Litter Bug

While waiting for a connection at a train station not long ago, I sat on a bench. Next to me sat three teenagers. They were giggling and talking loudly and eating fast food. One after the other, they threw their trash on the ground behind or beside the bench. First paper wrappers for straws and hamburgers, then cardboard containers that had held fries and onion rings, next came the used napkins, and finally the cups and cans the teens had been drinking from. They did this despite the fact that there was a trash can not more than three feet from where they were sitting.

Those teens weren’t the only ones I’ve seen littering in recent times; people of all ages seem to think that walking a few steps to a garbage can is too much trouble, so they throw things to the ground outdoors and inside buildings, or out of car or train windows, or they even just spit gum or other unwanted items from their mouths to the pavement. I am not sure who they think is cleaning up after them, but I wish they would take responsibility for their own garbage. It’s disgusting, disrespectful, and deleterious.

--Curly

Not Another Password! (Or, Why Prunella Has No "Friends")

It took me long enough to get the hang of blogging. I do not maintain a "reader" (whatever that is). I hate having to keep track of all the passwords that enable me to do everything from reading certain articles online to submitting my own work for possible publication. And don't get me started on the trauma of transferring to a new computer, something likely to happen again for me within the next year or so.

I've tried to adapt. I've learned how to blog (right?) and I do keep all those passwords handy. But one thing I have not done is this: I have not joined any of the "social networking" sites.

Please, someone, explain the appeal/lure of MySpace/Facebook/et al. Please tell me why I should jump into something that will require me to maintain (another) site, and track (at least one more?) password/account. Something that has a peculiar reek of high school popularity contests (how many "friends" do you have?) Yes, "everyone is doing it," or seems to be. But why?

--Prunella

That’s No Lady(’s Portion)

At a bar a few months ago with a group of people, I ordered a pint of ale. The bartender asked me if I wanted the “lady’s portion”. The what? Apparently, a lady’s portion is a half-pint; I guess people assume women can’t, or won’t, drink as much as a man. I was a little annoyed, because I had in fact asked for a pint; if I had wanted a smaller portion, I would have asked if there was anything available. No, I said, I want a pint.

One of the men in the group I was with heard my exchange with the bartender. He was next in line to order and he asked for a lady’s portion. The bar-keep ignored the request and gave the man a pint.

That was an odd occurrence, I thought. But subsequently, I was offered the lady’s portion at other bars as well, even when I had clearly ordered a pint. I suppose the bartenders thought they were being helpful, but I found it offensive. Why assume that just because I am female I want or need a smaller portion, especially if I have already ordered something in particular? If, however, I’d asked about possible sizes, then it would have been fine to offer me the half-pint. But I object to gender-based assumptions in general and thus to the name “lady’s portion” and I also think it might put off men who would prefer to drink less.

--Curly

Typology of Irritating Professors

I laughed aloud when I read Margaret Soltan's post outlining a "typology of irritating professors." Any of these academic specimens sound familiar to you?

--Prunella

Laboring over Contractions

I have ranted here about apostrophe usage before, but in that post I focused on plurals and possessives. Now I want to mention contractions.

In English, we sometimes put two words together in a shortened form called a contraction. Examples include: can’t for can not, I’m for I am, haven’t for have not, we’d for we would or we had, she’s for she is or she has, and doesn’t for does not.

But rather frequently these days, I’ve (or I have) been noticing that people don’t (do not) quite get contractions. So instead of writing contractions mentioned above, they write: can’not, I’am, haven’not (or haven’ot), she’is, and so on.

Of course, if you use a spell-checker, it will mark all of those spellings as wrong. But if you don’t understand the rule, you probably won’t know how to fix it (and the spell-checker doesn’t always offer correct suggestions, which is one reason why people shouldn’t rely on such programs).

If you are using a shortened form, that means you are removing letters; a contraction is not just adding an apostrophe but keeping the same number of letters. Also, you might want to keep in mind that contractions are rather informal and should probably be avoided in formal writing.

--Curly

Guidelines Grievance

If, like me, you spend some of your time reading the guidelines that magazines and journals post for the writers who'd like to publish with them, you've probably noticed something annoying: Too many publications say nothing about what (or even whether) they pay their freelance writers/contributors.

At least the publications that state outright that they do not pay for writers' work have the guts--and the courtesy--to admit that that's their practice. And then you, as a writer, can decide for yourself if you still want to send them your work/pitches. (Many writers refuse to do so--the never-ending and often astonishingly acrimonious debate over "writing for pay" is not one I want to revisit at the moment, and I don't want to digress with a description of my own perspectives on that subject, either.)

What peeves me here is the lack of transparency. I'm not asking for an exact dollar amount. A range will do. But saying nothing--or saying that fees "will be negotiated" or something similarly vague--really irks me. Editors don't want us to waste their time--they could save us all some of that very precious resource if they'd be upfront about their payment policies.

--Prunella

To Baby or Not to Baby: That is NOT the Question

Ah, babies. Who doesn’t love them? Who doesn’t want them? Isn’t the dream of all women to be a mother?

Wait a minute. Not quite.

I have written on this blog before about people thinking that marriage is the ultimate goal for all seemingly heterosexual relationships and how that means that they tend to pressure or constantly question those who don’t necessarily seem so inclined. So this post is a follow-up to that one, and is on what many people consider the step after marriage: producing children.

People – and not just my relatives, either! – frequently bring up “the baby issue” to me. They remind me that I am not getting any younger (thanks for the news!), and they say that life is so much more worthwhile if you have children (I am sure some people honestly feel that way, but not all), and they try to encourage me by saying that my partner and I were cute babies ourselves (I can’t deny it) and that we should pass on our good genes (I have good genes? Now that’s news!).

The overwhelming perspective they all share seems to be: of course you want children, so why not do it now? Why wait? You owe yourself and you owe the world babies!

First of all, I’d rather not discuss my personal decisions under such circumstances; I don’t like feeling that I have to defend myself, and that’s how it would end up being. If they were genuinely interested in my life and my goals, they’d ask in an interested and open way, rather than assuming they know what I need and want. Beyond that, as I have said before, what even makes people think they know what is best or right for other people (and, hey, if it’s trendy, it must be right!)? Sure, they often give advice because they genuinely care and/or feel they have insight that they should offer to other people. But there are limits. Next thing you know, such people will want to join you in the bedroom, to make sure you actually know how to create a baby.

Typically, I try to avoid the topic. I say, “We’ll see.” Or I mumble about how busy my partner and I are and how it’s not a good time (their response: it is never a good time, so you just have to go ahead and do it). Rarely do I bother to point out that not everyone wants children or feels able to parent children, because when I have tried that, people just argue with me, saying that whoever thinks she/he doesn’t want children is just fooling her/himself and/or does not understand what she/he would miss out on. And especially if you’re female, people think there must be something strange with you if you aren’t busy picking baby names and looking into schools long before you’ve ever gotten pregnant. (And I won’t even get into the fact that some couples do actually try to have children but are not able to, and since they don’t share the disappointing news with everyone else in the world, others assume that they haven’t started trying yet, and therefore they lay on the pressure, which just makes the situation worse for the couple.) So to make a long story short, there’s no point in entering into such a discussion about whether to baby or not to baby; whatever I say, I am accused of being confused, defensive, or just plain wrong. Oh baby! How tiresome!

My wish here (and in many other situations, too) is that people would try to be more understanding of choices that others make, even if they would not have made the same choices themselves. It has nothing to do with my own baby decisions per se; it’s just about being polite and treating other people with respect.

--Curly

When Peeves Turn Profitable: Revengerella's Book Deal

Late last week I was intrigued to see this news flash over at MediaBistro's Fishbowl LA blog:

Syndicated columnist and Advice Goddess blogger Amy Alkon expands her plans for world domination by penning Revengerella: One Woman's Battle to Beat Some Manners into Impolite Society, true stories of the spectacular ways a self-described "manners psycho" pranks cell phone abusers, telemarketers, spamsters, road hogs, and other bad guys out of being rude. McGraw-Hill will publish and the book was sold by Betsy Amster at Betsy Amster Literary Enterprises.

Sounds good to me. Maybe Curly and/or Prunella will try to get copies and discuss here when the time is right.

--Prunella

Against Brunch

I recently noticed this "Rant of the Week" by writer and editor Jeff Ruby:

...The other day, a friend asked what my favorite weekend brunch spot was, and I realized: I hate brunch. The whole tradition that we follow like robots: rising early on Sunday, packing into a crowded entryway, vestibule, or sidewalk, to wait for a table where an overextended server will bring me an omelet I could've made myself? This isn't dining. It's compulsory eating, and I want my time and calories back. What is the allure here? Is it the ritual? The camaraderie? The hangover? Nothing against restaurants that provide brunch ­nor those that do their best to add a little flair to it...but I'll sleep in. And I'll make my own French toast, thanks.

Now it's Curly again. I don't have quite the strong anti-brunch feelings Jeff Ruby does, but I certainly have plenty of memories of trying to get the family together for brunch on Saturdays or Sundays. There were always some relatives who wanted to get up early and beat the crowds and then there were others who wanted to have a leisurely sleep-in, since it was, after all, the weekend. So we usually compromised -- i.e. the people who liked to sleep late would say they'd "try" to get up at a reasonable time, which in practice meant that it would be a late brunch yet again. This in turn meant that the early risers would be cranky and hungry, so they would eat before we met at the restaurant, while the late risers would still complain about being tired and not having had enough sleep. Then we would get stuck standing in a long line (since brunch restaurants usually don't take reservations), all for the opportunity to sit in a noisy dining room with other crabby and tired families, where we wouldn't be able to hear each other over the din, and where we would have a choice of either cholesterol-rich egg dishes or sickly-sweet pancakes doused in fake maple syrup. Often, the coffee at such places isn't too good, either. My solution to the brunch problem is easy: I get together with the early risers for breakfast and the late risers for lunch, and I try to make plans for weekdays or other off-times, so there is no need to wait for an hour to be seated and another hour for the food.

--Curly

Stay to One Side

I agree with Prunella's most recent post about the prudent use of elevators and would like to build on it in another rant about transportation. When you're on the escalator, or when walking down the street, please don't take up the entire step/area. People want to get past you and it is difficult if you are blocking their way. This is especially true if you are with another person; of course you want to talk, which means you want to walk side-by-side, but try to also be conscious of the other people around you and let them pass as needed. On the escalator, if you are just riding, stay to one side (and try to stay to the same side as all the other riders!) so those walking and in a hurry can get around you. And if someone politely asks you to move to the side, there is no need to make a face or to ignore the request. Just because you aren't in a hurry to get somewhere doesn't mean you should make things difficult for others.

--Curly

Please Take the Stairs!

If you are able-bodied and not laden with heavy packages, there is simply no excuse for you to take the elevator up (or, worse, down) ONE floor. Or two floors. Some might even argue that five floors might be the cutoff point.

Now that I spend the vast majority of my time in two buildings--the one in which I work and the one in which I live--where my official location is near the top (wow, that sounds much more impressive than it is), I am peeved all too frequently by the multiple stops I endure on my many elevator trips.

Since there are no "express" elevators in either setting, I'm doomed to "local" rides at highly inopportune times. So please, the next time you're waiting for an elevator to go up (or down) just one floor, take the stairs!

--Prunella

An Ode to Kvetching

Here is a musical group especially for those of us who have peeves and rants: the Helsinki Complaints Choir. In this “ode to kvetching,” they complain about many different topics (including one of my recent whines, the ever-increasing length of the Christmas season). And here is a report on the woman who started the choir, Tellervo Kalleinen, and the growing popularity of complaints choirs around the world. Though I dislike people playing music too loudly, in this case, I’ll make an exception: play the kvetching as loudly as you want! Enjoy!

--Curly