"I'm not usually a praying man. But if you're up there, Superman, please save me!" -Homer Simpson

Sad News

One of the interesting things about Facebook is the parade of faces from one's past who suddenly pop up again, announcing themselves as rediscovered friends. One such friend was Chris Voidis, with whom I attended middle school almost 30 years ago. His friend request arrived, I accepted, then I never bothered to send him any messages. I'd always meant to, but reconnecting with an old friend was a low priority task for me these past months.

Now comes word that Chris in fact passed away this summer, shortly after adding me to his friends list. The sentence in his profile, "Christos has no recent activity", mocks me. I have since learned that he maintained an active blog, Yioni.com, and was interested in current geopolitics, philosophy, and in becoming a literary author. In short, as adults we had a great deal in common, and I failed to take the time to find this out. And now it's too late.

So, if somehow you are accessing this blog, Chris, in whatever noncorporeal state you might now exist, please accept my apologies for neglecting you, and my promise that, if the universe allows it, we will one day have a conversation on these and many more topics.

In other news...

I used to like Harry Potter creator, JK Rowling. I liked that she was a broke, single mother who had an inspiration to write a multi-part children's novel, and carried through with her vision, compromising for no one. I liked that she was responsive to her fans, true to her characters, wrote excellent novels, and kept her word (so far) about not extending the series. I liked that she seemed to care more about the stories and what they meant to her readers, than about her money or her celebrity.

Then a series of things happened this year. She wrote the last Harry Potter novel. Then she inexplicably announced that a major character --Dumbledore-- is gay, even though the news has no bearing on any of the stories' content. Then she sued a small community in India for building a replica of Hogwarts school for a local fair. Then she announced she'll be writing a "spin-off" book of stories from the Potter universe, but would only be printing seven copies. Now she is threatening to sue some writers who are proposing creating an encyclopaedia of the Potter universe.

First off, you might own the copyrights to your world and your characters, but you can't forbid someone from writing about that world or those characters. So for Jeebus's sake, leave the encyclopaedia makers alone!

Second... suing a community group in a third world country? As C.S. Lewis would have put it, "For shame, Dwarf."

Third, as much as I love Rowling's books, there's nothing original about them, her, or her approach. Seriously, a spin-off book of short stories based on tales told within her opus? Anyone ever heard of The Adventures of Tom Bombadil? Rowling is starting to strike me as a third rate Tolkien impersonator. If you're going to write the stories, publish them for real; don't be a dick and manufacture an even more intense market for pirated versions.

Listen, creating cultural products is not like creating other types of commodities in the modern economy. When you create a cultural product, you do so out of the ideas, inputs, work, legacies and sacrifices of others; there would be no Harry Potter without Frodo, Narnia or a host of other fairly identical works. Sure, you are entitled to make a living from the things you create --but only up to a limit. At a certain point --a certain near point-- all cultural products become common property of the culture. This is the goal of art and artists, to add to the pool of cultural property.

I for one am fed up with this one author, whom I've previously defended to the teeth. She's already the richest non-royal woman in Britain. Heck, the actor who plays Harry Potter in the movies is now the richest teenager in Britain --that's how much money this stuff has wrought! All that money was made because the community --the people-- agreed to hand it over, and to embrace the Harry Potter elements into the mainstream consciousness and ethic. That means that those elements are now intrinsically woven into society, and Rowling's ability to own every aspect of how they are used is rightly limited.

Clinging to every bit of Potterdom has, I fear, qualified JK Rowling as this week's....



I leave you with a quote from Bill Maher:

"I don't give two fingleberries and a Mcshiat-all that Dumbledore is gay. I never wanted to know who Dumbledore was in the first place. Let alone his sexuality. What concerns me is adults who read 800-page books about magic schoolboys--and then try to talk to me about it. If I had the slightest interest in homosexuals with powers, I'd be a Republican."