The Jane Austen Book Club

It's rare that I like books that someone else recommends or really likes. The Time Traveler's Wife was a rare exception. I have strange taste in fiction and generally like my books sad and morose with uber flawed characters that can't see their way out of their troubles. So I'm actually surprised myself that I read The Jane Austen Book Club only because it was listed as one of the best books of 2004 by the New York Times. I don't even have any special interest in the topic of Jane Austen except the fact that Clueless is a modern Emma. Man, I loved that movie. "What are you wearing?" "A dress." "Says who?" "Calvin Klein". Jane couldn't have said it better herself if she was Alicia Silverstone.

The book chronicles a set of women and one man as they periodically meet at each other's homes to discuss the novels of Jane Austen. Each chapter is dedicated to a book and a member of the club drawing similarities between the two through present day trials and flashback tribulations. So we learn about each of the characters via the book they are reading. Works in theory. And while it was all very interesting (again, in theory), I didn't see the connection between the characters at any time beyond relational. I essentially got to meet a few people but I never really cared about any of them. And then, the worse thing happened - it all ended happily. For everyone nonetheless! Happy endings bore me. It seems to me that one never earns their happy ending, it just befalls you.

Kay Fowler's writing style didn't really mesh with my reading style and so most of the time I found myself playing with the irony of northshore women cheekily reading this book for their own book club. Or, drifting off trying to imagine who would play whom in the movie version. And for that matter, why no female actress powerhouse (say, Susan Sarandon or Reese Witherspoon) has optioned the movie because "there just aren't a lot of good roles for women in Hollywood." And what a tour de femme it would be - like Steel Magnolias set in a book store.

The Best Days of His Life

Good news this week. Matthew Limon, the 18 year old who was jailed in Kansas for performing consensual oral sex on a 15 year old boy, does not have to serve his 17 year sentence and was finally set free. The bad news is that it took over five years and multiple refused appeals for this to happen. Believe it, this kid has been in jail for five years not because he blew a minor (that only results in 18 months if you are a heterosexual) but because he blew a minor boy.

The craziness of this case for me is why? Don't get me wrong, rules are rules and we have to protect our youth from dodgy folks who would want nothing more than to lie cheat and steal their way into a tender boy's pants. Especially when the little thing isn't armed with the necessary information to protect himself (the benefits of a good broad based sex education in the moral halls of the Kansas school system is a topic for a different post.) I am also not naive to think that the courts in these cases are considering Mr. Limon specifically when determining their verdict but rather what the larger precedent will be should they agree or dissent. Although, in truth, Lawrence v. Kansas earlier this decade did nothing to help poor Matthew.

But it was the reasoning behind the larger sentence that has me miffed. The lawyers would have you believe that the homosexual act must be considered in a graver light because of the higher risk of transmitting AIDS and other STD's. The homosexual act, it seems, carries with it a higher emotional brand that leaves a deeper emotional scar than heterosexual statuatory rape. As assumed card carrying members of pestilence and destruction, an act of barely-legal boy on boy oral sex can be equivalent to armed robbery or aggravated assault. Are we never going to get out from under this rock?

The case also reminded me of how much we are feared. Despite second class citizenship, we continue to wield some power over the social structure of relationships. Because if we don't allow the courts to dole harsher punishment for gay sex crimes, what's next? We'll want to get married. In a brief filed in the case, Phill Kline, the Kansas attorney general, said a ruling in Mr. Limon's favor would "begin a toppling of dominoes which is likely to end in the Kansas marriage law on the scrap heap." That's right, you could say Mr. Limon could blow the whole thing.

In the end, the most ironic thing for me in this case is how in an effort to protect one boy's youth, the courts have taken away another's. Mr. Limon has not spent his early 20's in a dorm room or college campus. He has not spent a Spring Break in the Keys or backpacked in Europe. He has not worked for peanuts to support a boho art thing or found young love. He was in jail. And even if Matthew Limon was ultimately vindicated, wasn't that the overriding point that the Kansas lawyers taught and hit home to a watching world? Being gay can cost you your youth.

The Learning Curve

I recently attended a fundraiser for the Alliance School, a publicly funded charter school where I live for kids who have been bullied in their own school. At the fundraiser, I introduced myself to the principal and offered to volunteer for after school programs or mentoring. They actually asked me to consider teaching health class. I mentioned this to some co-workers and was surprised to hear some general revile at having to pay taxes to support such a school. I actually heard some people say that bullying is part of growing up and pulling kids out of school because of bullying is not doing them any favors in the long term - it toughens them up for the real world.

GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network) recently published a survey of students that showed that 9 out of 10 - that's 90% - of LGBT students are harassed on a regular basis at school. In fact all students stated that being gay or being perceived as gay is the second most common reason for harassment. The top reason was for personal appearance. Got that folks? You don't even need to be gay in order to be bullied, just thought to be gay. Studies have linked school bullying with absenteeism, depression and suicidality, and fall in academic performance. These are not lessons that should be learned in class and without a good education, these students can never succeed in the real world. In the GenQ page of the most recent issue of the Advocate magazine, 21 year old Brian Samuels briefly discusses his own experiences with bullying and ends his article by saying "we should be thankful for the hurt and pain that we've endured." Should we? OK, maybe if we've already got it. But should we be thankful for having the opportunity to endure such hurt? I'm less convinced.

High school was no picnic for me. Being the shortest, the skinniest, the least athletic, I was picked on alot. At my private Catholic school I was verbally harassed and physically singled out for abuse. I was called every gay name in the book and told by more than one teacher that I needed to toughen up. I never told my parents what went on. Naturally I gravitated toward my talents - drama, forensics (where I met some pretty awesome people), college courses in math and english, and a small group of friends that accepted me for who I was. Did I add to my character because of the bad experiences? You bet I did. I added alot of mistrust 101, callousness 302, and a master's class in bitter independence. Those are part of who I am now, mixed in with all of the good things I've learned along the way. Now every year, when my high school sends me alumni letters asking for money, I write a check to the Alliance school. Endure that!

It's Not About the Bike

I was going through some old photos and I found this one. And I want to be clear. I was doing the mulitple colored wrist band thing long before Lance Armstrong made it cool. I think this one was taken a few years back after my seventh, er fundraiser of the weekend.

Winter Chill

Two days ago, it was 81 degrees in my little urban borough. Today it is 47. From summer to winter without passing go. I simply refuse to turn on my heat before the middle of october but damn it is cold in my house. Aside from civil defiance, I am also worried about what will likely be huge energy bills this year with the fallout from two hurricanes. I'm not worried about me, I'm more worried about the people who will be unable to pay. The city just announced that it will be able to provide energy assistance for people who bring in less than 29K for a family of four! Hey, that was last year's poverty level. One cannot just easily absorb a doubling of a heating bill when one is trying to feed two or three kids. Did you know that at most homeless shelters, the homeless are not allowed to stay in the shelter during the day - only at night? Where are the fundraisers now? When is the star studded Pay Your Heating Bill telethon? Dig deep folks. Paying your taxes isn't enough. Financially support your local social service programs. Donate those old sweaters or coats. If you feel uncomfortable giving money to homeless folks, consider leaving your recyclable cans out for them to pick up so they get the money. Or recycle them yourselves and donate that money. Conserve energy to avoid further hikes. As prices soar, pressure your county officials to move funds in the right direction. It's going to be a cold one.

The Genius Factory

I am a big fan of nonfiction. I love biographies and, when written well, good commentary on odd subjects. Case in point, Mary Roach's book Stiff about the various ways that human cadavers have been used in science and in life. I became a huge fan of the human composting idea after reading that. So I picked up this nonfiction book hoping to have a similar experience (reading, not human composting).

The Genius Factory is a book by journalist David Plotz that chronicles his investigation into the infamous Nobel Prize Sperm Bank. Mr. Plotz looks into the man behind the sperm bank, the "laureates" who donated, the women who used the sperm free of charge, and the children who followed. He also documents what he believes to be the first time in the US that an anonymous donor met his offspring. The idea behind the sperm bank was optometrist Robert Graham's ideal to combat what was felt to be a decline in the quality of America by collecting the sperm of Nobel Prize winners (of which there was only one ultimately) and using it to improve the genetic pool. Only in this way could we preserve all that was good and smart (oh, don't forget white). In truth, the oft overlooked idea of eugenics skimmed a fine line with naziism and the creation of the perfect race. Dr. Graham specifically admits that he felt that the wrong kind of people were having too many children and since it wouldn't be popular to sterilize them, the only other solution would be to promote the good kind of people to have more babies. I would have enjoyed a deeper dive into the controversy of creating such a genetic pool but the book really doesn't go into it all that much.

The book also held the promise of discussing a topic near and dear to my heart - that of nature vs. nurture. The sperm bank felt that by making "genius sperm" available to women, it could breed genius babies. And in truth, I suspect most people would think that to be plausible when in point of fact, environment plays such a critical role as well. The women who received the sperm were not terribly screened with the exception that they all had to be heterosexual and married. The book does a better job of discussing this topic and it does draw some examples of exactly how different kids produced from the same sperm turned out to be. Toward the end it makes a statement about the importance of not letting predetermined ideas of one's potential guide one's life.

But overall, I found the book less than interesting. The author never committed to any real ideas (maybe a good sign of a journalist). The book discussed more of the human stories rather than the science or the controversy. It was more Oprah Winfrey than 60 Minutes. And I wasn't in the mood for Oprah. For me, the book confirmed my beliefs that any one particular thing, whether it be intelligence, good looks or personality, doesn't make us perfect or any better than anyone else. It is the variability in all of us, both individually and collectively, that makes the human race great.