The Israeli/Palestinian Conflict is one of the most pointlessly ideological and political conflicts of all time. While there are many opinions about how the Conflict should be resolved, the majority of people on both sides actually agree on a surprising amount of the issues. So if everyone agrees on how this should end, why is it still continuing? The politicians are unable to make really tough decisions and compromises. It's likely that whoever is involved in the final negotiations of the Conflict will be labeled a traitor or sell-out or betrayer etc., and that will be the end of their political career. And what's the point of solving a decades-old conflict if you get no glory? But whether or not either side has a bold enough leader, the people themselves know what the end solution is going to look like. Here are my ideas about the core issues:
Borders:
Palestine will include the Gaza Strip and most of the West Bank, which is east of the Green Line of 1967. In recent negotiations Israel has offered up to 97% of the West Bank, I think I read in the "Palestine Papers" recently released by Al Jazeera and The Guardian. There is talk of including some of the Arab villages along the Green Line in Palestine, but it seems as though many of these Arab Israeli do not want to lose their Israeli citizenship. I suggest that these Arab villages along the border have local elections to determine which state they will belong to. This will involve some trust among the Palestinian and Israeli leadership, since both sides would have to be OK with having all, none, or some of those villages.
Jerusalem:
Israel is not giving up the Old City. Ever. There are some neighborhoods of Jerusalem along the edge that I think Israel should and would be able to give to Palestine. The Arab residents of East Jerusalem are mostly Jerusalem residents, not Israeli citizens (which requires renouncing other citizenships and swearing allegiance to Israel), so Israel would not be revoking their citizenship if their neighborhoods became part of Palestine. Without busting out a map, I think it's fair to say that Arab neighborhoods on the periphery of Jerusalem should go to Palestine, and adjacent Arab neighborhoods. It's unlikely Israel would agree to give away Arab neighborhoods that are surrounded by Jews.
Settlements:
There are a few major settlements which Israel should keep, like Maaleh Adumim and Ariel. They can either have Israeli-controlled freeways going straight there, or the existing roads (with ramps into Palestinian land) can be maintained by Palestine. Maaleh Adumim is close to Jerusalem, but Ariel is farther out, so maybe a few solutions can be employed for the different situations. The rest cannot be controlled by Israel. The residents of the smaller settlements should be given 3 choices: 1. remain citizens of Israel living abroad, 2. become citizens of Palestine, 3. move back into Israel proper.
Refugees:
"Palestinian refugees" are different from any refugees in the world. While a refugee is normally someone who has been displaced from their home during a conflict, Palestinian refugees are those who lived their for only two years or more, giving refugee status to many more people than would otherwise have received it. Be that as it is, The Arab refugees of 1948 should be given either Israeli citizenship, financial compensation, or even citizenship to other countries, as some have suggested. Their descendants probably won't get anything, since Israel is not going to let in massive amounts of non-Jews, just as the Palestinians don't want tons of Jews in their country. Call it whatever you like, but that's how it is. Furthermore, Jews who were expelled from Arab countries in 1948 should also be given financial compensation for their property. It is unlikely that many Jews would want to return to countries like Iraq and Algeria.
So it's not that complicated. None of my ideas are original. From what I heard from OneVoice, a majority of people on both sides agree on most of the issues. At this point it's all politics. We need two leaders who can step up to the plate, who are willing to risk their careers and lives for an end to this conflict. The rest is details.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Sucky Israeli Names
Anat
Osnat
[someone's at the] Dor
[sock] Dror
Udi
Uzi
Moran
Or
Gal[l]
Tal
Guy
Inbal
Inbar
[sc]Rotem
Nimrod
Shai
Alon
Dudi
NEW 1/25/11: Nir
Mai (my)
From Aliya: Snir
from Shiranne: Ofir
Osnat
[someone's at the] Dor
[sock] Dror
Udi
Uzi
Moran
Or
Gal[l]
Tal
Guy
Inbal
Inbar
[sc]Rotem
Nimrod
Shai
Alon
Dudi
NEW 1/25/11: Nir
Mai (my)
From Aliya: Snir
from Shiranne: Ofir
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Room 3
There are 5 children in Room 3, and 2 teachers. This is a room for children with Autism. It smells like diapers because only J. is toilet-trained. The lights are off because R. is sensitive to the flickering of fluorescent lights. There is no art on the walls or decorations of any kind. Each classroom at this school is supposed to have a teacher with a credential in Special Education, and other aides. Because this teacher has 10 kids--two of whom frequently attack each other-- the class was divided into two rooms. The credentialed teacher rarely visits Room 3.
T. has Autism and is non-verbal. He can communicate using a PEC book, but we don't know where it is. When we go to the gym in the afternoon, he enjoys bouncing a ball from atop the stage, careful to let it bounce on the corner. He wants someone to return the ball to him, but he doesn't interact with them. For severely autistic people, other people are tools to get what they want. They don't understand that other people may have feelings that are separate and different from their own. When he is happy he toe-walks and puts his thumbs in his ears and tousles his hair. He vocalizes nasal and vowel sounds. When provoked, he is likely to grab another person hard around their arms and grit his teeth, looking distressed. He does not like to wear shoes. When he cooperates with us when we try to run goals with him, he gets Cheetos. He mostly eats Saltines for lunch.
B. is one of my favorites. Many children came to school in various stages of neglect and disarray, but B. always has on a clean 'fit, and he smells good. He is non-verbal. If he has Autism, it doesn't matter; his severe mental retardation eliminates any chance for development. At 12 he still wears a diaper, and he always will. B.'s main behavior is "mouthing." That means he puts thing in his mouth and chews them. It was B. who bit me on my second day at the school. My future co-teacher failed to warn me. When available, he has a chew-toy tethered to his belt loop. Because of his low muscle tone, he is not very strong. He can't clap his hands. When we put on Tele-Tubbies, he makes happy retard noises and spins around and flaps his hands. He prefers Skittles as a reinforcer for good behavior. He is able to feed himself chicken nuggets.
S. is six years old and weighs well over 100 pounds. He is non-verbal and has Autism. When he is aggressing, he can pinch you so that it draws blood. Changing his huge diapers is quite challenging. He enjoys rolling Play-Doh into small pills, and lining up cars. He is fat and has eczema because of his diet. Many people with Autism are highly sensitive to certain sensations, especially when it comes to food.
F. is the oldest in the class at 13. We're not sure when they'll put him in a different class. We never run goals with him. He is very strong, and is extremely dangerous when provoked. And when dealing with people with Autism, any demand can provoke them. He sits in a corner all day and "stims." That means he does self-stimulating behavior. F. enjoys the sensation of a toy car rattling in his hand, so he does that all day. We do not change his diaper. He eats rice with cut up hot dog. He will hunt down every grain of rice that escaped his mouth and eat it. One teacher makes up data so that it looks like we've been running goals with him.
K. does not have Autism. He does not have a diagnosis. My best guess is that he is psychotic. His clothes are dirty and don't fit. He is dirty. He is highly verbal and enjoys making other people uncomfortable. Once when trying to get out of working he declared to the teacher that his nipples were hard. He also pinches people's noses. He bolts, and he can run fast. He is terrified of rats. He burned his house down at age 6, or so I heard. When the school notified his mother that he needed more meds, he came in bearing a dirty Advil box with pills of different colors and shapes. No one was taking care of him, and because of his disturbing behavior, he was unable to make connections with any staff. Although his behavior was the most disruptive and dangerous in the class, he was only given a 1:3 aide. Oakland Unified was unwilling/unable to pay for him to get 1:1 care.
In Room 3 I saw the worst of special education. I saw incompetent and possibly abusive teachers. I saw schools powerless to help needy children. Ultimately the school has to act in its own (financial) interest, which meant leaving 5 severely disabled children with 2 aides lacking any formal training in special education. Since two of the kids were 1:2, and three were 1:3, that means that theoretically one teacher can work with one child and supervise the other, and the other teacher can work with one child and supervise the other two. That is just not possible. I saw the school at its worst, parenting at its most dysfunctional, teachers with no motivation or training, and kids with no grown-ups to care for them. It was a dark and smelly room indeed.
T. has Autism and is non-verbal. He can communicate using a PEC book, but we don't know where it is. When we go to the gym in the afternoon, he enjoys bouncing a ball from atop the stage, careful to let it bounce on the corner. He wants someone to return the ball to him, but he doesn't interact with them. For severely autistic people, other people are tools to get what they want. They don't understand that other people may have feelings that are separate and different from their own. When he is happy he toe-walks and puts his thumbs in his ears and tousles his hair. He vocalizes nasal and vowel sounds. When provoked, he is likely to grab another person hard around their arms and grit his teeth, looking distressed. He does not like to wear shoes. When he cooperates with us when we try to run goals with him, he gets Cheetos. He mostly eats Saltines for lunch.
B. is one of my favorites. Many children came to school in various stages of neglect and disarray, but B. always has on a clean 'fit, and he smells good. He is non-verbal. If he has Autism, it doesn't matter; his severe mental retardation eliminates any chance for development. At 12 he still wears a diaper, and he always will. B.'s main behavior is "mouthing." That means he puts thing in his mouth and chews them. It was B. who bit me on my second day at the school. My future co-teacher failed to warn me. When available, he has a chew-toy tethered to his belt loop. Because of his low muscle tone, he is not very strong. He can't clap his hands. When we put on Tele-Tubbies, he makes happy retard noises and spins around and flaps his hands. He prefers Skittles as a reinforcer for good behavior. He is able to feed himself chicken nuggets.
S. is six years old and weighs well over 100 pounds. He is non-verbal and has Autism. When he is aggressing, he can pinch you so that it draws blood. Changing his huge diapers is quite challenging. He enjoys rolling Play-Doh into small pills, and lining up cars. He is fat and has eczema because of his diet. Many people with Autism are highly sensitive to certain sensations, especially when it comes to food.
F. is the oldest in the class at 13. We're not sure when they'll put him in a different class. We never run goals with him. He is very strong, and is extremely dangerous when provoked. And when dealing with people with Autism, any demand can provoke them. He sits in a corner all day and "stims." That means he does self-stimulating behavior. F. enjoys the sensation of a toy car rattling in his hand, so he does that all day. We do not change his diaper. He eats rice with cut up hot dog. He will hunt down every grain of rice that escaped his mouth and eat it. One teacher makes up data so that it looks like we've been running goals with him.
K. does not have Autism. He does not have a diagnosis. My best guess is that he is psychotic. His clothes are dirty and don't fit. He is dirty. He is highly verbal and enjoys making other people uncomfortable. Once when trying to get out of working he declared to the teacher that his nipples were hard. He also pinches people's noses. He bolts, and he can run fast. He is terrified of rats. He burned his house down at age 6, or so I heard. When the school notified his mother that he needed more meds, he came in bearing a dirty Advil box with pills of different colors and shapes. No one was taking care of him, and because of his disturbing behavior, he was unable to make connections with any staff. Although his behavior was the most disruptive and dangerous in the class, he was only given a 1:3 aide. Oakland Unified was unwilling/unable to pay for him to get 1:1 care.
In Room 3 I saw the worst of special education. I saw incompetent and possibly abusive teachers. I saw schools powerless to help needy children. Ultimately the school has to act in its own (financial) interest, which meant leaving 5 severely disabled children with 2 aides lacking any formal training in special education. Since two of the kids were 1:2, and three were 1:3, that means that theoretically one teacher can work with one child and supervise the other, and the other teacher can work with one child and supervise the other two. That is just not possible. I saw the school at its worst, parenting at its most dysfunctional, teachers with no motivation or training, and kids with no grown-ups to care for them. It was a dark and smelly room indeed.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
crotch = brain
(warning: This blog involves massive generalizations about men and women. Your friends who do not fit into this are the exceptions that prove the rule.)
I've been putting a lot of thought into thinking about thinking. It's hella metacognitive. Because sometimes boys do things that make me think they are retarded. But not all boys could be retarded, right? ...Right?? Right. So here is my theory: in a nutshell (if you will), boys think like penises, and girls think like vaginas. (I would like to add here that Firefox has corrected "vaginas" to be "vaginae," which would be correct if we were speaking Latin. And in Latin that would be pronounced like wa-gee-nye. But I digress.)
So let's start with boys. They are more straightforward, literally. See, when they are aroused, when they want to mate with something, their penises stick straight out, alerting them that something needs fertilization. There is no middle ground. They know if they're gay because men make them have boners, they know if they like Japanese cartoon porn because they have boners, and we know when they like you, again, because of the boners. If they really like something, they get more of a boner. If they don't like something, well they just don't have a boner at all. And when you've climaxed, well there it is. Then your penis takes a nap. It's good to use your penis.
And for males, this makes the world fairly simple. Either something is boner-inducing or it is not. Boys don't get stuck doing things they actually don't want to do at all, boys aren't concerned that if they do certain things that someone else will be mad at them, and they definitely don't think that any sane person would do such things as aforementioned.
For girls, things are much different. The vagina is hidden. I had a friend who didn't know it was there until she was 13. It's very existence is hidden, as well as its function. We want to put things in it, but we're told not to. Do not use your vagina! But if you're thinking about using your vagina, no one can tell you what to expect. Sometimes your panties get wet when you're doing your math homework. But then when you're actually making out with someone you're just waiting for it to end. But let's be clear: not being aroused by men doesn't mean your a lesbian; neither does being aroused by lesbian porn. See, we ladies can do that. And how do you know when you've climaxed? Well, you just KNOW. Some girls THINK they've had orgasms. Most of them haven't. Isn't that weird? If you'd like to climax and you're not, you can just fake it! Now no one knows if you're not satisfied, sometimes not even you.
So you see, this is all very complicated. Arousal doesn't always mean you like something, nor does lack of arousal mean the contrary. And what exactly is getting aroused? How can a hole- a lack of matter- indicate arousal? And what about that clit thing that no one can find? How does THAT work? And do some girls like anal sex? Ohmigawd ew don't talk about that! Orgasms may be happening or they may not, we're not really sure. All of these questions mean that girl-thinking is not as direct as boys'. Girls sometimes go along with things they don't enjoy because they want the other person to like them. And other times girls worry about what people will think if they do certain things, like go out with another group of friends, or ask someone to please do the dishes more often. A girl's thoughts are hidden, and her motivations are varied and often indescribable.
There is nothing inherently wrong with thinking like a penis or a vagina. It's when you combine the two that problems arise. Boys don't understand girls because they don't realize that the girls are thinking like vaginas, and not like penises at all. Things are very complicated in a girl's head. She factors in things that boys don't even touch on. That's why boys always seem retarded, because the girl is four steps ahead of him, and she doesn't get why he's not there. But, ladies, you must remember that boys think like penises. Things are very simple for them, and you mustn't provide them with too much information at one time.
Now that we've cleared all this up, is there a practical application for it? No. Not really. Boys will still think like boys, and will still do stupid boy stuff like not say anything even though you dressed up all nice for him, and "fall asleep" when they were supposed to call. And they won't understand why you're upset. But then because they guy doesn't know why she's upset, the girl feels invalidated and begins to think she's really not upset. But then three days later you don't text her back fast enough and BAM she's screaming at you! So girls will still get upset when guys pull that shit, and guys, you will still be annoyed at them for it. It's a vicious cycle. Maybe if girls tried to be more direct in their communication and boys tried to be more receptive to what girls try to communicate, the world would be a better place. Or at least people would fight less and have sex more. That's cool, too.
I've been putting a lot of thought into thinking about thinking. It's hella metacognitive. Because sometimes boys do things that make me think they are retarded. But not all boys could be retarded, right? ...Right?? Right. So here is my theory: in a nutshell (if you will), boys think like penises, and girls think like vaginas. (I would like to add here that Firefox has corrected "vaginas" to be "vaginae," which would be correct if we were speaking Latin. And in Latin that would be pronounced like wa-gee-nye. But I digress.)
So let's start with boys. They are more straightforward, literally. See, when they are aroused, when they want to mate with something, their penises stick straight out, alerting them that something needs fertilization. There is no middle ground. They know if they're gay because men make them have boners, they know if they like Japanese cartoon porn because they have boners, and we know when they like you, again, because of the boners. If they really like something, they get more of a boner. If they don't like something, well they just don't have a boner at all. And when you've climaxed, well there it is. Then your penis takes a nap. It's good to use your penis.
And for males, this makes the world fairly simple. Either something is boner-inducing or it is not. Boys don't get stuck doing things they actually don't want to do at all, boys aren't concerned that if they do certain things that someone else will be mad at them, and they definitely don't think that any sane person would do such things as aforementioned.
For girls, things are much different. The vagina is hidden. I had a friend who didn't know it was there until she was 13. It's very existence is hidden, as well as its function. We want to put things in it, but we're told not to. Do not use your vagina! But if you're thinking about using your vagina, no one can tell you what to expect. Sometimes your panties get wet when you're doing your math homework. But then when you're actually making out with someone you're just waiting for it to end. But let's be clear: not being aroused by men doesn't mean your a lesbian; neither does being aroused by lesbian porn. See, we ladies can do that. And how do you know when you've climaxed? Well, you just KNOW. Some girls THINK they've had orgasms. Most of them haven't. Isn't that weird? If you'd like to climax and you're not, you can just fake it! Now no one knows if you're not satisfied, sometimes not even you.
So you see, this is all very complicated. Arousal doesn't always mean you like something, nor does lack of arousal mean the contrary. And what exactly is getting aroused? How can a hole- a lack of matter- indicate arousal? And what about that clit thing that no one can find? How does THAT work? And do some girls like anal sex? Ohmigawd ew don't talk about that! Orgasms may be happening or they may not, we're not really sure. All of these questions mean that girl-thinking is not as direct as boys'. Girls sometimes go along with things they don't enjoy because they want the other person to like them. And other times girls worry about what people will think if they do certain things, like go out with another group of friends, or ask someone to please do the dishes more often. A girl's thoughts are hidden, and her motivations are varied and often indescribable.
There is nothing inherently wrong with thinking like a penis or a vagina. It's when you combine the two that problems arise. Boys don't understand girls because they don't realize that the girls are thinking like vaginas, and not like penises at all. Things are very complicated in a girl's head. She factors in things that boys don't even touch on. That's why boys always seem retarded, because the girl is four steps ahead of him, and she doesn't get why he's not there. But, ladies, you must remember that boys think like penises. Things are very simple for them, and you mustn't provide them with too much information at one time.
Now that we've cleared all this up, is there a practical application for it? No. Not really. Boys will still think like boys, and will still do stupid boy stuff like not say anything even though you dressed up all nice for him, and "fall asleep" when they were supposed to call. And they won't understand why you're upset. But then because they guy doesn't know why she's upset, the girl feels invalidated and begins to think she's really not upset. But then three days later you don't text her back fast enough and BAM she's screaming at you! So girls will still get upset when guys pull that shit, and guys, you will still be annoyed at them for it. It's a vicious cycle. Maybe if girls tried to be more direct in their communication and boys tried to be more receptive to what girls try to communicate, the world would be a better place. Or at least people would fight less and have sex more. That's cool, too.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Coolooloosh 4/2/09
So hella days ago I went to see Coolooloosh at a venue called "The Music Room" in Tel Aviv. On the way there I found a copy of an 18th century painting of some ladies in big dresses waving to some people in a carriage. They're in a garden and the sky is blue with puffy white clouds. It was in a dumpster. Clutching the rolled print, I waited an hour and a half for the band to come on. I was tired, but the rest of the people in the room took the opportunity to get smashed, which made them way more excited for Coolooloosh than I could understand. Midway through the set they brought on an old African-American guy who sang soul hits from the 70's. I am not at all interested in 70's soul, but apparently it struck some kind of sentimental chord in the crowd because they were really into it. White people love when they like black people music. One of my friends talked about him for the rest of the night, and another bought the Coolooloosh CD hoping Old Black Guy would be on it. He wasn't.
Although I was bored to tears, I gained a bit of understanding of Israeli culture in that smokey basement. Israelis get super into stuff, even when it sucks. It doesn't even matter that they're too naive to know that Old Black Guy isn't a real soul singer from the 70's. Israelis lack some of the cynicism that Americans often have. I could sit there and recognize that this guy was a hack, but the Israelis didn't seem to care. I like that about them.
Although I was bored to tears, I gained a bit of understanding of Israeli culture in that smokey basement. Israelis get super into stuff, even when it sucks. It doesn't even matter that they're too naive to know that Old Black Guy isn't a real soul singer from the 70's. Israelis lack some of the cynicism that Americans often have. I could sit there and recognize that this guy was a hack, but the Israelis didn't seem to care. I like that about them.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Time Limits
Friendship can be a tricky thing. Sometimes you might really like someone, but sometimes they make you want to lock yourself in a closet. You know what I mean? Some people you can spend hours on end with, and some people –who may be perfectly nice—you can barely make it through a movie with. And it isn’t that you don’t like them, it’s just that your time limit is shorter.
You have time limits with everyone you know. Hopefully your longest time limits are with people you spend a lot of time with, like you partner. Otherwise, you have a problem! I think time limits are an overlooked aspect of friendship, but it is one of the most important factors. Even among the people I would call some of my closest friends, there are different time limits which greatly affect the way we interact.
Good friend #1. Good friend #1 rarely ever calls, and frequently ignores me on facebook chat. On the rare occasion that we actually see each other, we can spend a whole day together. Despite being kind of a crappy friend, he has a long time limit.
Good friend #2. Good friend #2 is an excellent friend. She always is seeing how I’m doing, she’s lent me money without me asking, and she’s always down for whatever. What a great friend! But I find that after 4 hours I start to lose it. That’s because she has a medium-length time limit.
Annoying girl #1. Annoying girl #1 is a very nice person, very cheerful. Too cheerful, actually. She was in my circle of friends for a while. I could tolerate her personality for an hour. After that I would excuse myself. And I would not agree to do anything with her which might stick me with her for longer than that.
Annoying girl #2. Annoying girl #2 was a challenge for me. Again, she is a nice person, and a good friend to those who have longer time limits on her. Unfortunately, my time limit with her was only a few minutes. After that I found it nearly impossible to not make snarky comments at her. She didn’t do anything to me, I just can’t be with her for more than five minutes. Other people seem to like her just fine.
Annoying guy #1. Poor Annoying guy #1. He has a negative time limit with me. I get irritated before he opens his mouth. Just seeing him makes me want to throw things at his nasty face. Again, this guy is perfectly nice. It just so happens that even the possibility of having to interact with him expends my entire time limit on him.
I think the idea of time limits on people is very real, and that people would benefit from adopting the concept. It really adds an interesting dimension when describing other people. And in cases where you have a short time limit on someone, you are able to put the onus on yourself, rather than blaming the person for their grating personality, which they just can’t help. It also is a way of clarifying why you like someone who maybe isn’t that great of a friend. Now you don’t have to feel bad when you get sick of hanging out with your best friends—it’s not your fault that some of them have shorter time limits!
You have time limits with everyone you know. Hopefully your longest time limits are with people you spend a lot of time with, like you partner. Otherwise, you have a problem! I think time limits are an overlooked aspect of friendship, but it is one of the most important factors. Even among the people I would call some of my closest friends, there are different time limits which greatly affect the way we interact.
Good friend #1. Good friend #1 rarely ever calls, and frequently ignores me on facebook chat. On the rare occasion that we actually see each other, we can spend a whole day together. Despite being kind of a crappy friend, he has a long time limit.
Good friend #2. Good friend #2 is an excellent friend. She always is seeing how I’m doing, she’s lent me money without me asking, and she’s always down for whatever. What a great friend! But I find that after 4 hours I start to lose it. That’s because she has a medium-length time limit.
Annoying girl #1. Annoying girl #1 is a very nice person, very cheerful. Too cheerful, actually. She was in my circle of friends for a while. I could tolerate her personality for an hour. After that I would excuse myself. And I would not agree to do anything with her which might stick me with her for longer than that.
Annoying girl #2. Annoying girl #2 was a challenge for me. Again, she is a nice person, and a good friend to those who have longer time limits on her. Unfortunately, my time limit with her was only a few minutes. After that I found it nearly impossible to not make snarky comments at her. She didn’t do anything to me, I just can’t be with her for more than five minutes. Other people seem to like her just fine.
Annoying guy #1. Poor Annoying guy #1. He has a negative time limit with me. I get irritated before he opens his mouth. Just seeing him makes me want to throw things at his nasty face. Again, this guy is perfectly nice. It just so happens that even the possibility of having to interact with him expends my entire time limit on him.
I think the idea of time limits on people is very real, and that people would benefit from adopting the concept. It really adds an interesting dimension when describing other people. And in cases where you have a short time limit on someone, you are able to put the onus on yourself, rather than blaming the person for their grating personality, which they just can’t help. It also is a way of clarifying why you like someone who maybe isn’t that great of a friend. Now you don’t have to feel bad when you get sick of hanging out with your best friends—it’s not your fault that some of them have shorter time limits!
Me According to Facebook According to You
Thanks for voting, people! I greatly enjoyed laughing at you getting things wrong. Here are the results!
If you like The Ramones, Pink Floyd, The Cure, David Bowie, and The Sex Pistols, you might like: 77% said The Clash. Correct!
If you like Bangun Tidur, Bangun, Pulang, and Mandi, you might like: 50% said Thai food. Wrong! I have no idea what these things are, but they all came up because I like BREAKFAST.
If you like Heavy metal music and Punk rock, you might like: 50% said psychobilly. Wrong! I do like psychobilly, but these came up because I like SKA.
If you like Neil Gaiman, you might like: 40% said Amanda Palmer, 40% said Coraline. Close enough! "Many who like AMANDA PALMER like Neil Gaiman," which is good because they are dating and it's always so awkward when you don't like your favorite celebrity's boyfriend.
If you like Bon Iver, Fleet Foxes, Radiohead, and Animal Collective, you might like: 57% said Arcade Fire. Wrong! Fuck that, I like BEIRUT.
If you like Dinner and Sleep, you might like: 62% said sandwiches. Wrong! Only one person guessed correctly. BREAKFAST again has bested you.
If you liked Camping, Walking, Crocheting, Crafts, Painting, Cooking, Knitting, Reading, Country music, Scrapbooking, gardening, baking and CSI, you might like: 62% guessed sewing. Correct! For the record, I don't like camping or crafts; I can't crochet, paint, or knit; I can't cook or bake for shit; I do like a lot of country music, but I've never told anyone so clearly facebook read my mind; I hate CSI; and do people actually scrapbook? They don't just save a bunch of crap saying that they're going to use it in a book and then never do?
If you like Futurama, Family Guy, Scrubs, and Two and a Half Men, you might like: 50% said The Simpsons. Correct! But 37% said American Dad. People, no one likes that show. Come on.
If you like Social Distortion, you might like: 44% said The Clash. Wrong! The one person who said TIGER ARMY was a genius.
If you like HOPE not Hate, you might like: 44% said Israel/Palestine. Wrong! I do like Israel/Palestine, but this organization came up in response to liking BILLY BRAGG, who only one person voted for.
If you like Edward Scissorhands, you might like: 62% said Beetlejuice. Correct!
If you like The Notebook, you might like: 75% said Sex and the City. Fuck you! I've never seen The Notebook, and Sex and the City makes me throw up in my mouth. This one was suggested to me because I like MEAN GIRLS, which is a way more accurate/funny portrayal of female behavior.
If you like Traveling and Movies, you might like: 42% said concerts. Correct! I don't really like traveling or movies, but good job anyway.
And at the end of it all, I think two things are clear:
1. facebook suggestions were super nutty
2. democracy doesn't work
If you like The Ramones, Pink Floyd, The Cure, David Bowie, and The Sex Pistols, you might like: 77% said The Clash. Correct!
If you like Bangun Tidur, Bangun, Pulang, and Mandi, you might like: 50% said Thai food. Wrong! I have no idea what these things are, but they all came up because I like BREAKFAST.
If you like Heavy metal music and Punk rock, you might like: 50% said psychobilly. Wrong! I do like psychobilly, but these came up because I like SKA.
If you like Neil Gaiman, you might like: 40% said Amanda Palmer, 40% said Coraline. Close enough! "Many who like AMANDA PALMER like Neil Gaiman," which is good because they are dating and it's always so awkward when you don't like your favorite celebrity's boyfriend.
If you like Bon Iver, Fleet Foxes, Radiohead, and Animal Collective, you might like: 57% said Arcade Fire. Wrong! Fuck that, I like BEIRUT.
If you like Dinner and Sleep, you might like: 62% said sandwiches. Wrong! Only one person guessed correctly. BREAKFAST again has bested you.
If you liked Camping, Walking, Crocheting, Crafts, Painting, Cooking, Knitting, Reading, Country music, Scrapbooking, gardening, baking and CSI, you might like: 62% guessed sewing. Correct! For the record, I don't like camping or crafts; I can't crochet, paint, or knit; I can't cook or bake for shit; I do like a lot of country music, but I've never told anyone so clearly facebook read my mind; I hate CSI; and do people actually scrapbook? They don't just save a bunch of crap saying that they're going to use it in a book and then never do?
If you like Futurama, Family Guy, Scrubs, and Two and a Half Men, you might like: 50% said The Simpsons. Correct! But 37% said American Dad. People, no one likes that show. Come on.
If you like Social Distortion, you might like: 44% said The Clash. Wrong! The one person who said TIGER ARMY was a genius.
If you like HOPE not Hate, you might like: 44% said Israel/Palestine. Wrong! I do like Israel/Palestine, but this organization came up in response to liking BILLY BRAGG, who only one person voted for.
If you like Edward Scissorhands, you might like: 62% said Beetlejuice. Correct!
If you like The Notebook, you might like: 75% said Sex and the City. Fuck you! I've never seen The Notebook, and Sex and the City makes me throw up in my mouth. This one was suggested to me because I like MEAN GIRLS, which is a way more accurate/funny portrayal of female behavior.
If you like Traveling and Movies, you might like: 42% said concerts. Correct! I don't really like traveling or movies, but good job anyway.
And at the end of it all, I think two things are clear:
1. facebook suggestions were super nutty
2. democracy doesn't work
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)